Creation vs. Evolution

[noguru]

Dear Barbarian,

Yes, that's what I believe. Note that it says in Rev. 20:5KJV, "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

Yes, I believe in reincarnation, if that's what you're wondering. I think we keep being born again until we get all of it right.

Michael

So you think science should teach your theological beliefs?

 

[noguru]

Oh Kdall, I've seen you bring it up, but I never agreed with it. That's what I meant to say. That I don't believe it.

Michael

Do you think science needs to teach what you do or do not believe in regard to theology?

IOW, do you want science educators to consult with you and get a detailed outline of your theological beliefs as a guideline to decide the curricula for their students?

 

[The Barbarian]

Who says they had to bail it out? I would doubt that any water got into the Ark. And, with God's help, I'm sure the boat was leak proof and plenty of pitch was used to seal it up.

Won't work. They tried that on the Wyoming. It's an inherent problem in wood. At scales like that, it flexes and lets water in. So creationists invent another non-scriptural miracle to cover it up.

You'll have to do better than that.

 

[noguru]

Won't work. They tried that on the Wyoming. It's an inherent problem in wood. At scales like that, it flexes and lets water in. So creationists invent another non-scriptural miracle to cover it up.

You'll have to do better than that.

But once they have explained everything with natural causes they have taken all the "supernatural" (fun) out of it. And then they end up with the evolution through single common ancestor and long ages model.

Come on Barbarian, can't you just go along with our special pleading? We just want to throw God in (and perhaps some other detailed coverage of our specific theology) to every science class.

 

[Kdall]

Dear Kdall,

Why don't you then draw from the lesson that the Creation took 6days. Why would God lie about it being six days?

Michael

You just said yourself that parables aren't lies. Did you suddenly change your mind on that?

 

[Kdall]

Dear Kdall,

Our Bible says that God created the fowl on the 5th day {Gen. 1:21KJV} before He created the creatures on the 6th day {Gen. 1:25}.

Michael

Michael, the Bible also says that fish and birds are not animals. If they aren't animals, then what are they?

A. Plants
B. Protists
C. Fungi
D. Archaea
E. Bacteria

 

[Kdall]

vs


which is it blood bath or flesh ?



link
- Mary Schweitzer will be widely shown to be wrong in her published claim that biological iron is the preservative that enables soft tissue to survive for millions of years. This will be falsified for many reasons including the realization that many specimens of recovered soft tissue are not associated with heavy deposits of biological iron. Further, which of the typical decomposition factors would iron interfere with: hydrolysis, chemotropism, microbes, cylical temperatures, friction, oxidation, autolysis, radioactive decay?

ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. I did it for you. Return the favor

 

[StanJ]

Won't work. They tried that on the Wyoming. It's an inherent problem in wood. At scales like that, it flexes and lets water in. So creationists invent another non-scriptural miracle to cover it up. You'll have to do better than that.

The Wyoming was built AS a schooner, not an ark and it was not built of the same material that God told Noah to build the ark out of. The ark was designed to be a floating vessel, impervious to water and rain, NOT built as a sailing schooner.
Now what 'gofer' wood is, may be unclear, but Noah knew and understood, so we can safely deduce that it was a type of wood best suited to boat or ark building, plus it was covered inside and out with tar. Some say "gofer" means laminated, but regardless, it was unique to that situation and is the only time it is used in the Bible. It is not stated how long it actually took Noah to build the ark, but it has been deduced at between 50 - 75 years. Plenty of time to do a good job.
No invention, just what God said.

 

[Kdall]

The Wyoming was built AS a schooner, not an ark and it was not built of the same material that God told Noah to build the ark out of. The ark was designed to be a floating vessel, impervious to water and rain, NOT built as a sailing schooner.
Now what 'gofer' wood is, may be unclear, but Noah knew and understood, so we can safely deduce that it was a type of wood best suited to boat or ark building, plus it was covered inside and out with tar. Some say "gofer" means laminated, but regardless, it was unique to that situation and is the only time it is used in the Bible. It is not stated how long it actually took Noah to build the ark, but it has been deduced at between 50 - 75 years. Plenty of time to do a good job.
No invention, just what God said.

Back when the ark is presumed to have been built, ship building tech had not advanced to the point where more than one piece of wood could be fitted together to make a curved piece for the bow. What that means is that in order to build a 500 foot ship, Noah would've had to use a 500 foot tall tree, and carve it out to make it curved. When you find a 500 foot tall tree outside of California, let me know

 

[alwight]

Mucking out the Diplodocus pen must have been a real pain for Noah.:think:

 

[Kdall]

Mucking out the Diplodocus pen must have been a real pain for Noah.:think:

Further factor in just brachiosaurus, saltosaurus, and apatoaurus, and the ark sinks. However, that's just details to ark truthers

 

[alwight]

The freshwater fish tanks must have been extremely heavy and reduced buoyancy quite a bit, not to mention the drinking water tanks. :think:

 

[Kdall]

The freshwater fish tanks must have been extremely heavy and reduced buoyancy quite a bit, not to mention the drinking water tanks. :think:

No no my friend, you've been misled. YECs KNOW either that God magically let all the aquatic creatures survive differrent salinities, or that they all adapted in the 150 days the world was flooded to be able to live in all salinity levels, then de-evolved when the flood was over.

