|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The SEVEN "DAYS" WERE GEOLOGICAL ERAS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Yes, you make a lot of bullshit claims.
Give me one that I have not backed up with science references.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
You have not backed up even one with a science reference.
yeah, yeah, yeah,...That is what you keep accusing me of here, but fail to give me the post(s) where that is true.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
But I did give you the posts where that is true, every single one of your posts is just plain bullshit.
That is what one side in a debate says, mutually, to the other side, from the get-go. But only idiots keep repeating that they are on the one side while there is the other side.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
There is still more in Genesis which fits into the scientific chronology of the History of the Earth.
Things in the geology of the rocks also add to the Paleontology in regard to the credibility of Genesis as a factual set of statements on beginnings. Assuming that the "day three" in Genesis actually refers to the "evening of the Archean era and the morning of the Proterozoic era,"... ... we CAN see that Genesis recognizes that "the first sprouts of life on Earth" spontaneously generated, while during that same moment in the history of the earth, Rodinia (the first pangea-like episode) appeared in the midst of "all the waters under heaven havingbeen collected into just one place." Science support for this observation:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
People have shown you time after time why what you post is utter bullshit and a total misrepresentation of both what the Bible says and what science says.
What about the above post?Can you just deny arbritarily, that Gen 1:9-11 specifically says these same events took place or give a reason which shows Genesis or the facts are not both the same ideas?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Lame objects to what is clearly stated in Gen 1:9-10, about all the waters UNDER HEAVEN, collected TOGETHER into ONE place is an unavoidable analogy of this first Pangea-like geography forming on the same exact geological "day" as found in Genesis.
Wiggle wiggle, secular atheists this totally unknown event before 1920 was a divine revelation from the Bible 3362 years prior. Then, the same one-to-one correspondence again,... between the events of the "evening" of the Big Bang, that first "day" when the planetesimal accretion ring of an Earth void of shape, then coalesced into a sphere,...
...AND, the molten Earth cooled... Gen. 1:2 And the earth was without form, (a spinning cloud of molten matter and gases), and void: (not valid as a sphere yet- i.e.; an accretion disk), and darkness: [choshek: obscurity] was upon the face (of the disk) of the deep: [tehowm: the deep primeval abyss of the thick ring].
And (the great Shechinah), the spirit, (the pan-en-theistic Natural Laws) of God moved upon the face: [paniym: presence] of the "waters" (i.e.; of these transitory things spinning counter clockwise around the Sun: [mayim: Hebrew])
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
[qs]
/qs
"The single global ocean which surrounded Pangaea is accordingly named Panthalassa." Only one continent can exist when there is only a single global ocean as described in Gen 1:9-10: Pangaea - Wikipedia Gen. 1:9 And (Father Nature, the first cause), God, said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, (Panthalassa), and let (Pangea/Rodinia), the dry land appear: (composed of the Seven Large Tectonic Plates):
1. North American Plate,2. Pacific Plate, 3. South American Plate, 4. African Plate, 5. Eurasian Plate, 6. Anartic Plate, 7. Australian Plate),... ...and it was so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Even a few more continents and the water could still be in one place.
1) But Genesis does say God collected all the waters together.So the Bible is not incorrect in any case. 2) Panthallasso is the science term for a geological condition where all the oceans/seas have been collected into one Ocean, which requires a single continent by definition. 3) Lame as these attempts are, attempting to avoid the amazing revelation 3362 years ago about the mention of this previously unknown geological event,... ... it is true that all the water was in one place called Earth, of course. 4) But Genesis says all the (separated) waters were "collected together," which tells us that the water was already on earth but separated, de facto of implying so in that verse. 5) And, even if your intellectual dishonesty were to presist with such lame defenses against the evidence in Gen 1:9, motivated by the sole attempt to bash the Bible,... .... you can not object to a rational reading of Genesis which scientifically conforms with the facts we now know and explains what Genesis meant, at the same time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Even a few more continents and the water could still be in one place.
