Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Questions Creationists Never Answer
olletrap
Junior Member (Idle past 5648 days)
Posts: 23
From: Mass, USA
Joined: 10-07-2008


Message 121 of 141 (485492)
10-08-2008 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
01-08-2002 12:14 PM


Dating and Flowers
Sorry for misunderstanding the question. Again, I am not here to defend the flood as a certainty the way that we understand it. clearly it comes down from the epic of Gilgamesh and probably earlier stories. The stories meaning is that the world has been destroyed because it was evil, and a remnant was saved to repopulate it.
That I can believe. There are many philosophies that say that the earth has been destroyed and rebuilt many times. If I were to discover that there was no Noah, it would have no affect on my beliefs. There are just as many problems with the story of Adam and Eve or Cain and Able... but these are the oldest stories on earth. I think we need to concentrate on the gist of them, not the details.
Edited by olletrap, : spelling

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 01-08-2002 12:14 PM nator has not replied

  
wardog25
Member (Idle past 5553 days)
Posts: 37
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 122 of 141 (486649)
10-23-2008 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
01-08-2002 12:14 PM


quote:
1) Define "kind".
I think your real problem is that you want a very specific answer for something that was not given as specific.
What if I decided that I wasn't going to believe in Aristotle until I knew his shoe size and eye color?
From all the posts on here, you can see there is definitely a broad definition for "kind". Can you ever reduce it down so much that we could classify every living thing according to that system? Of course not. Not enough information is given.
So why is this so troubling? There are many things about history that we just can't know. If you can give me Julius Caesar's exact weight when he was 12 years old, I'll give you an exact definition of "kind".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 01-08-2002 12:14 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Huntard, posted 10-23-2008 12:46 PM wardog25 has not replied
 Message 124 by onifre, posted 10-23-2008 6:37 PM wardog25 has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 123 of 141 (486655)
10-23-2008 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by wardog25
10-23-2008 12:09 PM


wardog25 writes:
I think your real problem is that you want a very specific answer for something that was not given as specific.
That is indeed the problem
What if I decided that I wasn't going to believe in Aristotle until I knew his shoe size and eye color?
What does this have to do with anything? The reason we want to know what kind means is so we can see if all kinds could've fit on the ark.
From all the posts on here, you can see there is definitely a broad definition for "kind". Can you ever reduce it down so much that we could classify every living thing according to that system? Of course not. Not enough information is given.
Which is the problem if you want to say the flood story is true.
So why is this so troubling? There are many things about history that we just can't know. If you can give me Julius Caesar's exact weight when he was 12 years old, I'll give you an exact definition of "kind".
What's troubling is the fact that people keep claiming the flood story is true, yet when asked for evidence can produce NONE.
Oh, and Caesar's weight when he was twelve was 35,67 Kg.
Edited by Huntard, : Changed the weight a bit, this one's correct though!

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by wardog25, posted 10-23-2008 12:09 PM wardog25 has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 124 of 141 (486698)
10-23-2008 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by wardog25
10-23-2008 12:09 PM


So why is this so troubling? There are many things about history that we just can't know.
Its troubling because its claimed as factual.
"Kind" is not definable by science standards, which is the standard used to categorize animals. In other words, is "kind" refering to for example humans, or primates, or mammals, or vertibrates etc, etc?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by wardog25, posted 10-23-2008 12:09 PM wardog25 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by wardog25, posted 10-23-2008 6:42 PM onifre has replied

  
wardog25
Member (Idle past 5553 days)
Posts: 37
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 125 of 141 (486700)
10-23-2008 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by onifre
10-23-2008 6:37 PM


But that was my point entirely. There are many things from history that aren't deeply specific. That doesn't mean they aren't factual.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by onifre, posted 10-23-2008 6:37 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by onifre, posted 10-23-2008 7:13 PM wardog25 has not replied
 Message 127 by bluescat48, posted 10-23-2008 7:37 PM wardog25 has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 126 of 141 (486704)
10-23-2008 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by wardog25
10-23-2008 6:42 PM


