Scientists baffled by a perfect example of Biblical kinds

[Jose Fly]

Evidence.

Thanks for your time.

 

[6days]

Where is this creation model? Where does it lay out all of this?

As Stripe said,,, EVIDENCE.... its already been outlined.

 

[6days]

I answered "Yes!" with literally the first word of my last post, then went on to explain why that is (upheaval and erosion).

And I mocked your non falsifiable answer.

If you really are interested in how geologists interpret the geological layers, KT boundary, etc within the Biblical framework... google. A good place to start would be with ICR, although geologists from other web sites also have good articles on this.

A. You are lying about "evolutionism" (still not a word, btw) hindering scientific progress

You need do some research Greg. If you are unaware of how evolutionary beliefs have harmed science..... Google. (Or ask me for examples)

Also, I said that evolutionism not only has hindered scientific progress, but has also lead to things like increased racism and genocides.

As for the rest of the list: who cares? The universe doesn't base its natural laws on which of two theories is more moral or what makes you feel happier. So if the correct theory leads to bad things, then so be it. That's better than staying blissfully ignorant of reality, imo. The evidence leads to evolution, and it doesn't care about your moral objections.

The problem with that Greg, is that things like increased racism and genocides were caused by FALSE evolutionary beliefs, now proven wrong by science. God's Word was correct... evolutionists were wrong...ALL humanity is "same blood". Other people groups and women are not less highly evolved than white males as evolutionists believed.

Im going to need to know if you've ever taken a college science course. Okay? Don't ignore me, I won't quit asking

And I will keep giving you this same answer. Attacking a person based on education level is ad hominem fallacy. This type of argument is used by people who find it easier to attack a person rather than address an argument using logic and intelligence.

IOW... Ad hominem fallacy would be...'Greg, if you have any college education, you have wasted your money since you don't have a basc understanding of science and confuse it with your beliefs. OR...
Greg, you should have got a basic college education. You don't understand science and often confuse it with your beliefs.
(That is ad hominem... attacking you rather than your 'arguments')

 

[6days]

Did you have something to contribute to the discussion of the evidence rather than presenting stuff you don't understand from your side as if it was the only possible idea

Exactly!! Similar to Gregs thing where I told him it was "textbook creationism"

 

[Jose Fly]

6days, it's fascinating to see how far you've fallen since I first came here. Now that you've been reduced to little more than slimy Godwin's Law fallacies and "Google it" responses, I have to wonder why you still bother. Certainly you can't think you're doing your side any favors with such childishness.

Do you think God rewards your persistence in standing up to us "evolutionists", no matter how ridiculous you are in the process?

 

[6days]

6days, it's fascinating to see how far you've fallen since I first came here. Now that you've been reduced to little more than slimy...

I'm sort of wondering if I should consider this as a compliment when it comes from you.

I'm glad you are here in TOL Jose.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Thank you, Mr Cutandpaste.

Did you have something to contribute to the discussion of the evidence rather than presenting stuff you don't understand from your side as if it was the only possible idea.

At least when he cuts-n-pastes, he doesn't change or omit certain words to misrepresent information, like you famously do.

User's posts are authentic and credible. Can you say the same? Not likely. You're just another lying "Christian"

 

[Greg Jennings]

As Stripe said,,, EVIDENCE.... its already been outlined.

So you admit that the Bible says no such thing about your bogus "biblical creation model"? We're making progress....

 

[Greg Jennings]

And I mocked your non falsifiable answer.

If you really are interested in how geologists interpret the geological layers, KT boundary, etc within the Biblical framework... google. A good place to start would be with ICR, although geologists from other web sites also have good articles on this.


You need do some research Greg. If you are unaware of how evolutionary beliefs have harmed science..... Google. (Or ask me for examples)

Also, I said that evolutionism not only has hindered scientific progress, but has also lead to things like increased racism and genocides.



The problem with that Greg, is that things like increased racism and genocides were caused by FALSE evolutionary beliefs, now proven wrong by science. God's Word was correct... evolutionists were wrong...ALL humanity is "same blood". Other people groups and women are not less highly evolved than white males as evolutionists believed.

And I will keep giving you this same answer. Attacking a person based on education level is ad hominem fallacy. This type of argument is used by people who find it easier to attack a person rather than address an argument using logic and intelligence.

IOW... Ad hominem fallacy would be...'Greg, if you have any college education, you have wasted your money since you don't have a basc understanding of science and confuse it with your beliefs. OR...
Greg, you should have got a basic college education. You don't understand science and often confuse it with your beliefs.
(That is ad hominem... attacking you rather than your 'arguments')

I was going to answer this post like your many others, but then I realized that it's exactly the same as the others. In fact, it's the exact same as most of your posts from the past 5 years at least. You don't say anything different, you don't research, and you don't learn. Nothing is worse than a person who is uneducated in what they claim to an expert in.

Once again, have you ever once taken a college science course? Answer the damn question

 

[Greg Jennings]

Exactly!! Similar to Gregs thing where I told him it was "textbook creationism"

You may be a lost cause 6, but the rest of the world isn't as dumb as you and your ilk. Creationism is dying out rapidly, despite your factually absent claims that "Science supports a young Earth" and so on. You have lost, are losing, and will continue to lose until there isn't anyone to fight your fight. Enjoy your meaningless resistance to reality, flat-earther

 

[Stripe]

6days, it's fascinating to see how far you've fallen since I first came here. Now that you've been reduced to little more than slimy Godwin's Law fallacies and "Google it" responses, I have to wonder why you still bother. Certainly you can't think you're doing your side any favors with such childishness. Do you think God rewards your persistence in standing up to us "evolutionists", no matter how ridiculous you are in the process?

