Creationists shame!

Hi everyone!

This post will be something completely different!
This time I will actually go against some of the creationist words!
This time I will be fair, I will pretend I don't believe any one of the theories and answer things accordingly.

Before I start!
I got allot of messages about my story in the previous post...
Don't believe it if you don't want to!
Instead of attacking me about it, attack the topic, not the story!

Next, there seems to be some confusion between a creationist and an evolutionist. An evolutionist doesn't necessarily mean there is no God. All it means is you believe the evolution theory. A creationist is someone who rejects the theory of evolution and believes that there was a creator. So I am not saying if you believe in evolution you don't believe in God. This guy told me he is a creationist, God controlled evolution! No thats wrong, number 1, he is an evolutionist, and number 2 he believes the theory of evolution. So creationist means, you do NOT believe evolution.

The banana!
Oh my goodness this is a fault in logic. They say, the banana proves there is a God.
 I don't think this is so true. They say look at how it is formed, its perfect for the human hand. Good to eat, shape of the mouth etc. NO! Thats not true. Birds eat banana's, monkeys eat banana's, rabbits eat banana's, rats, bats, horses, bears, toucans etc. There are allot of animals that eat banana's, this thing proves absolutely nothing. A banana is not created for a human, there are allot of things that eat animals that looks absolutely nothing like humans and they eat it. The banana proves nothing!

Evolutionists say:

The banana that we know has been genetically modified over thousands of years into it's current form. In fact the designer of the banana is Man himself, hardly proof of a divine creator.

No, thats also not true, the man isn't the designer of the banana, its the planter. There is a difference. First they tell you it has been genetically modified. I agree. They say how it changes over a long time. I agree, what they don't tell you is that evolution has atleast 6 meanings. One of them is scientifically proven. Its called micro-evolution, which means a variation in kind. Hard banana in nature, soft banana here, its still a banana. Thats not evolution! I will expand on this in another post entry.

Dinosaurs
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever seen!
Everybody, enjoy a laugh with me!

Evolutionist: How do you explain dinosaurs? They extincted millions of years ago you now.
Creationist: Easily explained, dinosaurs never existed!
Evolutionist: How does that work? We found the bones you know!
Creationist: See this is how they trick the people! See God simply put the bones in the dirt, so they never really walked the earth! Why did He do that? I don't know, maby He just wanted to test our faith! Thats possible.

This is really funny, I am working on a blog entry for my explanation on dinosaurs. Just so you know, NO thats not true! Dinosaurs have always lived with humans! There is no problem, I will explain this later, but just know, saying that to an evolutionist WILL make them laugh at you and I will laugh with them!

Contradiction:
Evolutionist:  What do you say of contradiction of the bible? Got anything to say about that?
Creationist: There are no contradictions in the bible!
Evolutionist: *Shows a list of hundred of "contradictions"*
Creationist: People wrote that, people make mistakes.

If I didn't know that there were NO contradictions in the bible I would have became an evolutionist. There are no contradictions in the bible. Now all you creationists stop telling them there are contradictions! Yes it is true that some versions of the bible is translated wrong, I will admit that. This is also a huge topic, a topic for another day! Some bibles just mess up I can tell you that, but nothing to worry about!

Pangea:
Evolutionist: What do you think of pangea? Any thoughts on that? How is that possible?
Creationist: God did it!
Martin (Me): Refering to the creationist. Youre an idiot.

That guy thought I was against God, when I'm not, I'm against silly theories like the creationist when much much better theories exists. Creationists, if you want to answer this question, don't say "God did it!" because directly saying that without even trying to go a little more in depth makes you look like an idiot. I find it really annoying when I follow debates and the creationist just says "God did it!". Thats not how you should answer a debate! As for the evolutionist. They tell you the continents were once connected. What they don't tell you is that to do that they had to shrink Africa by nearly 40%. They also don't tell you that they completely had to remove Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Belize and Nicaragua. No doubt the continents are moving, about as fast as your finger nail grows, but underneath the water is dirt, take all the dirt between the continents put it a little together and you will notice the continents should be much larger than the pangea theory suggests. Lastly, any arguments you say like erosion, etc. that is possible, I believe it. Now remake pangea with all those things kept in mind and you will see it looks nothing like pangea in the textbooks!

