[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/25/creationist-trial-bible-genesis-evolution]Source[/url]
[quote][b]A California creationist is offering a $10,000 challenge to anyone who can prove in front of a judge that science contradicts the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis.[/b]
Dr Joseph Mastropaolo, who says he has set up the contest, the Literal Genesis Trial, in the hope of improving the quality of arguments between creationists and evolutionists, [b]has pledged to put $10,000 of his own money into an escrow account before the debate. His competitor would be expected to do the same. The winner would take the $20,000 balance.[/b]
[b]The argument would not be made in a formal court, but under an alternative dispute resolution model known as a minitrial.[/b] Mastropaolo said he would present the argument in favor of a literal interpretation of the creation story once he had found a willing scientist to argue that a non-literal interpretation of Genesis is more scientific.
[b]"They [evolutionists] are not stupid people, they are bright, but they are bright enough to know there is no scientific evidence they can give in a minitrial," Mastropaolo said.
[/b]
A minitrial differs from a regular trial because it does not need to be held in a courthouse and does not require the presence of traditional court figures. Mastropaolo plans to have a bailiff and court reporter in attendance, along with the judge. Contest rules state that evidence must be scientific, which means it is "objective, valid, reliable and calibrated".
[b]Mastropaolo believes that evolution cannot be proved scientifically. "It turns out that there is nothing in the universe [that] is evolving, everything is devolving, everything is going in the opposite direction," he said.[/b]
Mastropaolo started making public arguments in favor of creationism about 13 years ago, after reading an article about evolution in the newspaper. He has a PhD in kinesiology and taught biomechanics and physiology at a California university for more than 25 years. He is now a contributing writer at the Creation Science Hall of Fame, which is collaborating with him for the minitrial. The Creation Science Hall of Fame is a website, launched in February 2012, that honors those who have made contributions to creation science.
A majority of scientists disavow creationism, but a June 2012 Gallup poll showed that 46% of Americans believed in a literal interpretation of the biblical version of creation. Legislation to allow students to be taught religious versions of the creation of life is currently being considered in four states.
The Literal Genesis Trial contest would be held in a courthouse in Santa Ana, California and Mastropaolo has said he will create a list of potential superior court judges to decide the case. The participants would have to agree on a judge. Mastropaolo said that he hopes the trials can improve future debates between evolutionists and creationists by addressing the issue in a legal and scientific way.
"The evolutionists thereafter could read that transcript and make their case a bit stronger on the next one they contend against and we can do the same," Mastropaolo said. "We can read the transcript and not have have to go through the same process over and over and over again without any let up, without any resolution."[/quote]
Talk about being stuck between a rock and a hard place.
-
7 RepliesEdited by MR E0S: 4/2/2013 2:04:50 PMThis is too easy. A Virus is all the scientific proof that you need to prove evolution. Two Parents contributing traits to the children they create is all the proof you need as well. God created Us in 6 days right? How long were those 6 days really? You don't think that maybe.... JUST MAYBE. To get from Dirt to what you see in front of you now, took place through a long process of evolution? Evolution and creationism are one in the same. This is why both sides of the argument are retarded to deny each other. Bible says who or what did it. Science says how it was done. Where's the argument at again? Why is there a debate over this? Let there be light? Big bang theory. God created Earth and man in 6 days. Evolution. Otherwise, why did it take him 6 days? Because he had to evolve us from dirt, you idiots. You're still living in the time span of the 7th day. You do realize that?
-
He won't pay. This has been done before and they didn't pay then either.
-
3 RepliesOf course it cannot be proven. Nothing can ever be proven. Evolution just continually fails to be disproven.
-
[quote]He is now a contributing writer at the Creation Science Hall of Fame, which is collaborating with him for the minitrial.[/quote] [quote]He is now a contributing writer at the Creation Science Hall of Fame[/quote] [quote]the Creation Science Hall of Fame[/quote] [quote]Creation Science[/quote] [quote]Creation[/quote] [quote]Science[/quote] [quote]Creation Science[/quote] Wat.
-
Can they dump that money in my wallet.
-
1 ReplySo in a debate where the evidence must be scientific, he's going to argue pseudoscience (creationism) against science (evolution). ... Seriously?
-
Don't do drugs kids, it may seem like all fun and games until you wake up with no memory and have several billion little people tell you condradicting accounts of you did the night before.
-
[quote]Contest rules state that evidence must be scientific, which means it is "objective, valid, reliable and calibrated".[/quote] I'm curious, how can you scientifically prove creationism? I always thought it was basically just an assumption.
-
2 RepliesReminds me of this.
-
3 RepliesThat awkward moment when the Catholic church accepts evolution as the most plausible theory.
-
1 ReplyHow did the bible evolve? it didnt it was created by highly evolved intelligent creatures bombing mushrooms and trying to write the most Blamed up story they could..
-
10 RepliesI'm Catholic and I read the bible when needed. It's meant to be taken as a metaphorical interpretation. Is he seriously going to debate that there was such things as talking snakes?
-
I wonder when people will learn the Bible is not supposed to be interpreted literally... :/
-
Edited by ChickenAbductor: 4/2/2013 1:53:49 AMLol, trying to find out if there is an afterlife or not, waste of time much. We Humans are just tiny specks in the Universe, I highly dought we will be able to figure that out :D
-
5 RepliesIf he's a religious zealot, he'll lose. If he is truly a theologian, I say he's got a [url=http://www.tcs.cam.ac.uk/issue/news/dawkins-defeated-in-cambridge-union-religion-debate/]shot[/url].
-
15 RepliesEdited by Hank Hill: 4/1/2013 4:39:56 AMI hope he wins, as that will help put all you evolutionists to shame. Not saying there's anything wrong with your beliefs or anything.
-
How it's going to go down: Mastropaolo: "The Bible says..." Judge: "I'll stop you right there. The other gentleman wins as per the rules of this debate. You are required to give scientific evidence to support your claim."
-
ssssooooo much hurrrrr durrrrr
-
1 ReplyEdited by High Charity: 4/1/2013 3:32:13 PMThe person supporting the Bible will just get beat simply because there is no real evidence to support it. Also, many cultures and was of life are older than the bible says the world is.
-
1 ReplyGet Richard Dawkins in on this
-
[quote]It turns out that there is nothing in the universe [that] is evolving, everything is devolving, everything is going in the opposite direction[/quote] All of my wat.
-
10 RepliesIf evolution, of all things, cannot be proven by scientific evidence, what makes his evidence of creationism any more credible? Oh right. The Bible.
-
Edited by westpointusma15: 4/1/2013 3:54:32 AMI thought the Scopes Monkey Trial did this already? Also, taking scientists' words and writings on evolution of live is no more believable than religious writings on the same thing. Both rely on faith and can't be proven. Believe whichever one you want because no one should give a shit Yes, I used an It's Always Sunny video, but he has a good point. I believe in evolution, but neither belief can be proven to be correct
-
Hahaha!
-
21 RepliesThat's why it's called the [i]theory of evolution[/i]. Of course you can't prove it.
-
Because the answer to the creation of the universe is only worth $20,000. That would be interesting though. I'd like to see how this turns out.