Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Galactic Tidal Tails - more evidence it's an old Universe !!
ex libres
Member (Idle past 6962 days)
Posts: 46
From: USA
Joined: 01-14-2004


Message 31 of 93 (81366)
01-28-2004 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by NosyNed
01-20-2004 9:09 PM


Okay, okay. So, I have some outdated info. This only goes to show that I need to dig more but it does not prove evolution is correct. If you like pointing out in your not so subtle way what deliberately misleading ignorant Christians we are because some of the arguements made on creation's behalf have turned out to be false, then should I use the same criteria to prove Creation theories are correct?
Lets see. Since the creationist said the sun is shrinking but it is not, evolution must be true.
Here's mine. Since evolutionists said that Nebraska Man is a missing link but then find out the entire MODELED skull was shaped around a PIGS TOOTH, then creation must be true.
It's simple folks, Evolution is studied from the sciences and Creation from theologies. We are taking two exclusive processes and trying to apply the same kind of tests. It won't work. You want me to argue for creation from a scientific angle which is equal to me asking you to argue for evolution from a theological angle. Do you see the problem? I don't have scientific reasons for believing in God. My belief comes from faith. I varify my faith through obsevation, experiance, and a lot of curcumstantial evidences such as the hydrological cycle being written about in several OT books in an entirely accurate way before these processes were even understood. Another more recent example would be the discovery of springs on the sea floor made within the past 50 years yet the bible mentions them in the book of Noah. You have to ask yourself "How did the author of the bible, if just a man, know about the "fountains of the deep"? He knew because the one who created them put the words in his mouth. There are several more of these examples. Anyone who wants to argue they also thought the world was flat need to go back and read the original Hebrew.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by NosyNed, posted 01-20-2004 9:09 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by NosyNed, posted 01-28-2004 4:17 PM ex libres has not replied
 Message 33 by Sylas, posted 01-28-2004 4:52 PM ex libres has not replied
 Message 34 by Brian, posted 01-28-2004 6:18 PM ex libres has not replied
 Message 36 by sidelined, posted 01-31-2004 6:22 PM ex libres has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 32 of 93 (81368)
01-28-2004 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by ex libres
01-28-2004 4:00 PM


This only goes to show that I need to dig more but it does not prove evolution is correct
Nope, you are absolutely right. Nothing is going to "prove evolution correct". But when lots and lots of attempts to disprove it are shown to be wrong then we do get a bit suspicious that it might a pretty good bet. This example, it not what I am talking about of course since it isn't a good, carefully thought out scientific attack on the ideas.
If you like pointing out in your not so subtle way what deliberately misleading ignorant Christians we are because some of the arguements made on creation's behalf have turned out to be false, then should I use the same criteria to prove Creation theories are correct?
I am not pointing out that you are an ignorant anything. What I am trying to warn you is that some (many? even all?) of the sources you will find are inaccurate, ill thought out and, in some cases, deliberately misleading.
I don't understand how what "criteria" you are talking about to "prove" Creation theories. Could you explain?
Lets see. Since the creationist said the sun is shrinking but it is not, evolution must be true.
Here's mine. Since evolutionists said that Nebraska Man is a missing link but then find out the entire MODELED skull was shaped around a PIGS TOOTH, then creation must be true.
Ha, now I see. I should have read all the post. Of course, this is silly. This isn't how things are "proven" at all. I'm glad we both understand that.
It's simple folks, Evolution is studied from the sciences and Creation from theologies. We are taking two exclusive processes and trying to apply the same kind of tests. It won't work. You want me to argue for creation from a scientific angle which is equal to me asking you to argue for evolution from a theological angle. Do you see the problem?
Of course! Most of us agree with exactly this. It is the fundamentallist, literalists that disagree with you. They are the ones trying to argue for religion from a "scientific" point of view. That is why they want to be called "creation scientists" isn't it?
My belief comes from faith. I varify my faith through obsevation, experiance, and a lot of curcumstantial evidences such as the hydrological cycle being written about in several OT books in an entirely accurate way before these processes were even understood
Oops. You "verify" your faith? That seems to contradict everything you just said.

