Creation vs. Evolution

[Yorzhik]

My understanding from elsewhere is that Yorzhik works in a call centre and likes to fill in any spare time trolling "evolutionists", mainly with bovine scatterings and other made-up stuff. IIRC when I previously tried to pin him down as a YEC he fudged by allowing for a rather vague but somewhat longer period of time, as more wriggle room at the time apparently, but now he seems to be a real 6000 year YEC again, dead set against common descent.
Shannon information seems to be something he has found out about more recently and thinks it can be applied wherever he wants it to, while his interlocutors are left to try to figure out whether any of it makes sense , which clearly it does not. When the veneer and bluster is stripped away there is absolutely no substance presented by him at all.:think:

The only reason you call me a troll is because your abject fear makes understanding simple evidence impossible.

You don't have to be a Christian just because, scientifically, mutations+NS is wrong.

BTW, a range of 6k-10k age is not a "rather vague but longer time period" beyond 6k years.

 

[Cross Reference]

I don't know for certain that it is, but all things considered it makes more sense than the Hebrews story. But you can look in Genesis and see that the crafty beast was already fallen, already evil, working against Gods plan for the pair, before Eve actually sinned.

You can also see that death came specifically to Adam and Eve, they could no longer eat of the tree of life. Death was already a fact for man, it's normal.

Also, you can see Cain was afraid of people out in the world away from his parents.

Why put so much stock in your opinion?

 

[alwight]

The only reason you call me a troll is because your abject fear makes understanding simple evidence impossible.

You don't have to be a Christian just because, scientifically, mutations+NS is wrong.

BTW, a range of 6k-10k age is not a "rather vague but longer time period" beyond 6k years.

As I recall you were espousing periods of time rather well beyond a typical YEC 10000 years max? :think:

 

[Caino]

Why put so much stock in your opinion?

It's not just my opinion, it's a belief which incorporates a number of factors. I frankly don't know why people think that the grossly exaggerated, self important writings of the religious men who killed Jesus are so inerrant? Especially when their secular history books didn't make it back to Jerusalem after Babylon.

 

[Cross Reference]

It's not just my opinion, it's a belief which incorporates a number of factors. I frankly don't know why people think that the grossly exaggerated, self important writings of the religious men who killed Jesus are so inerrant? Especially when their secular history books didn't make it back to Jerusalem after Babylon.

Wrong. It is a belief based on opinion. Nothing more unless you were present when all the events took place and even then your interpretation would not be without question.

 

[Caino]

Wrong. It is a belief based on opinion. Nothing more unless you were present when all the events took place and even then your interpretation would not be without question.

The authors of Genesis weren't there either, it's their opinion from the vantage point of Babylon when the OT books were finalized in the present form. They used information from many sources in Mesipotamia.

 

[Yorzhik]

As I recall you were espousing periods of time rather well beyond a typical YEC 10000 years max? :think:

I don't think so. Someone may have prompted me to speculate on what a universe before creation was like, and I may have been vague then due to an extreme lack of information. Basically, if we know "God moved over the face of the waters" before creation, what does that mean? I'm not sure but I'm willing to take a stab in the dark.

 

[gcthomas]

Your claim is that biological systems don't need the original message because noise works better. Do you understand that is what you are saying?

I do, but apparently you still refuse to read carefully. I have never claimed noise works better - mutations work because without them there is no substantive evolution. So what if most mutations kill or harm the organism? Those mutations will be removed from the gene pool if they are sufficiently harmful. It is those rare ones that make the organism function better that get preserved most often. There is no single communication that needs preserving, but a selection from a multitude of transposed and rearranged and duplicated and mutated copies. And the best ones have a better chance of surviving.

Since you have accepted that some mutations can be beneficial, I don't see why you are still acting as if you have anywhere to go with this discussion. You have argued yourself into a corner and are too proud step away from the lost argument. Your loss.

 

[Cross Reference]

The authors of Genesis weren't there either, it's their opinion from the vantage point of Babylon when the OT books were finalized in the present form. They used information from many sources in Mesipotamia.

Wrong again! God was there. He wrote the book by the hand of Moses and all that came before him. Proof??!! It's accurate!

 

[Caino]

Wrong again! God was there. He wrote the book by the hand of Moses and all that came before him. Proof??!! It's accurate!

That's a religion all to it's own, it makes the current Bible book list a form of an idol, a golden calf. It's misapplied faith in the writings of men, making divine that which is wholly human. Moses predates the writing of Genesis by 1,000 years.

 

[Cross Reference]

That's a religion all to it's own, it makes the current Bible book list a form of an idol, a golden calf. It's misapplied faith in the writings of men, making divine that which is wholly human. Moses predates the writing of Genesis by 1,000 years.

Read what I wrote again, for the first time. It is factual. You have nothing of substance with which to measure it against that disproves any of it..