Of course each body of water in itself could be understood to be in one place.lol. To comprehend what the Bible writers is saying, tho, we must read the whole context of the verse where it starts by saying, "Let the waters under the heaven be gathered"... so the plural reference to waters and the command to gather THEM into one place supports the interpretation which tells us that these ancients knew of the tectonic cycle that began with Rodinia. NOT only is the Bible correct, then, about something so far out of the realm if human knowledge back in 3362AD, but this is said to happen on "the Archean evening and the Proterozoic morning of the THIRD 'day'". EXACTLY when the first of the cycles began with the formation of Rodinia:
Neo-archean evening of the Archaean Era- and the Paleo-proterozoic morning of the Proterozoic Era/ = Third Day WHAT A DIRECT AND CLEAR MATTER OF SCIENCE SUPPORTING THE BIBLE... wow for Christians and woe for you guys.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Of course.
Whereas that recent sketch of what medieval Jews thought about the universe is pretty much the same as christians believed until this Age, it is just evidence of the medieval ignorance that prevented factual interpretations of Genesis. The religious people through out the ages did not have enough information about the facts which the Bible laid out for us today, when in the end times the Book could be opened and read in the way I am demonstrating. \[B\]This is why stories like Noah's Ark and the Flood had to be written in a way that contained enough information so we could piece together what they were really about.Yet writtem cleverly enough so those people could accept the story in a way that fit into their own educational paradigms of their times.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
If you look right now you will see that there are "7" cervical vertebrae and "12" thoracic vertebrae ... ... and if you add the fused tail bone vertebra to the "5" lumbar vertebrae you end up with 14 which is 7 + 7.
Actually, I will bring this all up in regard to the Urim and Thumimm, Ex 28:30, when I discuss the Pattern of the Temple and how its geometry models the way out brain casts a fixed pattern to the organization of data it senses,... from the seven senses coming, into the 12 Cortex Functional Areas of the Brain, via the 12 pairs of Cranial Nerves. So on and so on.... Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
1) I'm not moderating this thread - I'm just a participant.
1) I'm not moderating this thread - I'm just a participant. ANS: You are openly bias against my point of view and seem eager to silence it simply because of that.It seems fair that you avoid the urge to press your own views such as to make sure my own are not available here. I thank you for the fair play.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
2) I think you need to connect your ideas to evidence. For example, what evidence leads you to believe that Adam was a Sahefanthropus tchadensis?
ANS: A) The theological evidence of 22 links to the present human population are enumerated in Genesis.The Scientific evidence for 22 links to the present human population are enumerated in The Last Human: the 22 now extinct humans. B) Paleontologists hypothesize that Sahefanthropus tchadensis is a good candidate for the first branch from chimps to the new species, Humanoids. Re:
Search for the First Human (Sahelanthropus Tchadensis) Sahelanthropus Tchadensis is one of the oldest known species on the human family tree. This species lived sometime between 7 and 6 million years ago. topdocumentaryfilms.com/search-first-human-sahelanthropus-tchade... And, conversely, Gen 5:2 says that Adam is the first of the human species: Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
3) What evidence leads you to believe that a member of one species can give birth to a member of a different species? ANS:
"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes." According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2. Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred... before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 million and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5). References:1.Fan Y, et al. Genomic Structure and Evolution of the Ancestral Chromosome Fusion Site in 2q13-2q14.1 and paralogous regions on other human chromosomes. Genome Research 2002, volume 12, pages 1651-1662.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3851 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
Obviously humans were not born out of this fusion (mostly because chromosome fusions don't change gene expression on their own) because the line that leads to modern humans HAD ALREADY SPLIT OFF FROM OTHER APES. You are reading to that sentence something that OBVIOUSLY the writer could NOT have meant, because he specifically is saying that this fusion is the very evidence of common descent: "Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. " His point is merely that the branch of humans appeared after this fusion.He is also reserving the opinion that this immediately produced such a stark difference between the surrogate mother Ape to this early first divergence as to question whether it was still more ape than Hominid, but that after this the common decent followed: "Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2. Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred after the human—chimpanzee split, but before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 million and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5). References:1.Fan Y, et al. Genomic Structure and Evolution of the Ancestral Chromosome Fusion Site in 2q13-2q14.1 and paralogous regions on other human chromosomes. Genome Research 2002, volume 12, pages 1651-1662. Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given. Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024