Common sense isn't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ex libres, posted 01-28-2004 4:00 PM ex libres has not replied

  
Sylas
Member (Idle past 5290 days)
Posts: 766
From: Newcastle, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2002


Message 33 of 93 (81373)
01-28-2004 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by ex libres
01-28-2004 4:00 PM


quote:
Originally posted by ex libres:
Lets see. Since the creationist said the sun is shrinking but it is not, evolution must be true.
Nobody uses that argument. The argument is more like this:
Such and such a creationist says that the Sun is shrinking. This particular creationist is wrong; basing their ideas on old material long long since addressed and resolved. The Sun oscillates slightly in size over time, but it is not consistently shrinking. Here are references for further details.
No mention of evolution; it is not relevant.
quote:
Here's mine. Since evolutionists said that Nebraska Man is a missing link but then find out the entire MODELED skull was shaped around a PIGS TOOTH, then creation must be true.
I'll show you how this works:
You mistaken on the details of this incident. Evolutionists did not say Nebraska man was a missing link. One, and only one, scientist (Grafton Elliot Smith) did rashly promote Nebraska Man as potentially a human ancestor, though he also mitigated this claim by a number of published comments which expressed caution. A couple of scientists considered the fossil tooth to be possibly from an extinct primate; without any special link to humans. But scientists generally were skeptical. The comment about a "modeled skull" is pure creationist invention. There was no modeled skull, by anyone. There was a drawing made for a newspaper, which was simply based on imagination and never claimed to be anything else. The artist was quite clear that the image was actually based on Java man, (Homo erectus) for which much more substantial remains were available. For more details, see Creationist Arguments: Nebraska Man.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ex libres, posted 01-28-2004 4:00 PM ex libres has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4989 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 34 of 93 (81391)
01-28-2004 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by ex libres
01-28-2004 4:00 PM


Anyone who wants to argue they also thought the world was flat need to go back and read the original Hebrew.
Wow, if you have any of the original Hebrew you will be worth a fortune. You should contact your nearest University or museum right away.
Brian

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ex libres, posted 01-28-2004 4:00 PM ex libres has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Christian7, posted 01-31-2004 12:26 PM Brian has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 35 of 93 (81801)
01-31-2004 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Brian
01-28-2004 6:18 PM


I will explain what why I posted about self awarness.
Physical elements can not make self awarness.
Where I am getting is that we have a soul.
Eveolution can't produce that.
We must have been created.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Brian, posted 01-28-2004 6:18 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by sidelined, posted 01-31-2004 6:29 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 36 of 93 (81861)
01-31-2004 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by ex libres
01-28-2004 4:00 PM


ex libres
Oh I like this one. Can you point out for me the bible verses that verify your assertion?
such as the hydrological cycle being written about in several OT books in an entirely accurate way before these processes were even understood
I will await your response.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ex libres, posted 01-28-2004 4:00 PM ex libres has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by ex libres, posted 02-17-2004 5:36 PM sidelined has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 37 of 93 (81863)
01-31-2004 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Christian7
01-31-2004 12:26 PM


Guidosoft
Physical elements can not make self awarness.
Says who?
Where I am getting is that we have a soul
Can you back up that statement with evidence?
Eveolution can't produce that.
Evolution makes no such claim to this assertion so it is a non-issue.
You need to be a little more critical of your assumptions I think.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Christian7, posted 01-31-2004 12:26 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
Itachi Uchiha
Member (Idle past 5645 days)
Posts: 272
From: mayaguez, Puerto RIco
Joined: 06-21-2003


Message 38 of 93 (81891)
01-31-2004 9:40 PM


I'll try to get this one back on topic.
Man ive been reading on this tidal tail stuff and honestly there are serious questions from my part especially with the claim that this process takes 1 million years. How do you people come up with this dates? what makes you belive the tidal tails are from colliding galaxies and not from other events? Why are all the pictures computer made, cant i see some real ones?
These are some basic questions that i have. please aswer them freely and you can get technical with me if you like

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:36 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied
 Message 47 by Loudmouth, posted 02-02-2004 7:37 PM Itachi Uchiha has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 39 of 93 (82268)
02-02-2004 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Itachi Uchiha
01-31-2004 9:40 PM


