Discussing the evidence that support creationism

By suggestion, I'll post this discussion about the evidence that supports creation.1) Asexual/Bisexual reproduction. Evolution claims that our ancestors were all once-celled creatures. These reproduced by asexual reproduction. So, somewhere, it had to switch from asexual to bisexual. Two things are possible: a) this did happen within one generation (highly unlikely, due to the usual slow evolution usually taught), or b) both sides of the bisexual reproducing organisms were created at the same time.2) Galaxies. The centripetal force of the spinning galaxies would rip them apart within 10,000 years. Although astronomers have given galaxies the mysterious 'Dark Matter' to account for their lack of gravity, nobody's ever seen this substance. It seems that if 70% of the universe were dark matter, we'd have found some of it by now. Logically, if 70% of our universe were dark matter, there should be some in our solar system. We'd have detected it, it seems, by now.3) Snakes and humans. If evolution were correct, then reptiles would be genetically closer to other reptiles than, say, birds. However, when tested, snakes turned out to be closer to humans than any other. So did snakes evolve from some mammal? Or was everything created at the same time with roughly the same code.4) (This is my idea) Life. Simply put, the basis of life is amino acids. However, that's the basis for CARBON-BASED life forms. If life was a random even, who said that it had to be carbon-based. The only life we know is carbon-based, so we think that that's the only thing that can be alive. However, if life was random, it might be centered around some other element, like iron, or oxygen, or radon, or lead, or something. It would seem that life could appear anywhere, in any atmosphere, with any gravity, with any heat. We haven't found anything but carbon-based life, though. It would also seem that there would be some other life on earth not based on carbon, but there isn't. So, either only carbon-based life was created on earth, or earth could only support carbon-based life or carbon-based life prevailed.Please expand on these, or argue with them.---Aquilegia753

How about the Mid-Atlantic Trench? How every shoreline of the Atlantic is parallel to it and eachother? How about how every shoreline is the same, a gentle slope, then a steep drop, then the ocean floor? All these can be explained by a huge flood (see my explination on Message 229 on 'Was There a World-wide Flood').Sorry about my temper. I thank you all for replying.Edited by Aquilegia753, : I don't want to sound mean

In one of the earliest written stories, The Gilgamesh Epic, there is a reference to somebody who survived a great flood by building a giant boat and saving not only himself and his family, but also every living thing. This was written close enough for Noah, or one of his sons (or grandsons), to still be alive.

TrueEdited by Aquilegia753, : Spelling error

The Flood is evidence to support that the Bible is true, and if the Bible is true, the creationism is true.

I got that claim from the book In the Beginning (which I will get more information about over Thanksgiving). Sorry, I had no idea. It's probably an old book, too.

I never said that 'It must be God,'. I think, however, that because galaxies are intact, the universe must be younger than 10,000 years.I understand the snake thing.However, the plate tectonics. At the pressure that the earth is under at the depth of molten rock, it seems that all of the cracks would seal themselves up. So, although plate tectonics might be true, it seems that they could not cause volcanoes, like we think they do. There would be no way, under that pressure, that molten rock would escape. And even if it could, it seems like volcanoes wouldn't stop erupting, but erupt with much more force, the force of molten rock under 50 miles of earth.

He had a lot that I don't remember. He might have.

Well, the force of the galaxies spinning (at insanely fast speeds) along with the lack of neccesary mass to counter the effect with an equally strong gravitational pull towards the center means that the galaxies should be torn apart within 10,000 years. Because they are still intact and still spinning, either the galaxies must have more mass, and therefore more gravity (the theoretical 'Dark Matter'), or the universe and galaxies are less than 10,000 years old, and the galaxies haven't had time to decay.

I've already accepted that both 1 and 3 are bunked. And I will accept evidence against creation and for evolution. I'm interested to see what people have to say.However, I am saying that it's foolish to say that life could only exist on earth. Carbon-based life can only exist on earth, but not all life has to be carbon-based. Unless, however, life needed an Intelligant Designer to be made, and not a random sequence of events.

By my previous efforts to state possibly old (and now unreliable) data, I'm currently researching something. Hold on..."[An] important lesson we learn from the way that pure numbers like define the world is what it really means for worlds to be different. The pure number we call the fine structure constant and denote by is a combination of the electron charge, e, the speed of light, c, and Planck's constant, h. At first we might be tempted to think that a world in which the speed of light was slower would be a different world. But this would be a mistake. If c, h, and e were all changed so that the values they have in metric (or any other) units were different when we looked them up in our tables of physical constants, but the value of remained the same, this new world would be observationally indistinguishable from our world. The only thing that counts in the definition of worlds are the values of the dimensionless constants of Nature. If all masses were doubled in value you cannot tell because all the pure numbers defined by the ratios of any pair of masses are unchanged."
--John BarrowIf the speed of light has been decelerating, like Joo Magueijo and John Moffat seem to think it has, then the stars and galaxies more than 10,000 light years (modern light years) may have started at the same time.'14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights”the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning”the fourth day.'
--Genesis 1:14-19The Bible says that on the fourth day, the stars were visible. However. If this was the fourth day after the creation of the universe, then the light must have traveled very fast for the four-day-old stars to reach earth. Therefore, the speed of light was much much greater than today, for the closest star's light takes over four years to reach earth, not four days.So, the most distant stars and galaxies may only be 10,000 years old. Therefore, still giving them not enough time to decay.

I never denied the 'old universe' theory. I actually strongly believe that God made all things mature. In doing that, he could have created a 'mature' universe. The rocks could appear to be billions of years old, but really be much younger. Adam could've appeared to have been 30, when he was not a day old.

Yes, that would create a time distortion, but we already experiance a time distortion here on earth with something much slower: sound.If a car is going at, say, a quarter of the speed of sound, away from you and it honks its horn twice, ten seconds apart. Then, the first honk, honk A, will be traveling backward, away from the rapidly receding car. Ten seconds later, the car emits honk B. However, in between, the car has traveled 2820 feet. Both honks are now traveling at the same speed toward you, but 14100 feet apart. therefore, even though Honk B was sent only ten seconds after Honk A, they would arrive 12.5 seconds apart.This simulation represents a time distortion. The sounds were made 10 seconds apart, but the stationary observer hears them 12.5 seconds apart.If the car were to, in between the honks, accelerate to half the speed of sound, then the honks would be farther apart. Were it to continue accelerating, but decrease the speed increase exponentially, eventually, you'd need a period of greater than ten seconds between honks to tell their time differances apart (i.e. 15.000000058949201 seconds and 15.000000058949210 seconds [totally random numbers].

No. I'm sure that God didn't give Adam false childhood memories. But, I'm saying that God made everything mature. He didn't make the egg, for there was no chicken to tend to it. If He made a middle-aged man instantly, He could make a middle-aged earth

I WILL NOT STAND FOR YOU TO CALL MY CREATOR A LIER!