Darwinists hate discussing the evidence. Any time some is presented, they will look desperately for something else to talk about.

Usually they find assaulting a man's character is the best tactic.

User's posts are authentic and credible.

They're useless. We know your model and the fact that there are endless things we could read on Google about them. We have presented a challenge to the dominant idea. That requires you to engage with what we say, not parrot what your side says as if it has not been questioned.

You're just another lying "Christian"

Nope.

Evidence, remember? We know Darwinists hate it.

So you admit that the Bible says no such thing about your bogus "biblical creation model"?

The Bible is the foundation of the biblical creation model. Science helps fill in the gaps. The evidence points to the Biblical model. We know why you hate the discussion focusing on the evidence.

 

[chair]

Actually, it's pretty clear. God made the kinds to reproduce among themselves and generate more of the same kind...

Yes. Exactly God created many types of animals, to reproduce among themselves, and generate more of the same animals. You, however, are claiming that they produced different animals.

 

[Stripe]

Yes. Exactly God created many types of animals, to reproduce among themselves, and generate more of the same animals. You, however, are claiming that they produced different animals.

Nope. Tigers and lions are of the same kind.

 

[chair]

Nope. Tigers and lions are of the same kind.

Whatever. Go ahead with your non biblical and non scientific beliefs. Don't expect to convince anybody who has bothered to think about these issues.

 

[alwight]

Nope. Tigers and lions are of the same kind.

View attachment 23648
What about hybrids?
A liger.
Kitty kind.

 

[Stripe]

Whatever. Go ahead with your non biblical and non scientific beliefs.

Wait. You just got finished agreeing with my belief about the Bible:

Actually, it's pretty clear. God made the kinds to reproduce among themselves and generate more of the same kind.

Yes. Exactly God created many types of animals, to reproduce among themselves, and generate more of the same animals.

So much "for non-Biblical."

Don't expect to convince anybody who has bothered to think about these issues.

I'm not trying to convince anyone. :idunno:

I'm looking for people willing to challenge what I believe in a rational manner.

What about Ligons?

You're too stupid to talk to.

 

[chair]

Wait. You just got finished agreeing with my belief about the Bible:

Exactly the opposite is the case. You agree with my understanding- except that you define "kind" in a way to make this understanding meaningless.

When I say that God created the different types of animals, and they reproduced to produce more of the same animals, I mean exactly what I said. Tigers have birth to tigers. Lions gave birth to lions. Leopards gave birth to leopards.

You say "they reproduced to produce more of the same animals". You explain that this means that a generic cat-kind animal produced lions, tigers, and leopards. Those are not the "same animals".

What you gain from this non-Biblical theory is a way of explaining how all the animal types fit on Noah's ark. You also claim to have an alternate mechanism for the change in animals over time, however, the mechanism of the Theory of Evolution isn't the challenge to Creationism. The challenge is the very occurrence of evolution over time, especially a long time. You are saying that animals (and plants, for that matter) did change over time- just the mechanism is different.

So your position is non-Biblical. In order to make any sense scientifically, you need to show that until about 5,000 years ago there was only one cat kind, one dog kind, one cow kind etc. Can you show that?

 

[Greg Jennings]

Darwinists hate discussing the evidence. Any time some is presented, they will look desperately for something else to talk about.

Usually they find assaulting a man's character is the best tactic.

They're useless. We know your model and the fact that there are endless things we could read on Google about them. We have presented a challenge to the dominant idea. That requires you to engage with what we say, not parrot what your side says as if it has not been questioned.


Nope.

Evidence, remember? We know Darwinists hate it.



The Bible is the foundation of the biblical creation model. Science helps fill in the gaps. The evidence points to the Biblical model. We know why you hate the discussion focusing on the evidence.

You can't seriously say things like, "you hate the discussion focusing on the evidence," when you yourself are famous for ignoring questions and making assertions without any corroborating evidence. Plus your pathetic and heavily edited scientific studies that you post here from time to time. Do you think it's honest to quote mine?

 

[way 2 go]

nothing to do with evolutionary research.
evolution would be the bacteria writing brand new never seen before code
not incorporation...

the premise of evolution is complex code from nothing.

what you have is
code + code = new code

evolution would be

code + write its own new never seen before code = never seen before code

Umm....no. Evolution is the process by which organism populations adapt and change in response to environmental stimuli. Bacteria incorporating a plasmid into their own genome, receiving a positive adaptation from the plasmid, then passing on its plasmid-infused genome to its offspring is textbook evolution.

so you are saying evolution is not complex code from nothing.

 

[6days]

You say "they reproduced to produce more of the same animals". You explain that this means that a generic cat-kind animal produced lions, tigers, and leopards. Those are not the "same animals".

The same kind. Cats produce cats. Ask any breeder. They use existing genetic info and eliminate unwanted traits. *Selection leads to a loss of variation. And...again, ask breeders if there seems to be a limit to varation.

What you gain from this non-Biblical theory is a way of explaining how all the animal types fit on Noah's ark. You also claim to have an alternate mechanism for the change in animals over time, however, the mechanism of the Theory of Evolution isn't the challenge to Creationism. The challenge is the very occurrence of evolution over time, especially a long time. You are saying that animals (and plants, for that matter) did change over time- just the mechanism is different.*

No Chair...I didn't see Stripe claiming the mechanism is different. We all observe mutation rates, genetic drift, sexual selection, etc.*


The reason its wrong to add vast amounts of time to scripture is because it corrupts the gospel, and destroys the purpose of Christs physical death. If physical death existed before first Adam sinned, then physical death was part of what God called very good. And if physical death is very good... and not the "final enemy", then Last Adams death ...and His defeat of death by the physical resurrection becomes meaningless