I am afraid I cannot back up myself with a bible verse because I do not know what that means. Please explain sideline.
But let me ask you this? How is it possible that in a vast expance of complete void and explosion can accur. That would imply that you scientest are considering magic as an explination to the development of out highly complex system.
If a fish could evolve into a crocadile, it would prove even more there was an intelleagent designer.
Weather evolution is true or not. It had to start from a creator.
Personaly I backup the geneses account recorded in the bible. "In the begining God created the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1
By the way the 1rst five books of the bible were written by moses not jewish scribes. Moses show's authorship of the book. In fact in the books he claims his authorship.
Remember sideline, Just tell me what you wrote means and I will answer it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 01-31-2004 9:40 PM Itachi Uchiha has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:39 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 42 by NosyNed, posted 02-02-2004 6:56 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 46 by sidelined, posted 02-02-2004 7:27 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 40 of 93 (82269)
02-02-2004 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Christian7
02-02-2004 6:36 PM


By the way, the bible does imply man has a soul, many many many times.
I mean it states it.
Here is an example were is suggests it: This is somewere in geneses in the bible:
"...the breath of life ,and man became a living soul" somewhere in the book of geneses(THAT WAS WRITTEN BY MOSES) in the bible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:36 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:48 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 41 of 93 (82276)
02-02-2004 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Christian7
02-02-2004 6:39 PM


Also, about the mountans and the fish bones.
You say that tech tonic plates form the mountans and brought up the fish bones with it write?
Well, what about the mountans that could not have possibly been formed as a result of techonic plates. There in the wrong place.
Now let me ask you this, not are there just "the epics of gilgamesh" wich is eraly simalar to noah's ark but many more around the globe of different cultures.
Take into consideration the possibility that after the global flood oral tradition took the story on a long journey and the story got pretty messed up.
BTW, babylon was were everyone in the world got together after the flood. There were about to built a tower but got confused there languages so that they could not, then they spread around the globe.
Perhaps this is why the stories seem to originate from babylone. Fossils are terribly messed up and this could only be a result of a mass global flood.
May I also point out that water ages thing to such an exageratable degree that it could appear millions of years old. Plus water is required to make fossils.
Tell me if i am outdated with this information and I through some of the latest creationist evedince at your face(Don't take it personaly.).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:39 PM Christian7 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Loudmouth, posted 02-02-2004 7:26 PM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 53 by crashfrog, posted 02-02-2004 7:57 PM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 56 by JonF, posted 02-02-2004 7:59 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 42 of 93 (82280)
02-02-2004 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Christian7
02-02-2004 6:36 PM


Weather (sic) evolution is true or not. It had to start from a creator.
And that is exactly what the majority of Christians think. The universe was created and unfolds according to laws laid down by the creator. His methods are what we understand thourgh our learning about geology, physics and biology.
However, the simple statment that it "had to start from a creator" doesn't have any support. It may have or may not have. Saying it doesn't make it so.
If a fish could evolve into a crocadile, it would prove even more there was an intelleagent designer.
The logic behind this escapes me perhaps you could explain?
And you might also state your position please. Are you a young earth creationist or a ID'er. These two groups are mostly, as far as I can see, in rather strong disagreement with each other.
But let me ask you this? How is it possible that in a vast expance of complete void and explosion can accur. That would imply that you scientest are considering magic as an explination to the development of out highly complex system.
Actually, I don't understand the detailed physics well enough to know how this all works. However I do understand that from this some measurable facts about our current universe can be calculated. This leads credibility to the idea. In addition, since material things can appear out of what we colloquially call "nothing" it doesn't seem quite as far fetched, just really really weird.