Creating sun and stars etc.
Evolutionist: How was it that the bible talks about "days", but the sun was created on the first day? Also how did God make everything in 6 days?
Creationist: Well they are not literal days (Duh!) they are simply stages in which He made them!

To all evolutionists, if a creationist says that to you just say:
"Well if its stages why not suggest that those stages could occur over millions of year?"
Because I know where the creationists are going with this, they are trying to mix in evolution with creation and that doesn't work! I can tell you the creationist is both dumb and stubborn! Or, he doesn't really know, in that case, read below! (Hey that rhymes! I'm 'n poet and I didn't even knowet! I can make it rhime anytime!) On with the post!

The word days have 5 meanings.
#1. Part of a day period between sunrise and sunset.
Can't be that, the sun didn't exist yet.

#2. The part of a day period which one spends at one’s job, school, etc.
No, there wasn't time then (Remember, God is not stuck in time like we are)

#3. Rotational period of a planet.
Possible, but now some people would say, maby it refers to Venus days! Then it will take 243 days, for the first day to be completed. Possible, but highly unlikely.

#4. The period from midnight to the following midnight.
Now we are getting closer to the truth!

#5. A period of 24 hours.
Ah, there we go, 24 hours a day. Now you see, a sun is not needed for a day to complete!

Now, thats one theory you can follow. Or you can say, back then, the word "day" was a definition called a cycle of light and dark. The bible said God created the light and the darkness first, so there is not really a problem.

Alternatively you can say God represented the sun, He was light.

I really don't know which one of those are true, I don't know if there are any other theories and I really don't care. I just wanted to point out to creationists like the above. Almost all the bibles are translated as THE days. Look at this:

New international version
Genesis 1:5 "...the first day." 
Genesis 1:8 "...the second day. "
Genesis 1:13 "...the third day."
etc.

The message
Genesis 1:5 "...Day one." 
Genesis 1:8 "...Day two."
Genesis 1:13 "Day three."
etc.

New living translation
Genesis 1:5 "...the first day." 
Genesis 1:8 "...the second day. "
Genesis 1:13 "...the third day."
etc.

King James Version
Genesis 1:5 "...the first day." 
Genesis 1:8 "...the second day. "
Genesis 1:13 "...the third day."
etc.
I will also admit there are bible versions such as Amplified and New American Standard bible which says a first day, a second day, a third day.
Note how these are new bibles, they change the way they translated the bible, but the Hebrew word is translated to the first day and not a first day. How many a first days do you know of? Allot! It can be every day if you please, every week if you want. How many the first days do you know of? I only know of one.

Things like this go on and on and on. Now I understand ALLOT of creationists might hate me for saying all of this, but think about it logically. It doesn't work how most of you want it to work. In all the cases above, if a creationists answers my questions like that I would have definatly became an evolutionist. There are to many loop holes. I am not suggesting that creationists are dumb, I am suggesting that you look at more than one option and try to find a little references to them. I would encourage evolutionists to ask questions like this as they are trick questions, but what I also encourage is that you admit that it might work if it is answered intelligently or scientifically.

See I'm not against science, I really don't care who believes in evolution, it doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that evolution is considered a fact while it is not a fact. We cannot say evolution is a fact, we can't observe it, we can't test or demonstrate it. If we can't do that then its not a fact. I would be really happy if the textbooks change all the words under evolution from fact to theory. This book I have on evolution, the first sentence says:

Evolution is a fact.

The reader just has to assume thats true.
If that was changed to "Evolution is a theory" I wouldn't have a problem. I also won't have a problem if even 1 sentence of creation is in the books. Maby as a footnote.
"There is a possibility of an intelligent designer."
Thats all it has to contain and I will be happy with it!

I'm not against science, but I'm telling you, there are some lies in there. And I think that should be changed.

All you evolutionists that hate me.
Don't hate me, I never said creation was a fact, I am suggesting that it is possible and that there is no proof for evolution. I am friends with allot of evolutionists, it doesn't bother me. What does bother me is that I get impolite messages saying how stupid I am! People thinking that has a serious problem! I'm also not suggesting that any of you are dumb! I get that allot to! I think your theory is dumb, but I don't think you are dumb! Just like you might think my theory is dumb doesn't make me dumb! Like Kent Hovind said:

I don't hate him, he's not the enemy, he just works for him!

Well, I better stop typing before I #1. Burn the computer out, and #2. Create an incredibly long entry! (Edit, too late!)

Thanks for reading!
Martin!