Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8925 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2019 11:50 AM
39 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, DrJones*, jar, JonF, ramoss, ringo, Stile, vimesey (8 members, 31 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,170 Year: 15,206/19,786 Month: 1,929/3,058 Week: 303/404 Day: 21/96 Hour: 3/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Logical account of creation
platypus
Member (Idle past 3982 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 11-12-2006


Message 1 of 173 (376314)
01-11-2007 6:59 PM


Account of life: The earth is 4.5 billion years old. At that point in time, several distinct forms were instantaneously created, an amoeba, a fish, a plant, a reptile, an amphibian, an arthropod, and a mammal. These original forms diversified into the innumerable species we see today. But these forms did not evolve from one original organism, so there is no need to justify the origin of life from a biochemical soup. Life was instantaneously created along the forms listed above at the beginning moment of time. Random mutation and speciation has occurred from this beginning moment in time to produce all of the species we see today.

Afternote: This is not my view, and I am not presenting it as such. If I were, I would need to provide evidence for the truth of this account. I have proposed this because of a recent discussion with a friend, and because the creationist crowd seems to be a little slow these days. My question is, although there is no factual evidence in support of this account, is there enough scientific evidence to disprove this account of life?

I suppose it should go in biological evolution?


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by AZPaul3, posted 01-12-2007 1:02 PM platypus has responded
 Message 7 by Matt P, posted 01-12-2007 6:03 PM platypus has responded
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-26-2007 9:12 AM platypus has not yet responded
 Message 18 by ikabod, posted 03-28-2007 9:38 AM platypus has not yet responded

    
platypus
Member (Idle past 3982 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 11-12-2006


Message 9 of 173 (376582)
01-12-2007 6:42 PM


Thanks guys, my geology background is severly lacking. I was thinking of very complicated biological arguments, but the geological evidence is much simpler. Is there anything else that could be offered?
    
platypus
Member (Idle past 3982 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 11-12-2006


Message 10 of 173 (376585)
01-12-2007 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Matt P
01-12-2007 6:03 PM


Re: No Oxygen for 2 billion years
Hi Matt,

I actually do not find this argument particularly convincing. Could it be possible that these organisms survived by other means, at least initially, and then later evolved the means to breathe oxygen? Also, I suppose I could change the original position so that these species were simultaneously created 2 billion years ago, when dioxygen formed. Come to think of it, the simultaneous origination of the original forms does not need to correspond to the creation of the universe. What do you have to say to this?

As a question of curiosity, why was there no dioxygen until 2 bya? Did dioxygen appear with the first plants, or was it caused by some other factor that in turn aided the formation of plants and animals?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Matt P, posted 01-12-2007 6:03 PM Matt P has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Matt P, posted 01-12-2007 10:46 PM platypus has not yet responded

    
platypus
Member (Idle past 3982 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 11-12-2006


Message 11 of 173 (376589)
01-12-2007 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by AZPaul3
01-12-2007 1:02 PM


Hi Paul,

I don't know enough geology to argue about the nature of the evidence, but I'll take your points as true.

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

Being a flexible scientific investigator, I change my position so that each of these "kinds" were inserted at various points in the earth's history, as you have labelled. But I am going to contend that each kind insertion was a separate event, and that no two kinds evolved from one another.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AZPaul3, posted 01-12-2007 1:02 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2007 10:36 PM platypus has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019