• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

Dinosaurs are fake and leads to atheism!

marke

Well-known member
Do you have any idea how humongous the conspiracy would have to be to pull off such deception? Dinosaur species have been named from 51 countries and Antarctica. Thirty or more species have been named from 12 countries: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Mongolia, South Africa, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The first dinosaur was discovered in 1676 and the first scientific paper published on that fossil by Robert Plot who was not an atheist. Both the fossil and the scientific paper both still exist to this day.

Since then, thousands upon thousand of dinosaur fossils have been found by a wide variety of people across centuries of time, usually at extremely great expense. The explanations for their existence have been as wide and varied as can be (i.e. no coordinated conspiracy in evidence). And there are hundreds and hundreds of people who are being paid full time sallaries to do nothing at all but look for, find, escavate, transport, clean, document, replicate, identify and otherwise study and work with nothing but dinosaur fossils.

Why is it always Christians who are willing to believe almost anything, no matter how obviously impossible and they all seem to show up here on TOL! It was the flat earth insanity for a while, now this utter nonsense!

Clete
How can Christians honestly believe dinosaurs roamed the earth hundreds of millions of years ago when by secularists' own test methods dinosaur remains have always been found to be less than 50,000 years old?
 

marke

Well-known member
Dinosaurs being real is what leads atheism.
Atheists see a fossil and conclude, as Nicolas Steno did nearly 500 years ago, that those fossils must surely be old or how else would they have gotten themselves embedded in rocks. Steno, like modern secularists who think fossils are millions of years old, either did not know the Bible, did not understand the Bible or did not believe the Bible.
 

marke

Well-known member
You can lead doser to evidence, but you can't make him think.
Dinosaur remains are found by the thousands in frozen Alaskan muck. What do you think they were feeding on at the time they were suddenly covered by muck which froze them in place?
 

marke

Well-known member
Are you referring to entropy? It is at work. So, many species have gone extinct. Gravity is at work too, but I still can play catch with my son.

The earth's particular distance from the sun balances entropy to a degree. Other planets get a full wallop.
There was a major extinction event that occurred as a result of the universal flood of Noah's day. Atheists see the evidence of the massive extinction event in the geological record, but they cannot adequately explain it in spite of stupidly insisting there was never a universal flood.
 

marke

Well-known member
How about showing how radiometric methods are very flawed? Not all methods for λ Lambda use a Geiger counter.
Secular radiometric dating depends on a series of assumptions that have never been irrefutably proven true. Just like computer programming, if you design or calibrate measuring methods using garbage assumptions your date results will be garbage.
 

marke

Well-known member
There are such processes that influence natural selection. I think you have heard of weather. Continental shift both imposed order and contributed to diversity.
Natural selection is a theory that can no more be proven than God can be proven by human observation and measurement.
 

marke

Well-known member
You can see that repeated selection can lead to diversion of traits so much so that after a period of time what was one species becomes two.
"Interminably long periods of time" are essential to 'proving' evolution possible, as George Wald once said.

George Wald on Time as the Magical Hero of the Plot​

GEORGE WALD, "THE ORIGIN OF LIFE," SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, AUGUST, 1954, P. 45
A close-up photo of the bright center of a star cluster.

The important point is that since the origin of life belongs to the category of at-least-once phenomena, time is on its side. However improbable we regard this event, or any of the steps it involves, given enough time, it will almost certainly happen at least once. And for life as we know it, with its capability for growth and reproduction, once may be enough. Time is the hero of the plot … Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, the probable becomes virtually certain. One only has to wait; time itself performs miracles.
George Wald

Another quote:

“When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance!”
-- George Wald

Another:

i-do-not-want-to-believe-in-god-therefore-i-choose-to-believe-in-that-which-i-know-is-quote-1.jpg
 
Last edited:

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
"Interminably long periods of time" are essential to 'proving' evolution possible, as George Wald once said.

However improbable we regard [the spontaneous origin of life],… it will almost certainly happen at least once…. The time… is of the order of two billion years.… Given so much time, the “impossible” becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One only has to wait: time itself performs the miracles.

George Wald
See: Just So Stories by Rudyard Kipling
 

marke

Well-known member
Entropy involves energy. The overall energy is depleted. The overall order decreases over time, but both order and disorder can be created within the system. An ocean carves a beach creating an intricate ordered coastline, but it tears up rocks decreasing order.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics assumes all energy 'evolves' toward decay, not increase. The sun is not getting younger or increasing in energy, it is getting older and tending toward decay and failure. Life is not increasing in development from simplistic ignorant life forms to more complicated thinking forms of life but is decreasing in intelligence, strength, and stability.

