Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Logical account of creation
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 62 of 173 (516239)
07-24-2009 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by AZPaul3
01-12-2007 1:02 PM


AZPaul3 writes:
Well, as one data point in the argument against such a creation there are these facts of the first appearance of these "kinds":
amoeba "kind" - Achaean period
plant and fish "kinds" - Vendian period
arthropod "kind" - Pre-Cambrian period
amphibian "kind" - Devonian period
reptile "kind" - Carboniferous period
mammal "kind" - Triassic period
ignorant creationist "kind" - Cenozoic period
Seems to me that if these "kinds" were created at the beginning then we should see all of them in the Achaean period.
your list above has no conflict with the bible account.
the Genesis account merely covers the major events in a progressive way, describing what things were formed, the order in which they were formed and the time interval, or 'day,' in which each first appeared.
it was the 1st and 2nd creative periods or 'days' that speak of the atmosphere being created and the dry land being brought together into one place
then it was the in the 3rd creative period that three broad categories of land plants appeared. "Let the earth cause grass to shoot forth, vegetation bearing seed, fruit trees yielding fruit according to their kinds..."
in the 5th creative period or 'day' came first the sea creatures, then the flying creatures. "Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens"
finally it was the 6th creative period or 'day' that land animals began to appear...the last of them being 'mankind'
"Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind."
so isnt this order of creation is in line with scientific fact...if not whats missing ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AZPaul3, posted 01-12-2007 1:02 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by lyx2no, posted 07-24-2009 10:09 AM Peg has replied
 Message 64 by bluescat48, posted 07-24-2009 2:44 PM Peg has replied
 Message 67 by AZPaul3, posted 07-24-2009 8:19 PM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 65 of 173 (516394)
07-24-2009 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by lyx2no
07-24-2009 10:09 AM


Re: No number 36,997
lyx2no writes:
Birds do not come before land animals.
have you got any references I can go to that explains this?
genesis lists 10 major stages in this order:
1a beginning to the universe
2a primitive earth in darkness and enshrouded in heavy gases and water
3light
4an expanse or atmosphere
5large areas of dry land
6land plants of all sorts
7sun, moon and stars discernible, and seasons begin
8sea creatures and flying creatures
9wild and tame beasts, mammals
10mankind
what's illogical or impossible about this order? Its seems like it could work. Light would need to come before plants. Plants would need to come before animals

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by lyx2no, posted 07-24-2009 10:09 AM lyx2no has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by lyx2no, posted 07-24-2009 8:27 PM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 66 of 173 (516397)
07-24-2009 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by bluescat48
07-24-2009 2:44 PM


bluescat48 writes:
Except for the fact that the "Vendian" plants were not land plants.The land plants first appear no earlier than the Devonian
but the genesis account does not specify the specific types of plants. It simply presents the order of the major groups as they appeared.
it says only they appeared on 'earth' and does not specify whether is they appeared on the land under the seas or land above.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by bluescat48, posted 07-24-2009 2:44 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by bluescat48, posted 07-24-2009 11:27 PM Peg has replied
 Message 79 by Blue Jay, posted 07-25-2009 1:37 PM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 70 of 173 (516443)
07-25-2009 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by lyx2no
07-24-2009 8:27 PM


Re: No number 36,997
lyx2no writes:
You've go to be pulling my leg.
havnt you heard there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by lyx2no, posted 07-24-2009 8:27 PM lyx2no has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by lyx2no, posted 07-25-2009 9:03 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 75 by ICANT, posted 07-25-2009 10:18 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 87 by traste, posted 08-19-2009 12:08 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 71 of 173 (516444)
07-25-2009 2:18 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by bluescat48
07-24-2009 11:27 PM


bluescat writes:
And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so
It would seem that this would mean plants on land.
it only says 'earth'
as far as i'm aware, the land under the sea is still part of the earth unless scientists have decided otherwise
there are many diffferent types of plants that yield seed and a fruit tree isnt confined to apples and oranges.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by bluescat48, posted 07-24-2009 11:27 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by bluescat48, posted 07-25-2009 11:41 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 80 of 173 (516566)
07-26-2009 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by ICANT
07-25-2009 9:57 AM