Common sense isn't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:36 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 7:11 PM NosyNed has replied
 Message 71 by Itachi Uchiha, posted 02-07-2004 9:25 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 43 of 93 (82288)
02-02-2004 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by NosyNed
02-02-2004 6:56 PM


First of all I am a 12 year old christian.
Seccond of all, I meant that in order for a fish to evolve simply because of chemicals and enviorment the fish must be very complex, plus a another system for organisms to reproduces. How can both theese abiblitys spring into exisitance after a couple million years.
By the way I thought you might be interested in this:
One minister wrote:
----------------------------------------
Assuredly I do not dispute the fact that we of today are enjoying a higher degree of general knowledge and civilization than has ever before been known to the world. But instead of accepting in explanation of present conditions a theory which makes void the Word of God, I accept the explanation of present conditions which the Bible presents, - stronger and sounder by far, and more reasonable every way, than the Evolution theory.
The Bible foretold the present conditions, and explained how they would come about, and how they are to result, with a detail and an accuracy which evolutionary speculation knows nothing about. I call to your remembrance the revelations given to the Prophet Daniel, concerning the things to come to pass in the closing epoch of the present age. I remind you of the prophet's deep interest in the stirring scenes of that vision, and how he prayed and fasted seven whole weeks, desiring to know of these things - the purposes of God: and how then an angel was sent to him who delivered the divine message, "Go thy way, Daniel, for the declarations [of the vision] are closed up and sealed until the time of the end." This "time of the end," you will remember, is elsewhere in the Scriptures spoken of as "The day of His Preparation" - the day or period in which the Lord will be preparing the world for the new dispensation, the Millennial Age.
Perhaps you will recall also the testimony of the angel sent to Daniel respecting some of the peculiar characteristics of this "Day of Preparation" or "time of the End" - he said: "In the time of the end, many shall run to and fro and knowledge shall be increased and the wise shall understand, but none of the wicked shall understand." (Dan. 12:4,10) This inspired statement, it seems to me, is most remarkably fulfilled before our eyes today, and not only proves that we are now living in this period, "The Time of the End," the day of God's Preparation, but also furnishes a much clearer and more satisfactory explanation of the present day enlightenment and progress than any Evolution theory extant. It begins by calling attention to what every one will concede is one of the most notable features of our time, differentiating it from all past time, viz, the fact that everybody travels. The whole world seems to be "running to and fro;" just as was revealed to the Prophet twenty-four hundred years ago. Here we are ourselves, at this very moment running at the rate of fifty miles an hour and the car crowded full: and we know that similar trains are rushing in every direction, similarly laden with people. We wonder why there should be so much "running to and fro," and yet it is on the increase every year. And mark you, my friend, the railway, and the steamboat and the trolley car, which permit this running to and fro, belong to this century.Remember, again, that you and I have probably traveled over more miles of country within the last twenty-five years than did all our ancestors back to Adam, during that period of six thousand years.
Take the next feature of the Lord's revelation to Daniel respecting the present time: "Knowledge shall be increased." I hold, in harmony with this Scriptural statement, that the present wonderful increase of knowledge is not the result of Evolution, but the result of divine interposition at the present time: that it is one of the features of this "Day of His Preparation" - making ready for the Millennial Kingdom. If the theory of Evolution were correct, this increase of knowledge should have been gradual, during the past, and not sudden, now, toward the close of six thousand years of man's history - within the present century, and particularly within the past fifty years.
I call your attention also to the fact that the increase of knowledge has accompanied and followed the running to and fro of the past sixty years. In his own due time it has pleased the Lord to draw to man's attention the powers of steam and electricity, and to quicken him with intelligence for the handling and harnessing of these to his service. (See Exod. 31:6; 36:1) Pots had boiled and kettle-lids had rattled for centuries before the mind of Watt was led to reflection on the power of steam, and how it might be utilized in human affairs. Similarly simple were the first thoughts respecting contrivances for making use of steam power, and subsequently electrical power. But for those simple thoughts to which we believe divine providence led in God's due time, these great factors in our nineteenth century awakening might have lain unnoticed for centuries to come, as they did for centuries in the past. But in his own due time God made these the bases, the starting points, for the fulfilment of the divine prediction - "in the Time of the End many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."
As the discovery of the power of steam led to the construction of engines by which, on boats and cars, the people by running to and fro and commingling with each other gave fresh impulses to thought and action, so also the same steam power was attached to printing presses; and as a result the world is flooded with literature in every language, and thus again the world's thinkers and writers are brought in contact with the millions of its population, and increase of knowledge became unavoidable - as God foreknew. Electricity coming in assists in this commingling of mankind and their thoughts, throughout the world, by telegraph, telephone, etc. Very evidently the all-wise God, the Author of the Bible, which he caused to be written by his various instruments and agents, knew well what would be the result of letting in of the proper light at the proper moment, to cooperate with all the features of his great and wonderful plan of the ages.
Moreover, you will bear me witness that the stoutest Evolutionists stand somewhat in awe of what may be the outcome of present conditions, viewed along the lines of Evolution. They begin to fear that the increase of knowledge signifies eventually a danger of social wreck and possibly of ultimate anarchy, or, to avert this, a return to some degree of restraint of education or of liberties. They see that the increase of knowledge of our day permits a twelve-year-old child to have before him the accumulated knowledge of centuries, as well as of modern investigations and discoveries, gives him much more theoretical knowledge at his command than had his grandfather (mainly of his own personal experience) at seventy years of age. They see also that a century ago the educated were extremely few, whereas today knowledge is so increased that in civilized lands education is compulsory, and comparatively few are without its privileges and advantages. And yet they see, contrary to all their Evolutionary expectations, that these hitherto undreamed-of blessings and comforts of our day are not apparently favorable in the masses of the people to the cultivation of happiness and contentment. On the contrary, it is manifest that the more and the greater the blessings enjoyed, the more and the greater will generally be the discontent in unregenerate hearts. Thus Evolutionists stand in dread of a retrograde movement, the logic of which disputes their hypothesis.
On the contrary, all of these facts are in most absolute accord with the Scriptural delineation of the cause, object and result of the present running to and fro and increase of knowledge. The Scriptures indicate that the present increase of general knowledge and skill is now due, in order to the preparation of machinery, and the various mechanical arrangements and contrivances for the benefit of mankind during the Millennial age; nevertheless, it points out also that this knowledge is premature, so far as mankind in general is concerned - that mankind is not in proper condition to appreciate and use with wisdom the knowledge and opportunities, liberties and blessings thus thrust within his grasp, because of innate, inherited selfishness, - which left to itself would turn blessings into curses. The Bible points out that unregenerate man needs a strong superhuman government, which will give him practical lessons along the lines of wisdom, righteousness and the spirit of God, Love: and it points out that God is preparing to establish such a strong superhuman government, which will prove a blessing and an uplifting power to all who will come into accord with it, after its establishment. This superhuman government is the Millennial Kingdom, the kingdom or dominion of heaven, for which our Redeemer taught us to pray, "Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is done in heaven."
A. Pardon the interruption, but I should have considered you too logical a reasoner to hold the theory that Christ will come a second time in "glorified flesh," sit upon an earthly throne, hold earthly court, etc, during the Millennium. It strikes me that is a very gross conception of divine government - a retrogression as compared to the present spirit dispensation.
B. I agree with much of your criticism of a common view of Christ's Kingdom. Such is not my view; I understand the Scriptures to teach that our Lord Jesus is no longer a man, a human being, in any sense, but a spirit being, "the express image of the Father's person." And when his kingdom shall come into control in the world, the heavenly king and his associates (the glorified Church) will no more be visible to mankind than are the holy angels now. The coming Kingdom will be a spiritual and invisible one, but will operate and rule through human representatives. As an illustration of a spiritual ruler operating and governing through earthly agents, take "the present evil world" or age, of which Satan is the prince. A spirit being, he is invisible to humanity, and rules for evil through his human servants. With the end of this age comes the binding of Satan and the overthrow of his dominion - God's due time for the establishment of the Kingdom of Heaven having come. Christ's Kingdom will be the reverse of Satan's in respect to its character in that it will be a Kingdom of light, a Kingdom of righteousness, but it will resemble it in that its King and his associates will also be spirit beings of a still higher order, of "the divine nature," and equally invisible to men.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by NosyNed, posted 02-02-2004 6:56 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by NosyNed, posted 02-02-2004 7:25 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 44 of 93 (82292)
02-02-2004 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Christian7
02-02-2004 7:11 PM



