User talk:Navyspetnaz

 [ Post message for ]

Welcome to the CreationWiki!

We thank the Lord for your willingness to serve Him by participating in the development of this educational resource. The CreationWiki is a collaborative effort and your help is needed. Our hope is that by working together we can build an archive of knowledge that will spread the truth of His creation throughout the world.

All newcomers to the editorial staff are encouraged to visit the community portal where the following policy and help pages can be found. If you are looking for ways to become involved, check our help wanted page for projects that might interest you.


 * Policy - Before getting started please review our policies. (i.e. Only creationists are permitted to edit content pages - All article content must be supported by references.)
 * Creating a new page - Simply enter a title for your new article and click the "Create page" button. You will then be allowed to enter text in a new blank page.
 * Editing Help - If you are unfamiliar with the Wiki software, then authoring within the CreationWiki will require a little education. To help you get started view our how to edit page for some helpful instructions.
 * Formatting Help - To take the next step and learn how to accomplished more advanced features within your page view our formatting help page for instructions on how to format pictures, tables, etc.


 * Please feel free to delete this message from your user-talk page after viewing...

A little about me
I am a homeschooler thats a senior in high school, I think the earth is in least 20,000 years old, I believe in the big bang theory, but reject the theory of macroevolution. I believe in the big bang theory cause it seems to be supported by a great deal of evidence, obviously its not perfect but what universe orgin theory is? Also I think its a great tool for witnessing to athiests, especially in conjunction with the anthropic principle. Because then athiests have to admit that by random chance the universe came out of nothing, finely tuned, even though the probabilites of that are 10x10 to the 140th power! Also the quotes by famous astronomers are priceless, for example astronomer and skeptic Robert Jastrow talks about when science has climbed the cliffs of ignorance and comes to realize that the universe has a beginging  there greated by a band of theologians that have been pondering such things for centuries! I mean how awesome is that! I plan on becoming a paleontologist, I want to be the first paleontologist to write a book challenging the supposed evolutionary transitions in the fossil record. Another thing I want to do is move young earth creation away from the dogmatic 6000 year timeline, I believe we are putting to much pressure on one event that event being the flood. It has to move plates at astonishing speeds, it has to create an ice age, it has to form a large amount of sedimentary rock. Thats a lot to do for one event global or not, especially in the time given to it. Another thing I want to do is to win 356 scientists in each field over to creation science in ten years. Starting when I get my phd in Paleontolgy. Just think about how good our models could get! Say if John Baumagarnder had more geophycist's to help him with his computer model, and marine geophycist's to help his model make predictions. Just think if Michael Oard, had Meteorologists, Climatologists, and Atmospheric Scientists help him with his model. Also its possible some of our young earth arguments could get even better or in least gain respect if we had Marine Geologist's endorsing Russel Humprheys age of the sea based on salt content argument. I also think if creationists are gonna make a stronger point on mutations not increasing genetic information, we need some bioinformatics people, to help us give examples of what would constitute such a change, and why current mutations don't pass that test.

Edits
Hi:

I saw the edit you made to Francis Collins and just wanted to remind you about our policy. Your actions were technically vandalism. You deleted a good portion of the article, and replaced it with derogatory comments, therefore going against administrative actions (I am an admin and created the original article). You were right, he is not a Creationist--my mistake, but doing such edits is not acceptable. If you have a suggestion, please post it on the talk page, or just change the category to "evolutionist" rather than "creationist."

Also, the page Henry Schaeffer III needs to be formatted correctly. I left a link on the talk page that you might find helpful. --└Amanda M. ┘┌ talk ┐&ensp; 18:24, 3 December 2007 (EST)‎


 * Theistic evolutionists are by definition creationists (see:creationism). I would categorize his biography as a creationist and evolutionist. --Mr. Ashcraft - (talk) 18:51, 3 December 2007 (EST)