this autumn? 2015? Just a few months away?
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
this autumn? 2015? Just a few months away?
noguru
Well-known member
Michael, I hate to burst your bubble but you are one of the most illogical people I have witnessed on this site, and perhaps in life as a whole.
noguru
Well-known member
noguru
Well-known member
See Michael, this is part of your problem. You mistake poetic cultural literature as "science". This just further demonstrates your lack of critical thinking skills.
I really don't care what this author has to say on this matter. Judging from what you have included it sounds like garbage.
6days
New member
Do you take that approach to all of God's Word. ..that it might mean something different than what it says?Soodanim said:
Your doubting what God said comes from Gen.3:3... 'Did God say....?'*
Did God say Jesus was born of a virgin?
DID God say He created everything in six days?
Why would you want to revise it into a literal history? Just accept it as it is. When you're willing to accept it God's way, you'll find it no longer matters so much.
And then you can focus on the real message in Genesis.
And then you can focus on the real message in Genesis.
Do you think the fancy atoms have more to them than just protons, neutrons and electrons?!
The point is that the ancients DID have an atomic concept but they had no evidence to support or disprove the idea.
And the mindless and poorly written rant that you posted (that also confuses evolution with abiogenesis) was saying that evolution was an old idea, and somehow therefore not a modern scientific explanation.
The analogy applies perfectly. Evolution by natural selection is a fact. In the way you use language, it is proved beyond any doubt.
Try telling that to the muslim who wrote the moronic rant you posted.
Where's the photograph of your god that I promised you would show me? Haven't you even got one??
Stuart
6days
New member
Barbarian said:
Good thinking... accept God's Word as it is.*
*God created light before He created the sun.
*God created the great sea creatures before land animals.
*God created man from the dust on the 6th day that had evening and morning.
*God created woman from man's rib.
*Death entered the world because of one man's sin.
* The highest mountains under the heavens were covered in water, and...
* God gave the rainbow as a sign He would never flood the earth again
I think this question of whether only God can create life may be answered before very long. If, in the near future, some (atheistic) scientist starts with a supply of atoms and (non-biological) molecules and manages to assemble them into exactly the same pattern as is seen in a simple form of life, and his creation starts wiggling and eating and excreting, then what? If you took the “animalcule” (to use an old term) and swapped it with the originally “alive” one that it was patterned after, would anyone be able to tell which is the original and which is the copy? If there is some essence beyond the atomic arrangement itself that is required for something to be “alive”, then that essence must provide some crucial benefit not found in just the atoms and their arrangement.
For some time one now of the most strident claims of the creationist community is that even simple life is complex. I am not aware or any studies of how things work in the cell that ultimately was not just biochemistry. So the “complexity of life shows God (intelligent designer)” argument may turn against the creationist community if it turns out all that is needed is sufficient complexity. If the intelligent scientist creates simple life, then at least at that level, wouldn’t he be supplanting God, creating life from non-life?
Dear Hedshaker,
I was still too young when I wrote this. The Earth has been around for 6-7,000 years. I learn from my mistakes. I don't care if if Ken Miller speaks about evolution or not. The proof is in the pudding. I will keep posting my page every other day or so, so that it will reach more each day or so. I don't buy into your evolution premise at all. It is an old cult and Grecian Pagan belief. But you hate to find that out. Yes, I think I'll post that page again right now for others.
Michael
Hedshaker
New member
To be honest Michael I don't much care any more. Myself, Alwight and others have tried to put you right on this but you refuse to even educate yourself on the subject. It will be tough but I guess the science of evolution will somehow have to carry on without your approval.
But when the end of this year passes and your predictions have not come to fruition and you are shown to be wrong (again), will you then accept that you just might be wrong about The Theory of Evolution also? Or will you then be saying "you made a mistake" just on the timing part? As others have been doing for centuries.
Bristlecone pine trees can live for up to 5,000 years.
Fossilised bristlecone pine trunks have outer ring thickness patterns that match the inner rings of newer trees, including living trees.
The dendrochronology of the overlapping bristlecone pine tree ring patterns allows you to literally count back the past 9,000 years of annual rings.
The longest ice cores drilled from Antarctica have annual layers that can be counted year-by-year back 800,000 years. Recent discoveries indicate that it will be possible to count back 1,500,000 annual layers in Antarctic ice cores.
See how you don't even need radioisotope dating to show that YEC timelines are wrong? The size of your mistake in claiming the planet is only a few thousand years old is the same as claiming that the distance from San Francisco to New York is a couple of hundred metres. And, by the way, both the tree rings and the ice layers disprove the claim of a global flood within the past few thousand years.
So sorry, but you're wrong. Maybe you can overcome your pride and agree.
Stuart
No, I have no idea how you draw that conclusion
Dear noguru,
You''ve never met someone like me. I am the most unusual guy you'll ever meet. I write out of conviction in my heart and soul, and mind. I try to only write the truth. I do okay, I think. Of course, you don't like the testimony I have to speak to upwards leaders, and Yes, Barack Obama, also has my book. He's keeping it on his mind, but he had best not get this Iran deal go through. It will not be any good. But maybe, I digress. Time alone will tell. Don't forget, you have never read my book, noguru, right?
My back is aching to be on here. I'm going to have to go off line if it keeps it up. I am in pain trying to express you these things.
Got To Run!!
To A Very Dear Friend,
Michael
God's word is not all one thing. It contains narrative, poetry, correspondence, parable, apocalyptic literature, and so on, and the different types of literature should be handled accordingly. My comments haven't been about 'all of God's word in general'. I was talking about the way many Jews and Christians take the creation account, that being not literally. There isn't the scope in this post to encompass all that's been written about the alternatives to simply 'literal' and 'made up nonsense.' It helps the discussion for people to be aware of the options on the table, and especially ones that would seek to show reasonably why the account was not intended to be literal, but had another completely different and specialised didactic purpose for Israel.
Dear Stuart,
9,000 years!! I'd hate to be the one who had to count the 9,000 years. And the again, I'd really be upset to read the trees for 800,000 years. And then of course, there is the poor boy who gets to count all of the 160,000
I'm wondering if English is his second language, as a few of his posts are a bit clunky and hard to follow. Nothing wrong with that, I only know English and I respect multi-lingual people for having that skill. I like to identify them as such if I'm discussing things online though; it's helpful when reading their posts to know that.
Will you get back to me once you have worked out that the earth is older than a few thousand years?
By the way, your back is probably killing you because it is a monstrous compromise stumbled upon by natural selection: if a designer did the human back he should surely deserve to be fired.
Stuart
noguru
Well-known member
As far as I know Michael was born and raised in the US with English as the first language taught in primary school. I think what is coming to the surface is an emotional/psychological hurdle which blocks him from understanding certain ideas.
Creation vs. Evolution
Hey, thanks for that. I certainly hope not to cause any offence (I realise asking a native English speaker if they are an ESL person, if meant as a slight, is tantamount to trash talk!) I'm hoping civility can win the day and lead to fruitfulness on this discussion; many of my closest Christian friends and I have varying different opinions on issues here and there, but we can discuss them without losing the friendship/fellowship.
Hey, thanks for that. I certainly hope not to cause any offence (I realise asking a native English speaker if they are an ESL person, if meant as a slight, is tantamount to trash talk!) I'm hoping civility can win the day and lead to fruitfulness on this discussion; many of my closest Christian friends and I have varying different opinions on issues here and there, but we can discuss them without losing the friendship/fellowship.
- Status