It's science. Or not

 

[The Barbarian]

The Wyoming was built AS a schooner, not an ark

That only complicates the problem. The Wyoming used extensive metal bracing within the ship, that was not listed for the Ark, and a rectangular vessel would have even greater torques on it.

and it was not built of the same material that God told Noah to build the ark out of.

Wood? The Wyoming, too. But that was the problem.

Now what 'gofer' wood is, may be unclear, but Noah knew and understood, so we can safely deduce that it was a type of wood best suited to boat or ark building,

And you thought thousands of years later, people didn't know what wood worked best? Seriously?

plus it was covered inside and out with tar.

Wyoming, too. Plus metal sheathing. It wouldn't matter. The wood still flexed,and let water in so fast, the pumps could barely keep up. One storm, they couldn't, and it sank.

So you're back to inventing a non-scriptural miracle to patch up your new beliefs.

 

[way 2 go]

Firstly, the Bible isn't evidence, and it's certainly not evidence if actual fossils aren't. That's ridiculous.

On Rhodocetus, I think the scientist in the video explained it well. They knew, based on the earbone structure that I explained to you in my post about Ambulocetus, that Rhodocetus was a cetacean ancestor. They were missing the feet and tail, so they filled in the blanks as best they could. Then, when they found feet that did not appear to be flipper-like, they changed their idea on how the tail was constructed also. This is a perfect example of how science is a process, not an "AHA!" moment. For decades scientists thought that Tyrannosaurus rex stood upright, but later discoveries indicated that it stood more horizontally. Same thing there: later evidence had to be factored in, and that changed perception of the animal.

I cannot emphasize enough that the way cetacean ancestors, like Rhodocetus, are identified is not by their feet or tails, but by the structure and position of the earbone. The feet and tails are just icing on the cake.

so Rhodocetus fake

Now, do you have actual evidence of the ark?
And
Are you aware that whales and dolphins have fingerbones?

ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. I did it for you. Return the favor

ark ?
there is evidence of a great flood and we still exist .
soft tissue in dinosaur bones
or do
you mean have we found the ark or Noah's ark
no we have not found the ark or Noah's ark

fingerbones?
you posted a link that i visited, so yes i saw that.

 

[Kdall]

so Rhodocetus fake






ark ?
there is evidence of a great flood and we still exist .
soft tissue in dinosaur bones
or do
you mean have we found the ark or Noah's ark
no we have not found the ark or Noah's ark

fingerbones?
you posted a link that i visited, so yes i saw that.

Well I can see that you've absorbed nothing, and have a tightly shut and sealed mind that only accepts what you like. It's my fault for getting my hopes up that you might be different

 

[MichaelCadry]

Barbarian chuckles:
That's another problem. You see, a wooden boat that size would leak so badly that a few people could never bail it out.

The 100-meter Wyoming could only sail with several pumps working full time. As the ship flexed, the joints, even though sealed with pitch, opened and leaked huge quantities of water. The Ark would have been much bigger, and therefore even more fragile. There's no way that a few people could have bailed out such a structure.

So, yet another non-Scriptural miracle is pulled out of a hat, and "hey, presto!" the problem is solved!

Sure... It's good that you understand that this is a parable for God's care of His people who are faithful to Him. But you're trying to rework it as a real event, by making up new stuff to insert in the Bible.

Not a good idea.

Dear Barbarian,

You've heard on Daniel being stuck in with the lions in their den and coming out unscathed. The same thing happened to him and his friends in a furnace where the Lord didn't let them get burned. When God is with someone, all sense goes out the windows. God does miracles. Things that you'd never expect.

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

Thanks, Barbarian (BTW, do you prefer to be addressed as “The Barbarian”, or is just “Barbarian” acceptable?).

Over most of the past decade this dino-soft-tissue has been one of the favorite, and hardest to give good answer to, claims thrown against deep-time by the creationist community. It will be interesting to see what counter-moves Schweitzer’s new (as of 18 months ago) article elicits from the creationist community (Enyart being a prime example of someone who relished the dino soft-tissue argument.)

I see this dino soft-tissue as a prime example of the way science plays out sometimes – the researchers huddle over their experiments and suddenly jerk their heads up with egg on their faces (speaking figuratively), since they just found something that just didn’t fit in with expectations at all. Had Schweitzer taken the advice of her creationist nay-sayers, she would have declared that all dinosaur dating to date must have been critically in error, and must be rejected en-masse. But instead, she was a scientist is the truest sense, and recognized that nature had just provided an opportunity for gaining a deeper, and unexpected, understanding of how biological molecular processes can work. A few years of hard work, and now we have new insights into some important aspects of how molecular structures can be preserved. For the young-earth crowd, another gap where they can find their YEC version of God has just been eliminated.

Just for kicks, here is the link to Schweitzer’s article in all its gory detail:

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/281/1775/20132741

(The date of publication is Nov 27, 2013, not Nov 26, 2013 as asserted in the LiveScience link you gave.)

Dear DavisBJ,

The procedures are relatively new and reek of the same dating methods' errors used before this one. As time passes, and more is done to further prove this iron method, then I will believe. Also, I find it hard to believe that birds are descended from dinosaurs. But whatever. Give it some time to prove itself in more instances before I'll believe it.

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

So you think science should teach your theological beliefs?

Dear noguru,

No. I've seen how science teaches with the Piltdown man and their Carbon-14 dating, and their blowhole explanation. Forget it.

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

You just said yourself that parables aren't lies. Did you suddenly change your mind on that?

No Kdall,

I denied it being a parable and you know it, you booper!

Michael