The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

The Concrete Doctor · 11-04-2013 01:27PM

J C wrote: »

Please come to a Creation Science conference, if you want that ... in the mean-time, could you please provide some of the stuff that is now required to be taught by law on evolution "as a comprehensive and central tenet of scientific theory".

I'm actually here to help you perfect your arguments!!!!

... so please practice on me ... with the evidence for this supposed 'fact' that is so important that not reciting its supposed 'wonders' or even just pointing out its many failings ... could be punished with severe monetary sanctions.

... it could save your blushes when 10 year old's start taking your arguments apart and asking questions that ye may not be able to answer.
Simple questions like, why do you believe that selected mistakes produced the Human Brain via a continuum from a snail-like ganglion ... when mistakes are observed to be invariably information destructive?
... or why do you think that Crocodiles remained completely unchanged over the supposed 100 million odd years that a glorified rat was morphing into a Man ?
... or what was so special about the rat that it did this, while the Crocodile was suposedly 'stuck in the mud'?:D

How do you answer the ten year old when he says "JC How do you know that the Ark actually existed"?

Sin City · 11-04-2013 01:33PM

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

How do you answer the ten year old when he says "JC How do you know that the Ark actually existed"?

Cuz its written in the Bible. which as we all know is a historical accoun t of human history, written by man and inspired by God

:D:D:D:D

The Concrete Doctor · 11-04-2013 02:17PM

J C wrote: »

... it could save your blushes when 10 year old's start taking your arguments apart and asking questions that ye may not be able to answer.
Simple questions like, why do you believe that selected mistakes produced the Human Brain via a continuum from a snail-like ganglion ... when mistakes are observed to be invariably information destructive?
... or why do you think that Crocodiles remained completely unchanged over the supposed 100 million odd years that a glorified rat was morphing into a Man ?
... or what was so special about the rat that it did this, while the Crocodile was suposedly 'stuck in the mud'?:D

By the way JC, are these ten year old kids studying, biology, theology or anatomy? In Trinity, UCD or Oxford? Makes a difference you know!

doctoremma · 11-04-2013 04:50PM

Article here: http://ncse.com/cej/4/1/impossible-voyage-noahs-ark/

Key points regarding the physical issues:

1. Noah would have required an education in naval architecture and a knowledge of physical principles not yet discovered, in an era where people sailed in hollowed out logs. This immense leap in knowledge, Noah's primary contribution to humanity, was lost among Noah's descendants, with sailors returning to hollowed-out logs.

2. The number of different internal fixtures required is mind-boggling. Different floorings, different cage sizes/bar width, different perch sizes, and so on. All this was achieved without a single consultation with a zoologist, who even today, lack the breadth of knowledge required to transport all animals.

3. The harvesting of timber and production of lumber (some of the beams required would have taken several years to cure) and the building of scaffolding/boat/dock/interior would take an estimated 81 years. By this time, the earliest phases would have been rotting away.

4. The ark was coated with "pitch", which requires oil wells to extract and couldn't have existed pre-Flood, given that such organic deposits were deposited during the Flood.

5. There is a physical upper limit on the length of a wooden boat, before bowing and sagging etc destroy it. Noah's ark exceeds this length. Boats as big as Noah's didn't reappear until the 1850s, when iron was first used

Any thoughts at the first interval, JC?

J C · 11-04-2013 06:09PM

Sin City wrote: »

No you are suggesting that all our problems are down to a talking snake and a auld bearded fellah who holds a grudge

You're correct that all our problems are ultimately rooted in sin.

The talking snake and the old fellah with the grudge and the goatee are one and the same ... but he had a bit of help from Adam many people down the years as well.

J C · 11-04-2013 06:14PM

koth wrote: »

You mean go to Mass? :P

You need a personal relationship with Jesus Christ to be Saved, my friend.

J C · 11-04-2013 06:29PM

tim3000 wrote: »

I stumbled across these ooparts before while link hopping around wikipedia but they usually are objects taken out of context (which I remind you could erroneously confirm a young earth creation hypothesis).

They are objects not found where they 'should' be ... things like a Human footprint in rocks where Dinosaur fossils are found or soft Dinosaur tissue still preserved ... or birds in a Dinosaur stomach ... hi-tech gadgets found in supposed millions of years old rock ... that sort of thing.

tim3000 wrote: »

I have another line of questioning for the only Creationist in the village . I am sure you have heard of vestigiality in animals. Most famously the appendix in humans but leg bones in modern whales and vestigal chromosomes and the Nictitating membrane in your eye. Why would perfect creator leave such imperfections in his creations?

Practically all supposedly 'vestigial' structures have been found to actually have a function ... and it was ignorance, rather than knowledge that led to them being classified a 'vestigial', in the first place.
Some structures may have suffered reduced functionality since they were first created ... but this is an example of devolution from perfection.

tim3000 wrote: »

Also you say you are a YEC how do you watch natural history documentaries or things like that does it get frustrating?