Seccond of all, I meant that in order for a fish to evolve simply because of chemicals and enviorment the fish must be very complex, plus a another system for organisms to reproduces. How can both theese abiblitys spring into exisitance after a couple million years.
And a fish is very complex isn't it? And it took about 3 billion years to get from the first life forms to a fish. That is more than 1,000 times longer than you "couple of million years".
The real challenge for biology and chemistry isn't to explain the evolution from one life form like a fish to another lifeform of about equal complexity like a crocodile or us. We understand now and can demonstrate how darwinian processes can manage this.
The real challenge today is to explain how even a very simple form of life that can support the darwinian processes can arise without those processes in place. And to explain how this can happen in at most a few hundred million years. With the progress being made in this area (it is possible to argue that life has already arisen "in the test tube" for example -- though the argument depends on your definition of life and good luck with that) I would hope for good explanations of this within the first half of this century.
Just in case you've missed this the initialization of living, imperfectly reproducing things isn't an issue included within evolutionary theory. The existance of these is required for any evolution to take place so it is not included.
The rest of your post from "one minister" seems to be a lot of prattle. As an example of that I would pick these assertions;
"The Bible foretold the present conditions, and explained how they would come about, and how they are to result, with a detail and an accuracy which evolutionary speculation knows nothing about."
"They begin to fear that the increase of knowledge signifies eventually a danger of social wreck and possibly of ultimate anarchy, or, to avert this, a return to some degree of restraint of education or of liberties"