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear Caino,

So this is the rubbish you've been spreading around to innocent or ignorant minds that crawl onto your thread. You think you've got your alien story all wrapped up and neatly packaged. Whether Moses was around during the time of Adam and Eve, that does not mean that he cannot write about them, as dictated to him by the Lord God. I know for a fact that it happens. Your words and interpretations are blasphemy to God and to Jesus, and they also are not 'alliens.' You've called the Holy Ghost an alien too, by overshadowing Mary before she before she bore Jesus. You try to take away from the holiness of God and Jesus by insinuating that they are linked to aliens. Wow, your mind is so screwed up it doesn't know which way is down until it is thrown down into the pit. I'm so sorry that you seem like nice man, but your being is FULL of lies and accusations. Oh well, we reap what we sow.

Michael

 

[Caino]

Read what I wrote again, for the first time. It is factual. You have nothing of substance with which to measure it against that disproves any of it..

We have the facts of science to compare the Hebrews history revisionism with.

What scripture book did they use while in Egypt? Where is it?

 

[Caino]

Dear Caino,

So this is the rubbish you've been spreading around to innocent or ignorant minds that crawl onto your thread. You think you've got your alien story all wrapped up and neatly packaged. Whether Moses was around during the time of Adam and Eve, that does not mean that he cannot write about them, as dictated to him by the Lord God. I know for a fact that it happens. Your words and interpretations are blasphemy to God and to Jesus, and they also are not 'alliens.' You've called the Holy Ghost an alien too, by overshadowing Mary before she before she bore Jesus. You try to take away from the holiness of God and Jesus by insinuating that they are linked to aliens. Wow, your mind is so screwed up it doesn't know which way is down until it is thrown down into the pit. I'm so sorry that you seem like nice man, but your being is FULL of lies and accusations. Oh well, we reap what we sow.

Michael

Gabriel, a celestial being appeared to Mary. You can pout, stomp around and hope that a wrathful God sends fire down from heaven all you like, but the same Gabriel that announced the coming of the Son in Mary's womb is part of the latest revelation of truth in the UB.

You have anger issues, you get mad at the truth I speak.

 

[Cross Reference]

We have the facts of science to compare the Hebrews history revisionism with.

Science can only deal with what it can hold in its hand. Everything, at best, is a theory and when dealing with evolution. . . based upon opinion.

 

[Caino]

Science can only deal with what it can hold in its hand. Everything, at best, is a theory and when dealing with evolution. . . based upon opinion.

True, Science is based on the facts of what it holds in its hands, the bones of different kinds of life that lived over millions of years as well as different kinds of humans throughout their evolution. The Opinions of the Hebrews about a 6 day creation event were just speculation out of ignorance. Moses didn't write Genesis, he was a reformer of previous beliefs and practices of the slaves he lead out of Egypt.

 

[Cross Reference]

True, Science is based on the facts of what it holds in its hands, the bones of different kinds of life that lived over millions of years as well as different kinds of humans throughout their evolution. The Opinions of the Hebrews about a 6 day creation event were just speculation out of ignorance. Moses didn't write Genesis, he was a reformer of previous beliefs and practices of the slaves he lead out of Egypt.

I don't believe there can be any doubt that the earth is more than 6k years old. However, that does not discredit the Genesis account. Evidence contained within the many opinions based upon not only science but the scriptures themselves that strongly infer to it being older. So on that account, we have strong agreement..
The thing to remember is that Genesis only gives us the record of the beginning of creation as we know it to be; as we presently witness it. . . beginning with Adam, the first human as we know him as our father, came into existence.

 

[Cross Reference]

Delete

 

[Caino]

I don't believe there can be any doubt that the earth is more than 6k years old. However, that does not discredit the Genesis account. Evidence contained within the many opinions based upon not only science but the scriptures themselves that strongly infer to it being older. So on that account, we have strong agreement..
The thing to remember is that Genesis only gives us the record of the beginning of creation as we know it to be; as we presently witness it. . . beginning with Adam, the first human as we know him as our father, came into existence.

The fragments of history used to write the Genesis account show signs of a much bigger story. In my religion we now have that story. Cain had reason to fear other tribes away from his home.

 

[alwight]

Wrong again! God was there. He wrote the book by the hand of Moses and all that came before him. Proof??!! It's accurate!

Seriously, how do you know?
How can you know?
You don't know...
You may believe, but you don't know, right?

Science can only deal with what it can hold in its hand. Everything, at best, is a theory and when dealing with evolution. . . based upon opinion.

Nonsense, science attempts to best explain the facts and evidence by using natural physics.
Using natural physics the behaviour of matter, energy and planetary bodies of all kinds that cannot be touched can be explained and predicted since natural physical laws can be applied to them just as well as to those that can be physically touched.
You can of course dispute any scientific explanation by using the real facts and evidence but a generally accepted scientific consensus however does exist for a great many things and not least Darwinian evolution. Darwin's theory is just not falsified nor contradicted by anything other than a supposed supernatural apparently based entirely on an adherence to an ancient scripture deemed by some to be inerrant, for no obvious reason that I've ever noticed.
If you have a better theory based in natural physics then by all means do bring it on, but a supposed evidence-free supernatural explanation does not rise above the level of bald assertion, nor above any other proposed evidence-free supernatural explanation that might be dreamed up by someone else.