Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-19-2019 4:31 AM
27 online now:
PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (2 members, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,816 Year: 4,853/19,786 Month: 975/873 Week: 331/376 Day: 8/116 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123456
7
8Next
Author Topic:   Dinosaurs explained biblically
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1702 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 91 of 107 (477580)
08-05-2008 3:04 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by ThinkGod247
08-01-2008 5:27 AM


Some trolls survived the Flood
The word dinosaur was not invented til 1841 before this time they were called dragons....

And what did they call trolls before you were invented?

man i really love the bible 66 books over 40 authors over 1600 years written on 3 different continents and still able to 100% accurate...

Rather like my BS meter, which just zoomed from orange to red.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by ThinkGod247, posted 08-01-2008 5:27 AM ThinkGod247 has not yet responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3137 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 92 of 107 (478472)
08-15-2008 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by ThinkGod247
08-01-2008 4:25 AM


Re: Humans and Dinosaurs before the flood?
I got to go behind the scenes at Ghost Ranch and I saw a slab that had 4 or 5 Ceolophysis smushed together with another cool looking species. Both of these Chinle creatures had holes opening into the brain case. There was a small one fossilized right on top of a large one. One can almost imagine this was death of a baby on a mother as we can see today young alligators on mothers’ snout. There are numerous slabs like this presently at Harvard and Carnegie Melon but costs tend to prevent rapid excavation the paleontologist said.

This kind of rock fossil is what Young Earthers tend interpret as due to Noah’s flood as best I understand their work. I had a hard time seeing that this layer in that landscape was caused by a flood that would have had to form all of the layers I saw. Perhaps I have missed something in the Young Earth argument. If you think that I need to see the video you linked let me know again and I WILL look at it.

Instead, there seems to be a problem BOTH on the science and the religious sides.

As for the theology I would tend NOT to get to NOAH at this point but be thinking still only back in Genesis up to ADAM and “keeping and tilling” the garden. The eco-justice literature (rather than YEC) suggests that revelation indicates that the EARTH survives HEAVEN. This would be how I see the future acoming…There is not a sufficiently developed natural theology to permit the vision from being duly separated into empirical things and things some unknown but potentially due to God.

But on the science side there has been too much feality to Greek thought such that there is no recognition that teleology, orthogenesis, orthoselection, the two-step thought of natural selection, the organization of living matter, a design and the right of this inheritance passed on to science students can be rigoursly kept separate from the data that determines out of the reflection still connected via space to any god.

At some level of thought on good and evil it would be possible to think of "humans" and any creature before Noah's flood chronologically but prophecy tends to keep this from being the necessary thought for me. One would have to KNOW what rights different living things OUGHT to posses then and that is still unknown.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by ThinkGod247, posted 08-01-2008 4:25 AM ThinkGod247 has not yet responded

    
Peg
Member (Idle past 3034 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 93 of 107 (489145)
11-23-2008 9:56 PM


reading through this thread brings the lolz

ok, im a creationist...so i can say that the bible does not mention dinosaurs

i find it annoying that if the religious teachers arnt sure about something, they just make it up

i dont think the bible needs to explain the existence of dinosaurs because obviously they were not in existence when the bible was penned...they must have died out a long time before that as the fossil record shows

if the bible DID mention dinosaurs, then i would be very concerned about the validity of it as a whole.


    
Lithodid-Man
Member (Idle past 1035 days)
Posts: 504
From: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Joined: 03-22-2004


Message 94 of 107 (489172)
11-24-2008 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by ThinkGod247
08-01-2008 5:27 AM


Hovind's backwards vapor theory
Thinkgod247 writes:

Before the flood there was a green house effect making perfect weather because of the firmament.....
(snip) The firmament provided The blocking of uv rays
pure oxygen for air ( this is also why men lived to be 900 years old)

This is, as some have mentioned, right out of a Hovind seminar. Am surprised you didn't include the giant tomato tree story as well. What Hovind claims is that the pre-flood world had a layer of water suspended in the sky that blocked uv radiation but allowed useful wavelengths of light through. This had the effect of making the Earth a perfect greenhouse where plants and animals grew larger and lived longer. Great hypothesis with just one little flaw..... is completely untrue.

Water does not block UV very well at all. In fact, light in the UV spectrum travels farthest through water. Long wavelengths of light, the ones green plants require, are blocked by water. If this magic water canopy existed, it would actually have made plant life impossible. This principle is called light attenuation and is why aquatic algae has evolved multiple photosynthetic pigments. Green algaes are restricted to shallow water as the red/yellow spectrum of light is absorbed very quickly. Red algaes, Rhodophyta, utilize visible blue/violet light and can live deeper (deepest living photosynthetic organisms that rely on sunlight are red algaes).