There are many things from history that aren't deeply specific. That doesn't mean they aren't factual.
Thus our questions.
If things in history are not understood there is a process of inquiry that takes place, we are merely applying that process to the Ark/Gilagamesh story.
All observable evidence from a geological stand point, if the date for the Flood was within the last 10,000 years, indicate that there was no global flood. Further more, if creation of ALL species takes place at a single moment in time then that would have to be one HUGE Ark, unless you define "kind" as say vertebrates. Then you can reduce the size of the Ark perhaps, and after the flood evolution from vertebrates takes place and the story starts to make sense. However, there is the enormous problem of Noah being human before vetebrates evolve.
I think the point of the OP is to expose the Ark story as nothing more than a folkloric tale. If we broke down each individual aspect of the story (i.e. Time line, geological dating, size of the Ark) we could see the problems with it.

"All great truths begin as blasphemies"
"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by wardog25, posted 10-23-2008 6:42 PM wardog25 has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 127 of 141 (486705)
10-23-2008 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by wardog25
10-23-2008 6:42 PM


But that was my point entirely. There are many things from history that aren't deeply specific. That doesn't mean they aren't factual.
The point is that one must separate "the wheat from the shaft."
When there are questions about the validity of a historical story, then one must examine the evidence pro & con to the validity. It may not be possible to get a fully accurate account, but one can determine whether there is evidence as to such or not.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by wardog25, posted 10-23-2008 6:42 PM wardog25 has not replied

  
terry107
Junior Member (Idle past 3807 days)
Posts: 5
From: sacramento ca
Joined: 10-23-2008


Message 128 of 141 (486718)
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Dinosaurs and man
The ancient Bretons created mega monuments in various forms and the landscape of Brittany contains natural rock, menhirs, dolmens etc. Among the ancient forms whichagain are thought to have been created by the Pagan Celtics ---or even older civilizations.
among these forms are clear representations of dinosaurs--impossible according to Darwin but in line with the Bible and creation. So...?
Why continue to believe Darwin when everything that it predicts is wrong.
http://s8int.com/phile/dinolit83.html