Re: Re plants
Hi ICANT,
i think its logical that God made fully formed plants, with seed production being the means for their duplication, rather then him producing seeds first and scattering them about.
Its like a chicken and egg senario... most logically he created a formed chicken that was capable of laying eggs rather then making eggs that hatched little chickens.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by ICANT, posted 07-25-2009 9:57 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by ICANT, posted 07-26-2009 3:11 PM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 119 of 173 (537109)
11-27-2009 1:26 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Dr Adequate
11-01-2009 4:56 AM


Re: Scientific laws
DrAdequate writes:
Since we know that at one time there were no living things, and since we know that there are living things now, we know that the "law of biogenesis" is not really a law.
thats what people believed about rotting meat
meat is fresh, it begins to rot then suddenly life appears (bugs n maggots and flies)
therefore rotting meat produces life
I thought they had worked that one out???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-01-2009 4:56 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 122 of 173 (537292)
11-28-2009 4:33 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Theodoric
09-22-2009 10:20 PM


Re: you are ignorant
Theodoric writes:
You do know there is no scientific law called [Recurrent Variation] this don't you. If you have any evidence such a scientific law exists please present it.
look here

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Theodoric, posted 09-22-2009 10:20 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 5:32 AM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 123 of 173 (537297)
11-28-2009 5:05 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by cavediver
11-27-2009 3:35 AM


Re: Scientific laws
cavediver writes:
Yeah, of course it did Traste - I cannot believe the endless stream of crap you produce. Do you have a reference to this at all???
the quote comes from the British 'New Scientist' journal in an article entitled "Darwins Theory: An Exercise in Science" June 25th 1981 by Michael Ruse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by cavediver, posted 11-27-2009 3:35 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 5:29 AM Peg has replied
 Message 126 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 5:42 AM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 127 of 173 (537372)
11-28-2009 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by cavediver
11-28-2009 5:29 AM


Re: Scientific laws
cavediver writes:
do we have a full, none-quote-mined copy of what Ruse said?
im not sure
but im sure a copy could be got from New Scientist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 5:29 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by hooah212002, posted 11-28-2009 9:36 AM Peg has replied
 Message 135 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 9:43 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 128 of 173 (537373)
11-28-2009 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by cavediver
11-28-2009 5:32 AM


Re: you are ignorant
cavediver writes:
Peg, one guy from a plant institute publishing in what must be the most obscure journal unknown to man, and declaring that he has a "law" is not really how 'laws' come in to being in science...
i dont know how science officiates such ideas/theories/laws
how did Newtons/Gallileo or Eisteins laws become official?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 5:32 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-28-2009 9:39 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 137 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 9:48 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 130 of 173 (537376)
11-28-2009 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by cavediver
11-28-2009 5:42 AM


Re: Scientific laws
cavediver writes:
I wonder how much Jesus loves the limitless lying and deception perpetrated by his followers... What do you think, Peg?
well you know what they say...
"the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
but seriously, i think creationists are looking very closely at what evolutionists say and when they say something that appears to express some amount of doubt, creationists use it. YOu cant blame them can you? I mean the idea that life evolved and was not created is diametrically opposed to their entire belief system.
most of us are not scientists...and those who are seem to be branded as 'not real scientists' if they believe in creation. So its no wonder we pounce on anything that appears to discredit evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by cavediver, posted 11-28-2009 5:42 AM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by hooah212002, posted 11-28-2009 9:42 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 134 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-28-2009 9:42 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 133 of 173 (537380)
11-28-2009 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by hooah212002
11-28-2009 9:36 AM


Re: Scientific laws
hooah212002 writes:
Please, if you can find the original, provide it. I would love to read it.
i only have the reference in the bibliography in my 'evolution or creation' book.
I did a google but didnt come up with anything either... Perhaps someone would need to ask New Scientist or the author for a copy of the original article.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by hooah212002, posted 11-28-2009 9:36 AM hooah212002 has seen this message but 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