Of course facts never deterred Hovind before, when he needs to make point he will bend scientific principles at will to fit.


Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"
This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by ThinkGod247, posted 08-01-2008 5:27 AM ThinkGod247 has not yet responded

    
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 95 of 107 (489205)
11-25-2008 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by ThinkGod247
08-01-2008 5:27 AM


Re: Humans scared of Dinosaurs before the flood?
man i really love the bible 66 books over 40 authors over 1600 years written on 3 different continents and still able to 100% accurate...

you are a little off, more like about 400-4000 authors and virtually 0% accuracy.


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 76 by ThinkGod247, posted 08-01-2008 5:27 AM ThinkGod247 has not yet responded

    
shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 953 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


Message 96 of 107 (493956)
01-12-2009 12:26 AM


water canopy
For something to stay in orbit it must travel a great circle(ellipse).
A water shell is not possible. Everything that stays up has to orbit about the center of mass of the earth. Halo orbits don't work.
Think of wrapping string around a ball and you get the idea. The orbiting envelope of water would be colliding into itself, slowing and falling.
    
djknight
Junior Member (Idle past 3584 days)
Posts: 1
Joined: 03-27-2009


Message 97 of 107 (504399)
03-27-2009 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by nos482
11-02-2002 5:39 PM


you're a gullible idiot pretending to be a wise man
nos482 (11-02-2002 03:09 PM) said: [Neanderthals are] Not our direct ancestor, but still in the same tree and still interfertile. Their ancestors left Africa before ours did and they evolved along the way."

why do you parrot? why not think? why do you make claims not based on any evidence? why are you so desperate to be exalted as a wise man? could you be a loser? g i wonder. not:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/10/neanderthals/hall-text
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v16/i2/neanderthal.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/red-haired-fast-talking
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/worthy-ancestors
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0217neandertal.asp
http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0890512388/creation-science-20

Further, dna analysis shows neandertals to be more related to our ancient ancestors than us. Now why would that be? Care to use your brain? See what happens when you assume, when you are impatient, and when you judge merely by your feelings? What's you're excuse? Let me guess, "We scientists are still learning!" Yeah, that's your excuse whenever you're wrong. How about just, "We were wrong." You know, honesty? That's what's science is supposed to be about isn't it?

Edited by djknight, : quoted the idiot babbler

Edited by djknight, : added additional scientific evidence reference that neandertals are human


Hate evil, love good, maintain justice in the courts. - Amos
This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by nos482, posted 11-02-2002 5:39 PM nos482 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Coyote, posted 03-27-2009 10:19 PM djknight has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 210 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 98 of 107 (504405)
03-27-2009 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by djknight
03-27-2009 10:06 PM


Re: you're a gullible idiot pretending to be a wise man
How about posting what you are really saying in your own words.

Arguing by links is not permitted here. You can make your arguments and then support them by links.

But I am fairly familiar with fossil man, so I would enjoy hearing what you have to say.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by djknight, posted 03-27-2009 10:06 PM djknight has not yet responded

  
PapaTed71
Junior Member (Idle past 3520 days)
Posts: 5
Joined: 05-28-2009


Message 99 of 107 (510193)
05-28-2009 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by axial soliton
08-29-2002 2:34 PM


Most people of religion feel that modern science is their enemy tryig to discount God, but i feel that both do well to provide evidence of eachother. In pregenesis text relating to the Judeo-Christian God it mentioned Earth as being the garden of God but also as his foot stool. This was before the creation of man mind you. God chose the mightiest of his archangels to watch over his foot stool and tend his garden. This was Lucifer. But he began to sully the garden of god with blasphemy's which many intellegent and open minded christians are willing to beleive that may have been in the propogation of reptilians to the ultimate bengs instead of the soon to be free thinking mammals. Well as has happened many times before god was angered and cast Lucifer out of heaven, back to earth, Then it says God kicked away his foot stool sending it spinning into blackness an void which is where it is found at the beginning of genesis only afew million years later where Lucifer himself appear as a snake only having legs which getcut out from under him by god. While it seems very scientifically flimsy i believe thats perfectly understandable since the people through which these stories were being told had no understanding of science in its modern form but that they can stll get a descent view of the goings of the planet pre humanity.