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by bluescat48, posted 10-23-2008 11:28 PM terry107 has not replied
 Message 130 by Coyote, posted 10-23-2008 11:32 PM terry107 has not replied
 Message 131 by anglagard, posted 10-24-2008 12:47 AM terry107 has not replied
 Message 132 by Huntard, posted 10-24-2008 1:53 AM terry107 has not replied
 Message 133 by Larni, posted 10-24-2008 8:11 AM terry107 has not replied
 Message 134 by cavediver, posted 10-24-2008 9:11 AM terry107 has not replied
 Message 136 by onifre, posted 10-24-2008 9:32 AM terry107 has not replied
 Message 139 by obvious Child, posted 10-24-2008 4:28 PM terry107 has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 129 of 141 (486719)
10-23-2008 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by terry107
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Re: Dinosaurs and man
It would take a vigorous imagination to see "dinosaurs" inthe scultures at the site you posted. Even if they did resemble dinos it would not mean that the sculptors ever saw one. Dinosaurs resemble lizards which would possibly existed with the sculptors. These sculptures in no way suggest that dinsaurs & humans existed at the same time.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by terry107, posted 10-23-2008 11:01 PM terry107 has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 130 of 141 (486720)
10-23-2008 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by terry107
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Re: Dinosaurs and man
The ancient Bretons created mega monuments in various forms and the landscape of Brittany contains natural rock, menhirs, dolmens etc. Among the ancient forms whichagain are thought to have been created by the Pagan Celtics ---or even older civilizations.
among these forms are clear representations of dinosaurs--impossible according to Darwin but in line with the Bible and creation. So...?
Why continue to believe Darwin when everything that it predicts is wrong.
Welcome. But you'll have to do better than that. You are wrong in several respects.
So you think dinosaurs were cavorting about in early historic times, eh? And that people were creating representations of them in stone?
Where are the bones?
Archaeologists (myself included) have been poking around and some of us have found mammoth and mastodon bones, as well as bones of other extinct fauna. They are literally all over the place in the western US, where I work. What are not present are dinosaur bones. Given the size of most of the dinosaurs, you'd think at least a few would have shown up in nearly 200 years of archaeology. But they haven't been found. To find dinosaur bones (actually fossils) you have to look in geological strata that are 65 million years old or older.
And everything the theory of evolution predicts is wrong? Under what rock have you been hiding? There are many accurate predictions stemming from the theory of evolution. I'll provide just one to show that your statement is incorrect:
'Fishapod' reveals origins of head and neck structures of first land animals
Perhaps you shouldn't do your research on creationist websites. When it comes to science, they tend to lie and relying on them will just make you look silly.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by terry107, posted 10-23-2008 11:01 PM terry107 has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 131 of 141 (486724)
10-24-2008 12:47 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by terry107
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Dinosaurs and Tortillas
terry107 writes:
The ancient Bretons created mega monuments in various forms and the landscape of Brittany contains natural rock, menhirs, dolmens etc. Among the ancient forms whichagain are thought to have been created by the Pagan Celtics ---or even older civilizations.
among these forms are clear representations of dinosaurs--impossible according to Darwin but in line with the Bible and creation. So...?
Why continue to believe Darwin when everything that it predicts is wrong.
Welcome to EvC terry107.
Having viewed your source, most would refer to your 'evidence' as a classic example of Pareidolia.
I must say that you are going to have to do better than seeing Jesus or any dinosaurs in a tortilla, grilled cheese sandwich, or even rock formation in order to topple all workable conclusions from natural science developed over the last 200 years. In fact you are even going to run into some trouble with psychologists, sociologists and dare I say, the majority of theologians.
Edited by anglagard, : add the term workable, after all there are some cranks and quacks about, however rare and disowned, even in something as self-regulating as the natural sciences.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by terry107, posted 10-23-2008 11:01 PM terry107 has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 132 of 141 (486726)
10-24-2008 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by terry107
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Re: Dinosaurs and man
Hello terry107 and welcome to EvC
terry107 writes:
The ancient Bretons created mega monuments in various forms and the landscape of Brittany contains natural rock, menhirs, dolmens etc. Among the ancient forms whichagain are thought to have been created by the Pagan Celtics ---or even older civilizations.
among these forms are clear representations of dinosaurs--impossible according to Darwin but in line with the Bible and creation. So...?
Why continue to believe Darwin when everything that it predicts is wrong.
http://s8int.com/phile/dinolit83.html
First of all, those rocks to me look NOTHING like dinosaurs, so please try again.
Second, Evolutionary theory has been EXTREMELY accurate in its predictions, so, sorry, but you'll have to try again there too.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by terry107, posted 10-23-2008 11:01 PM terry107 has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 133 of 141 (486737)
10-24-2008 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by terry107
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Re: Dinosaurs and man
Man you really have a point! The second picture however is obviously a human pelvis, no?
It really, really reminds me of a human pelvis and I should know because I have one. Obviously neolithic carved a pelvis out of stone.
Straw clutching bullshit.
When you look up at the night sky do you really see a bear? No; you don't.
What you have here is a collection of things that look like things with no evidence of anything other than natural forces at work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by terry107, posted 10-23-2008 11:01 PM terry107 has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3644 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 134 of 141 (486739)
10-24-2008 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by terry107
10-23-2008 11:01 PM


Re: Dinosaurs and man
among these forms are clear representations of dinosaurs
quote:
Whatever paleoentolgists might think, this ancient sculpture is clearly a theropod, like tyrannosaurus rex.
Agh, I think I'm dying...
Must keep this quiet - if the creationists all get ahold of this smoking gun, we're doomed! Doomed, I tell you...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by terry107, posted 10-23-2008 11:01 PM terry107 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Percy, posted 10-24-2008 9:27 AM cavediver has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22393
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 135 of 141 (486741)
10-24-2008 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by cavediver
10-24-2008 9:11 AM


Re: Dinosaurs and man
About this being a Tyrannosaurus rex:
I think it's been misinterpreted. I can see how they made the mistake, but clearly it's a hadrosaur.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by cavediver, posted 10-24-2008 9:11 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by cavediver, posted 10-24-2008 9:34 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 138 by lyx2no, posted 10-24-2008 9:35 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 141 by bluescat48, posted 10-24-2008 6:10 PM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024