Galactic Tidal Tails - more evidence it's an old Universe !!

No, I would not. I would concede that there was a creationist claim that our Sun is shrinking at a steady rate, and that this claim was ludicrously wrong when it was made, and that there have been many essays pointing out how incredibly wrong it is, and that there has never ben any justification for extrapolating this "shrinkage" linearly into the distant past, and that someone seriously advancing this argument says a lot more about the sorry state of his/her knowledge than about anything else.The Sun is not shrinking, and it was obvious when the claim was originally made that the claim was wrong. See The Solar FAQ: Solar Neutrinos and Other Solar Oddities: Shrinkage and The Legend of the Shrinking Sun - A Case Study Comparing Professional Science and "Creation Science" in Action. The former gives the facts in a few paragraphs, the (longer) latter contains both facts about the Sun and facts about so-called "creation science". I can't resist quoting from the abstract:

quote:

---

Within the professional scientific community, a preliminary report which suggested a long-term and rapid shrinkage of the sun presented a puzzle for solar astronomers. Consequently, additional studies were made and the credibility of the original data was re-evaluated. The result is that secular shrinkage has not been
substantiated, but an 80-year oscillatory behavior was discovered. Within the "creation-science" community, however, the response to the original report has been remarkably different. The suggestion of rapid long-term shrinkage was uncritically accepted, the evidence and conclusions drawn from subsequent studies were generally dismissed, and extrapolations of the presumed rapid solar shrinkage have been performed without restraint. Isolated from the corrective of continuing professional investigation and evaluation, the "creation-science" community continues to employ this unwarranted extrapolation of a discredited report as a scientific evidence" for a young earth. The credibility of the Christian witness to a scientifically knowledgeable world is thereby clouded.

---

By the way, don't bother to bring up moon dust. That one's even worse.Indeed, it's pretty likely that anything you bring up is similarly incorect. But post away, if you insist.

See, ex libres, another example. Start to think about the quality of the information you are getting from your sources.

---

Common sense isn't

Thank you for spending time on giving me counsel on how to study more efficiently this material. Its very nice of you. Honestly me and biology are not the best of friends. I find mathematics, physics and chemistry more interesting. The only things interesting here is that you can go to beach on christmas and the food is the best. I honestly think i have the capacity to distinguish between personal opinions and the subject being treated. Besides, everybody is allowed to believe what they want. Thanks ill do that. Honestly there are really no giant concepts here at least in my opinion. I wont become an evolutionist until it is 100% proven and you wont become a creationist until it is also 100% proven. I really apreciate you taking some time to respond to me so thank you again.

Well, there is a lot of stuff under the loose term "evolution" so it may never be 100% "proven". Will we know what the exact individual (or group) that was the last common ancestor of us and chimps? I doubt it. So without that would the connection be "100% proven". Not to some I guess.Do we yet understand all the mechanisms that underlie evolutionary change? Nope. So it isn't 100%? Maybe to some.Do we know that living things have undergone a large amount of change over a long time? Yup. That is a close to 100% as we are going to get. Still not exactly 100% but close enough for a reasoning individual.You'll have to describe what you want for adequate proof. Not 100% mind you, you're not going to get that for anything interesting. Just close enough to make it a reasonable good bet for now.It'll have to be within the bounds of what is reasonably possible. If you want the skeleton of every individual that connects one species, genus or family with another you know that isn't going to happen. Probably only 1 in many millions of individuals end up as a found fossil so we make do with what we have.If your requirement is set very high, I guess you might as well forget it and move on. If not give us some idea of what you would need to accept the current scientific consensus.

---

Common sense isn't

quote:

---

Honestly me and biology are not the best of friends. I find mathematics, physics and chemistry more interesting.

---

Biochemistry is a "fun" mixture of biology and chemistry. I put fun in quotes because most people struggle with it, but for a select few it is interesting. You might also look into protein chemistry (mostly chemistry with a little physics), molecular biology (manipulation of DNA), or bioinformatics (lots of statistics/math). Biology is a pretty big field, there might be a niche for you somewhere. However, there are days when I wish that I had gone into business instead of science, especially when bills come around.

quote:

---

I wont become an evolutionist until it is 100% proven and you wont become a creationist until it is also 100% proven. I really apreciate you taking some time to respond to me so thank you again.

---

Without time travel, evolution will never be proven 100%. What science has done is lowered the chances that evolution is wrong. If you hear someone say that evolution as an explanation for species diversity today has been proven 100% you have my permission to correct them. Evolution has been observed in recent history, but past evolutionary speciation is very probable but nonetheless not proven to 100%. Creationism suffers the same problem (would require time travel), but this theory, depending on the flavor, has very little evidence behind it and is based on non-scientific principles. On top of this, creation of new species by supernatural forces has never been observed.

Nothing is ever 100% proven in the real world.

Why don't you read the bible(the whole think) before diving into evolution.Let me ask you a question. Where does our self awarness and free will come from. No physical elements can produce a self aware being that can free choose what it want's to do. No computer can either. AI is not the same Free Will and Self Awarness.GOD Cannot Lie because he is perfect. That is why he died on the cross.1rst: God Demanded Death for sin
2nd: God Did not want us to die
3rd: This negates each other.
4rth: God had a plan to take the penalty of our sins.
5th: Only believers can enter the kingdom of GOD.
6th: Because non-belief is rejection according to GOD.That is why people offered animal sacrifices.Why are there fossils on top of mountans. You know like fish bones.
You think maybe some kind of flood might of did that. You know like Noah's ark.A computer can do a random, but a human can do a free will and intelegent guided choice. Not that people have intelegance. The bible says that man is stupid compared to god and even though thay think are wise they are foolish. The bible says that people would make evedence against him and reject but that those people are foolish and one day will be exposed as fools.How can an explosion just happen out of nowhere for nothing. Were did physics come from. It is a pretty interesting system, almost like it was DESIGNED. I know alot about evolutiany evedince but there are alot of problems with it otherwise it would of been decreed "The Law of Evolution"You cannot prove god exist or doesn't exist with any physical evedence because he created physics himself. You cannot see him because he created light himself. He is existance himself and he does not exist within the boundries of the universe. The universe exist in his pressence and without him we are nothing.The Bible is a permanant book wich shall not be destroyed.Jesus said that the word would never pass away untill everything has been acomplished."Heaven and earth will pass away but my words shall never pass away" or something like that.