I do agree that it is sad when ANYONE takes a close minded stand against understanding others why must you intellectuals wrap your scientifically justified robes around yourselfs and scoff at others I used to think scientists were the kinds of peoplewho had infinite scope and capability of understanding but after interacting with them they are just as their religious counterparts they just have a different boxin which they reside where as i try to reside in wonderous uneiverse created around us Whether it was by what some call God or by an Infinite PreBB Existance of energy that Condensed itself to a singularityso as to erupt outward showing the Nothingness with light and instilling in all matter a common functionality of which exixtance it self is based. I have one question for yousir. What is the difference between the two? If you ask me its just who you ask. You should take if you haven;t already some advanced Calculus it really gives you a finite mathematical definition for all the "unseens" of the universe. I think you'll like it and give you more strength behind your arguments. And who knows maybe you'll learn something.
p.s. Please don't take this as an attakck it is merely my expression of ideals created by my mind of the concurent running of my life time. Plus i love stiring the idle precipitate clinging to the bottom of the beaker. hehehe


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by axial soliton, posted 08-29-2002 2:34 PM axial soliton has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Blue Jay, posted 05-28-2009 5:04 PM PapaTed71 has responded

    
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 100 of 107 (510194)
05-28-2009 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by PapaTed71
05-28-2009 4:32 PM


Reptiles
Hi, PapaTed. Welcome to EvC!

For your information, the post you responded to is 7 years old, and the person who posted it hasn't been here in a very long time.

PapaTed71 writes:

But he began to sully the garden of god with blasphemies which many intelligent and open-minded Shristians are willing to beleive that may have been in the propogation of reptilians to the ultimate bengs instead of the soon-to-be free-thinking mammals.

Why do you feel that God hates reptiles? There are 7000 species of "reptiles," and only 5400 species of mammals: He sure made a lot of them for someone who dislikes them.

I happen to think dinosaurs represent a grand and wondrous stage of life on Earth, and certainly do not ascribe their creation to Lucifer.

I think John agreed with me:

John 1:3 writes:

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

-----

PapaTed71 writes:

While it seems very scientifically...

And, as shown by John 1:3, it also doesn't jive well with most people's interpretation of the Bible (certainly not mine, though I'm willing to admit that my ability to interpret scripture is very poor).

-----

PapaTed71 writes:

Why must you intellectuals wrap your scientifically justified robes around yourselfs and scoff at others?

I took the liberty of adding punctuation and capitalization for you here: I would greatly appreciate it if you did it yourself next time.

Yes, it's sad that many scientists are arrogant, but I think you'll find that arrogance is distributed just as widely among any group of people. Please try not to expect anything great out of us: we're still human, after all. But, that's really the beauty of it, in my mind: science is an amazing work, but it doesn't require particularly amazing people to do it, only people who are willing to do the work required.

-----

PapaTed71 writes:

I used to think scientists were the kinds of people who had infinite scope and capability of understanding but after interacting with them they are just as their religious counterparts they just have a different box in which they reside...

Again, you think too highly of us: we don't want your praise and your worship.

-----

PapaTed71 writes:

...[Scientists] just have a different box in which they reside whereas I try to reside in wonderous uneiverse created around us.

So, you feel that it's okay for you to put yourself above us, but not for us to put ourselves above you? I don't think that's very fair of you.

-----

You might also like to take a look at this thread for a discussion about the word "reptiles," just as some side information.

Edited by Bluejay, : fixed my URL


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by PapaTed71, posted 05-28-2009 4:32 PM PapaTed71 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by PapaTed71, posted 05-30-2009 11:02 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
PapaTed71
Junior Member (Idle past 3520 days)
Posts: 5
Joined: 05-28-2009


Message 101 of 107 (510363)
05-30-2009 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Blue Jay
05-28-2009 5:04 PM


Re: Reptiles
Firstly thank you for replying and i very much appreciate your welcome. Also for informing me of my arguing with a literal wall. I want to make it completely clear that in no way do i think god hates or loves in the sense humnanity brings to mind. WE, humans, have emotion I beleive God in my own understanding(using term extremely lightly if not infact incorrectly but only if i'm incorrect which i can't prove or disprove)I was merely using a biblical stylization so as to reach those rooted entirely in religion iin order to illuminate the merits of science. So why sould i say what I did.

I beleive as i mentioned before that God was and in some sense still is an infinite primordial energy source that was "sarificed" (converted) into what is existance as we know it and that in said energy, which permeates existance because it is its "creator", there lies a funciton (The all encompassing function of reality,purely my own thoughts on the matter but increasingly more plausible with humanities greater understanding of the universe)within which all things must fall.

I was simply proposing that reality was becoming imbalanced in relation to the functions limits and it self corrected (Gods intervention) and by kicking away his footstool the earth was say hit by a massive asteroid during the KT Boundary. And in that light i was simply trying to draw the two seperate conclusions of existance together.

As for Lucifer i simply beleive that is a natural inbound force that works to be the negative side of the necessary negative-positive balance, but in this case the polarity was simply shifted too greatly thus the need for correction. Of course thius argument is more existential than physical due to my lack of subsantil evidence but i beleive that as mans understanding increases we might beable to draw the two together. As for my spelling and punctuation I apologise i ofter make mistakes due to my large and rather clumsy fingers if only my body worked as well as my mind. but alas a balance is formed. HAHA.