They're very funny and interesting ... funny when they start talking about 'long ago and far away' ... followed by a very imaginative 'just so' fairy story ... and very interesting when they stick to the facts and report on the discovery of the many amazing aspects of all of God's Creation.
We are indeed blessed to have such great Natural History programmes ... but the religious aspects (like M2M Evolution and the mantras about 'millions of years') need to be taken with a 'pinch of salt'.:)

Sin City · 11-04-2013 06:40PM

J C wrote: »

They're very funny and interesting ... funny when they start talking about 'long ago and far away' ... followed by a very imaginative 'just so' fairy story ... and very interesting when they stick to the facts and report on the discovery of the many amazing aspects of all of God's Creation.
We are indeed blessed to have such great Natural History programmes ... but the religious aspects (like M2M Evolution and the mantras about 'millions of years') need to be taken with a 'pinch of salt'.:)

I think the highlighted words describe creationsim in a nutshell

J C · 11-04-2013 07:07PM

doctoremma wrote: »

It's a measure that dictates that the most plausible models to explain the natural world are taught in science lessons. It's a measure that seeks to formally remove unscientific theories such as creationism from science lessons. It's a measure that ensures our children are getting the most appropriate science education available to them. It's a measure that I thoroughly approve of.

... so please tell us what is this 'plausible model' that needs such careful protecting and legal 'mollycoddling'?

doctoremma wrote: »

It can be. In religion lessons.

Emma ... the real problem for Evolution is that wherever Creation Science or ID is taught, it will utterly destroy faith in M2M Evolution.
It is powerful stuff ... and pupils will simply laugh when they go to science class and are told about 'Microbes turning into Man' ... when they have been taught about Intelligent Design, Irreducible Complexity and Complex Functional Specified Genetic Information in Religion Class ... within or without schools!!!:D

You cannot use law and censorship to keep down information ... it often becomes even more attractive when it has a hint of illegality about it!!!

doctoremma wrote: »

Of course. This is the nature of the beast. If evolutionary theory turns out to be wholly incorrect, then teaching it in science lessons will be similarly frowned upon.

... why frown when you can laugh ... it gives you less wrinkles.:)

doctoremma wrote: »

Of And by the way, this is not evidence in favour of the existence of Noah's ark.

This certainly is:-

J C · 11-04-2013 07:19PM

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

The trouble with people like you claiming to be geniuses is that it irritates those of us who actually are.

... it must be even more frustrating then, when you are unable to make any plausible arguments (that I haven't demolished) about your 'pet' origins theory ... that we are Pondkind with nothing added but time and mistakes.

coolhull · 11-04-2013 07:24PM

J C wrote: »

...

This certainly is:

This is evidence of Noah's Ark?

Why, did Noah have a youtube account?

doctoremma · 11-04-2013 08:39PM

J C wrote: »

This certainly is:-

No it isn't.

J C · 11-04-2013 09:13PM

doctoremma wrote: »

No it isn't.

Oh yes it is!!!:pac:

J C · 11-04-2013 09:43PM

coolhull wrote: »

This is evidence of Noah's Ark?

Why, did Noah have a youtube account?

... he seems to have one!!!

coolhull · 11-04-2013 09:50PM

J C wrote: »

Oh yes it is!!!:pac:

Ah, J C, stop making a show of yourself... I read and enjoyed some of your earlier arguments, even though I didn't agree with them.
But now you're just being silly!

tim3000 · 11-04-2013 10:12PM

J C wrote: »

They are objects not found where they 'should' be ... things like a Human footprint in rocks where Dinosaur fossils are found or soft Dinosaur tissue still preserved ... or birds in a Dinosaur stomach ... hi-tech gadgets found in supposed millions of years old rock ... that sort of thing.

Practically all supposedly 'vestigial' structures have been found to actually have a function ... and it was ignorance, rather than knowledge that led to them being classified a 'vestigial', in the first place.
Some structures may have suffered reduced functionality since they were first created ... but this is an example of devolution from perfection.

They're very funny and interesting ... funny when they start talking about 'long ago and far away' ... followed by a very imaginative 'just so' fairy story ... and very interesting when they stick to the facts and report on the discovery of the many amazing aspects of all of God's Creation.
We are indeed blessed to have such great Natural History programmes ... but the religious aspects (like M2M Evolution and the mantras about 'millions of years') need to be taken with a 'pinch of salt'.:)

But birds co existed with dinosaurs indeed you can see the transitional form in the world famous Archaeopteryx fossil. But if you could show me a link to these gadgets you mention I would dearly like to see them? As regards the human and dinosaur foot prints I would like to see that though I know there is a much more rational explanation.

But the nictitating membrane in humans has no function in humans and is widely touted to be representative of our evolutionary history.

As for the documentaries you are missing out on huge chunks of well researched information. I was recently watching a documentary series about anthropology delivered by a medical doctor which shows the human journey out of Africa. I have enclosed the link. You will find that there is not a mention of an Ark a flood (though climate change is mentioned).