Entropy does not describe some future existence of evolved intelligent life but the dead end of all life on earth as we know it.


Thermodynamics is the study of heat and energy. At its heart are laws that describe how energy moves around within a system, whether an atom, a hurricane or a black hole. The first law describes how energy cannot be created or destroyed, merely transformed from one kind to another. The second law, however, is probably better known and even more profound because it describes the limits of what the universe can do. This law is about inefficiency, degeneration and decay. It tells us all we do is inherently wasteful and that there are irreversible processes in the universe. It gives us an arrow for time and tells us that our universe has a inescapably bleak, desolate fate.
 

marke

Well-known member
You acknowledge covid variants do you not? What is a new variant other than a small segment of natural selection?
Adaptation is common in life forms as designed by God. Natural selection is a secular myth that attributes acts of God to atheistic powers such as natural selection, which is a mythical power secularists believe can effect design changes even though it has no power to think or act.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Just for a lark I thought I'd check and see what the wiki entry said about Kipling's stories and I'm LOL'ing. Look at the last sentence in the entry.


Just So Stories for Little Children is a 1902 collection of origin stories by the British author Rudyard Kipling. Considered a classic of children's literature, the book is among Kipling's best known works.

Just So Stories
Just So Stories Kipling 1902.jpg
First edition
AuthorRudyard Kipling
IllustratorRudyard Kipling
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
GenreChildren's book
PublisherMacmillan
Publication date1902
Kipling began working on the book by telling the first three chapters as bedtime stories to his daughter Josephine. These had to be told "just so" (exactly in the words she was used to) or she would complain. The stories illustrate how animals obtained their distinctive features, such as how the leopard got his spots. For the book, Kipling illustrated the stories himself.

The stories have appeared in a variety of adaptations including a musical and animated films. Evolutionary biologists have noted that what Kipling did in fiction in a Lamarckian way,[1] they have done in reality, providing Darwinian explanations for the evolutionary development of animal features.[2][3]
 

marke

Well-known member
Why don't you just make the point if you are not using him as an authority?


He has an MD but never practiced. He does not have a scientific degree although he probably delved into undergraduate biology. He never participated in any original research. I am versed in scientific method, how well I will let my post reveal.

Why would you find a quote from a science fiction writer more compelling than the word of 97% of scientists?
If 99% of world leaders and geniuses refuse to believe the Bible then they are all fools for doing so. Never unquestionably believe what fools tell you.
 

marke

Well-known member
The results of experiments need to be interpreted and results need to be replicated by multiple researchers from different angles. A consensus of persons using careful scrutiny create a vision of the cutting edge of knowledge. It is a method of continually improving knowledge not a construction of ultimate truth.
Atheistic secularists are not interested in finding the truth. After reputable labs were tricked into testing dinosaur bones for age without knowing the bones were dinosaurs they yielded ages of less than 50,000 years. However, once they discovered the bones were dinosaurs they withdrew their test results and slandered the researchers who submitted the bones for testing. Why did the labs reject their own measurements? Because their measurements contradicted the secular assumptions about the ages of dinosaurs.

That is proof secularists will not accept facts if facts contradict known erroneous secular assumptions.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
I am versed in scientific method ...
I am a professional scientist, educated, trained and paid to do the job for 26 years, including different periods of time when I did original research funded by government grants. Even got myself published once. 😁

In a totally unrelated subject, I found myself a couple days ago scanning through a scientific paper online and was amazed to find that I still could, at the level I used to.
 

marke

Well-known member
I say this because your posts about entropy are proving the opposite point you're trying to make, but you don't realize it.
Raw energy, like that from the sun, increases entropy.
Entropy doesn't do work, as you suggested.


The energy from the sun becomes more ordered but less powerful when it hits the earth. Some energy is stored and some is radiated back out.

I never said entropy does work. I just said it can be defeated by various processes at least temporarily in some area while a cost may be paid in another. And, that includes purely physical processes.
The sun is burning out. The earth's rotation is slowing. Life forms get old and die. That is explained by studies related to entropy.
 

marke

Well-known member
Now, you are going with more snark than substance. Somehow I thought you were better than that.

Can gravity be thwarted without a designer?
We would not even have gravity if not for God. Atheists certainly cannot explain gravity or its origin if not for God.
 
Top