As for my "attack" on scientists I do admit it was a very subversive way to gain the trust of religious individuals but you must(not really but it would help) admit many scienist just as many religious officials especially feel there can be no common ground between science and religion but when i see or hear these kinds of people it both saddens me and makes me think back to what a man who was far more intelligent and had a far greater understandig of the basic principles of the universe than any of us once said something about science being blind maybe you know who i reference here[hint crazy awesome hair, five pairs of all the same clothes, and loved struedel(purely speculation but struedel is delicious)]

The last point i wish to make very clear. I AM BETTER THAN NO ONE!!! I was simply statin that i live where we all live i simply try(and fail miserable at times) to be as openminded and objective about my thoughts as possible but unfortunately i'm as human s the rest of you and too get riled up and make a fool of myself. You are completely right i hadn't quite realized the tone that last bit especially took. It sounds extremely self-righteous and i sincerely apologize. Thank you for keeping me grounded in that respect.

Sometimes i get carrid away by my thoughts and with passion comes the lose of objectivity. My main goal however, was to convey this one single idea, in the hope, that maybe those of you who are far better than me in both the scientific and religious worlds will cast aside ALL pride and do what scientist are supposed to try and see things as objectively as possible. Then, MAYBE progression will occour if not through any scientific findings maybe at the very least and understanding and acceptance that seems to hard for so many to grasp.

Again thank you for replying I enjoyed your input very much. (Sorry if there are any errors of syntax in my typing but i tried extra hard to do better this time)

Edited by AdminModulous, : broke a wall of text with some whitespace


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Blue Jay, posted 05-28-2009 5:04 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Blue Jay, posted 05-30-2009 2:31 PM PapaTed71 has not yet responded

    
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 102 of 107 (510376)
05-30-2009 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by PapaTed71
05-30-2009 11:02 AM


Re: Reptiles
Hi, Ted.

There's not much I can say about what you've written. It seems just as plausible as any other theological philosophy, I suppose. It's very difficult to debate against somebody's personal religious beliefs, so I'm not even going to try.

-----

PapaTed71 writes:

...maybe... you... will cast aside ALL pride and do what scientist are supposed to try and see things as objectively as possible.

The rest of what I have to say is off-topic, so if you want to continue discussing it, propose a new thread at the Proposed New Topics forum.

Open-mindedness is important in science, but only to an extent. The simple truth of economy is that we do not have the time, the resources, or the energy to restart ourselves from scratch every time somebody asks a question.

Science simply cannot progress if it is constantly asked to unthink and rethink everything that it has already shown to be reliable. The religious are always apprehensive about the possibility that science will uncautiously accept unreliable information, but these fears are wholly unfounded. Unreliable information will be exposed and weeded out by the normal course of science (this is the prime function of the scientific method, after all), although it may take more time than you want it to.

There is no reason, as yet, to postulate unknown or supernatural forces in the workings of the physical universe. Furthermore, the only way to find out if some phenomenon, e.g. the death of the dinosaurs, happened by some means other than natural, non-directed forces, is to simply exhaust literally all other possibilities, which is a process that science will never accomplish.

-----

P.S. Each message has a "peek" button in the bottom right corner. If you click this, it will show the message, allow with the codes used to make special formatting (including quote boxes, as I use). Take your time to learn some of these codes, and it will improve your communication at EvC.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by PapaTed71, posted 05-30-2009 11:02 AM PapaTed71 has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5622
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 103 of 107 (511055)
06-05-2009 11:04 PM


Test
    
Peg
Member (Idle past 3034 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 104 of 107 (522394)
09-03-2009 7:29 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by axial soliton
08-29-2002 2:29 AM


axial soliton writes:

The corner they argued themselves into was that god created only the dinosaur bones and then he buried them for us to find. God never created any dinosaur flesh, only the bones. When I need a lift, sometimes I think of the Baptists and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

since when did JW's teach this about dinosaurs?

i must have missed the memo lol


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by axial soliton, posted 08-29-2002 2:29 AM axial soliton has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by bluescat48, posted 09-03-2009 3:54 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 105 of 107 (522475)
09-03-2009 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Peg
09-03-2009 7:29 AM


axial soliton writes:

The corner they argued themselves into was that god created only the dinosaur bones and then he buried them for us to find. God never created any dinosaur flesh, only the bones. When I need a lift, sometimes I think of the Baptists and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Peg writes:

since when did JW's teach this about dinosaurs?

I don't think axial was implying the JW's in the dinosaur bit, but just included them in the what he thinks a humorous in the prosylitizing by the these sects.


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

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Peg, posted 09-03-2009 7:29 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Prev123456
7
8Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019