No, no flood did that. The deposits are inconsistent with the idea of a flood. Leonardo da Vinci figured that out in the late 1400's, and all the evidence that has accumulated since then supports his conclusion.Of course, he didn't figure out what did do it. That had to wait until the theory of plate tectonics. There are times when I agree ...

Do you even know for sure you have those things? What would be the observable difference between you having free will and you being a robot of sufficient complexity? Could you tell the difference - especially if you were programmed not to be able to?The point is this is a question for philosophers, not biologists. Let's not be too hasty in assuming that free will exists and needs a biological explanation, ok? How do you know? Have you tried? You seem pretty confident, surely you're not just making this up? Geologic uplift. Geez, haven't you heard of plate tectonics? You know, that thing that causes earthquakes. How do you know? Because He says so? Isn't that what liars usually say: "I'm not lying to you?" Your ignorance of the nomenclature of science is noted. The Theory of Evolution is as well-supported as the Germ Theory of Disease or the Theory of Gravity. Yet I don't see you flushing your perscriptions down the drain or jumping off of bridges.... Heh - shouldn't you be sure what the Bible says before you quote it as proof?

OK wise guy!First of all, I have a self awarness and even if I have no free will that self awarness still exists. You yourself have chosen to believe in evolution have you not? considering the evedience supplied to you.
Why have you failed to dispute everything I said in the previous post.
You know you exist. You are aware of your self so how can you say what if you just think you are aware. How can you just think you are aware if you are not already aware. Are you insane. Critical Thinking and Logical Reasonal plus common sensce wich are kind of like the same thing but that's not the point, suggest that we did not just come from nothing for no reason at all and life is meaningless.Allow me to adress a few issues. Man says that there are alot of good people in the world. What do you consider good. No man is perfect and therefore all men are evil. No man has at least contained in his mind evil intentions and might of carried them out. You are blinded by satan. Did you not know that satan was a geenious although his geeniousity is nothing to compare with god and man is nothing to compare with the devil. No man is perfect. For all have sin and come short of the glory of god. As for you that think good works can get you to heaven. The Bible says(Once again I quote) "For all have sin and come short of the glory of god." It also says "For by grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselfes it is the gift of god; not of works least any man should boast." Christ died for our sins you know.Let me adress this qustion: "Why cant god just forgive us of our sins instead of dieing of the cross for us and throwing us into hell if we don't believe in him. duuuuuuhhhhhh, ork ork ork,he he he, uuuuh I don't know what I am talking about. Ding Dong uhhh" First of all god demanded that the penalty of sin was death but god did not want us to die and therefore took the penalty of sin for us then conquered death because he is god with no limits and even in death can raise himself back to life. Why should god die for the non-believers. The rejectorsn die and non-belief is rejection according to god (Not according to your ingornatn non-logical minds.) God has no limits, do not apply to him any limits of any sort because even if god gave away his might he could get it back with no problem because he is god. It is hard to understant but he is god and is therefore unindomitable. God can do anything even give his power away. But at his will can get it back therefore proofing him to have infanit abilities.Another issue: Eternaty Past. You cannot imagagine god existing forever in the past because you are only thinking like a human being. You can only imagine what your mind can proccess. However, common sense not only states that there must be a begining but that void itself must have exisited before that forever in the past. Imagine god being that void. Not that void but the supreme ruler with an infanite mind. At some point he decided to create us as diabolical as we are.Why did not god make us perfect? He did you ediot. But we chose to sin so we fell end of story. Too late, we loose. We goto hell unless we accept jesus christ into our heart as our savior.I see no need for such and time wasting debate such as evolution vs creation. Common sense sugjest the FACT that there is a god and that he created us all. Why are you unable to accept that. Maybe because you are jelous or are afraid and in fear of a supreme being so you don't wan't t believe it. NEWS FLASH: GOD IS LOVE! God is the creator and the fact that he even decided to create us proofes that he is a loving god. Bible Scholars believe that 3/4 of the profecies fortold by isaya(I dont know how to spell it. I forgot.) about the mesiah has been fulfiled by jesus , the rest will be fulfiled on his return.I am sorry I can't use all kinds of fancy terms and stuff but I am only 12.

Guidosoft Every bit of what you are is made of physical elements and you are self aware[I assume] so how can you make this contradiction?

---

'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.'
(Daniel Patrick Moynihan)

You have both gotten badly off topic. Take it to a more appropriate thread please.

---

What goes? The Nose Knows!

Message replied to in a "for Guidosoft" thread, which you can find here.

posting serious observations that Creationists haven't heard before. It causes them to try to think and so they just go off topic to the PRATT list topics they cut/paste so well.Every time I have posted something like the original post here it dies with no Creationist input because putting it mildly they cannot think for themselves.

It is still a great post, though. I still can't understand how one goes from galactic tails to abiogenesis in one step, much less numerous steps.Hey, I would even appreciate an original post that seems to support creationism. PRATT's are endlessly tiring. The only entertainment from PRATT's is imagining the expression of the person reading the responses to their arguments. I always wonder if they actually believe they have refuted the theory of evolution in one fell swoop.