Common sense isn't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 7:11 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 93 (82293)
02-02-2004 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Christian7
02-02-2004 6:48 PM


quote:
Also, about the mountans and the fish bones.
You say that tech tonic plates form the mountans and brought up the fish bones with it write?
Well, what about the mountans that could not have possibly been formed as a result of techonic plates. There in the wrong place.
First of all, the fish bones are not "on the mountains" but actually IN the mountains. On Mt Everest you can find a layer of limestone that runs THROUGH the mountain that contains fossils of shells. And it isn't even at the top of the mountain, there is 2,000 feet of rock on top of this limestone layer. How did those shells get into the MIDDLE of Mt Everest?
And also, geology isn't my best area but could you list the mountain/s that "shouldn't be". There are some practicing geologists on this site and I wonder what their take is on it.
quote:
Now let me ask you this, not are there just "the epics of gilgamesh" wich is eraly simalar to noah's ark but many more around the globe of different cultures.
Take into consideration the possibility that after the global flood oral tradition took the story on a long journey and the story got pretty messed up.
BTW, babylon was were everyone in the world got together after the flood. There were about to built a tower but got confused there languages so that they could not, then they spread around the globe.
Perhaps this is why the stories seem to originate from babylone.
Or perhaps the Hebrew authors of the Bible copied the story from the Babylonians? This seems MUCH more likely to me. Creationists seem to think that the Noah flood account has to be literal. I look at it as a way of illustrating the relationship between God and people, not as a literal history.
quote:
Fossils are terribly messed up and this could only be a result of a mass global flood.
Actually, fossils are very ordered. Certain fossils are only found in certain sediments and only certain fossils are found in the same sediment. If there was a flood you would expect a trilobite, a dinosaur, and a rabbit all in the same sediment layer. Guess what, you don't. Not only that, but the ordering of the fossils supports evolutionary changes, such as reptile-mammal transitions and land mammal-aquatic mammal transitions. In reality, fossils are not "terribly messed up".
quote:
May I also point out that water ages thing to such an exageratable degree that it could appear millions of years old. Plus water is required to make fossils.
Could you cite some evidence for this. Someone here seemed to suggest something similar (username whatever). You can find some of the info on the thread dealing with Dual Porosity.
quote:
Tell me if i am outdated with this information and I through some of the latest creationist evedince at your face(Don't take it personaly.).
You might want to check out this link:
An Index to Creationist Claims
It contains a lot of the outdated and refuted creationist claims. If you find those lacking, feel free to discuss. BTW, it takes quite a bit for me to be insulted but others might not be as easy-going. My spiritual life does not hang on the theory of evolution, for me it is an honest assessment of the evidence at hand that has been well tested in many areas of science. It has yet to fail those tests.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Christian7, posted 02-02-2004 6:48 PM Christian7 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