You do know that the majority of the church agrees with evolution? Has someone explained to you how antibiotic resistance works in Micro-organisms?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwa6o-s1Yvs

J C · 11-04-2013 10:29PM

tim3000 wrote: »

But birds co existed with dinosaurs indeed you can see the transitional form in the world famous Archaeopteryx fossil.

I agree Birds (and mammals) co-existed with Dinosaurs ... its only the Evolutionists who deny this.

tim3000 wrote: »

But if you could show me a link to these gadgets you mention I would dearly like to see them? As regards the human and dinosaur foot prints I would like to see that though I know there is a much more rational explanation.

But the nictitating membrane in humans has no function in humans and is widely touted to be representative of our evolutionary history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwa6o-s1Yvs[/QUOTE]
Here is some thought provoking evidence (presented from an 'old Earth' perspective).

tim3000 wrote: »

As for the documentaries you are missing out on huge chunks of well researched information. I was recently watching a documentary series about anthropology delivered by a medical doctor which shows the human journey out of Africa. I have enclosed the link. You will find that there is not a mention of an Ark a flood (though climate change is mentioned).

Evidence tends to be fitted into the pardigm of the beholder.

tim3000 wrote: »

You do know that the majority of the church agrees with evolution? Has someone explained to you how antibiotic resistance works in Micro-organisms?

I agree with aspects of Evolution, for example Natural / Sexual Selection (of pre-existing genetic diversity) is a proven scientific fact ... its the idea that Pondkind can evolve into Mankind that I disagree with.
http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-evolution.html

I know all about ab resistance ... it occurs by loss of genetic information and pre-existing genetic diversity.

The Concrete Doctor · 11-04-2013 10:35PM

J C wrote: »

... it must be even more frustrating then, when you are unable to make any plausible arguments (that I haven't demolished) about your 'pet' origins theory ... that we are Pondkind with nothing added but time and mistakes.

JC, what do you say to the ten year old who says "How do you know that Noah's Ark actually existed?" or "JC How do you know that Adam existed. Can you show me something that I can show to my school mates to prove he actually lived"

But judging by your posts, you don't have much contact with ten year olds, do you JC?

Show us your evidence JC. Where is it?

J C · 11-04-2013 10:54PM

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

JC, what do you say to the ten year old who says "How do you know that Noah's Ark actually existed?" or "JC How do you know that Adam existed. Can you show me something that I can show to my school mates to prove he actually lived"

Y-chromosome Adam ... all men are descended from one man
... and Mitochrondial Eve ... all people are descended from one woman.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Chromosomal-Adam-Mitochondrial-Eve.html

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

But judging by your posts, you don't have much contact with ten year olds, do you JC?

My 10-year old daughter sometimes sits with me when I write replies to you guys ... she sometimes asks me why ye don't love me, like she does ... but I explain that ye are not unloving to me personally ... just to the ideas of God that I present and represent.

doctoremma · 11-04-2013 11:04PM

J C wrote: »

Y-chromosome Adam ... all men are descended from one man
... and Mitochrondial Eve ... all people are descended from one woman.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Chromosomal-Adam-Mitochondrial-Eve.html

You know that they are separated by some 50,000+ years?
And do you REALLY understand what the terms 'mitochondria Eve' and 'Y-chromosome Adam' mean? Do you get what the concept is? You know there were other women around, yeah?

And how can you accept the data when the timescales are so far off what you believe (without evidence)? When do you think mitochondrial Eve existed? Why do you accept a method that allows us to determine that there WAS a 'mitochondria Eve' but reject it when the same method, employed by the same type of scientist, tells us that the data says humans split from chimps 5m years ago?

The Concrete Doctor · 11-04-2013 11:08PM

J C wrote: »

Y-chromosome Adam ... all men are descended from one man
... and Mitochrondial Eve ... all people are descended from one woman.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Chromosomal-Adam-Mitochondrial-Eve.html

This is not evidence that Adam existed. It is selective in its conclusions. It could also prove that all men are descended from the same first ape. To deduce from this that therefore Adam existed is about as accurate as I would expect you to get.

If that is the best you can do JC (and you have still offered absolutely zero proof that Noah or the Ark ever existed), I think you had better stick to "It says so in the Bible so what more proof do we need". At least then you would be honest.

The Concrete Doctor · 11-04-2013 11:12PM

J C wrote: »

My 10-year old daughter sometimes sits with me when I write replies to you guys ... she sometimes asks me why ye don't love me, like she does ... but I explain that ye are not unloving to me personally ... just to the ideas of God that I present and represent.

At least that is true! But has she spotted that her Dad is a shocking spoofer!

J C · 11-04-2013 11:20PM

doctoremma wrote: »

You know that they are separated by some 50,000+ years?

The timescales are determined by unproven and unprovable assumptions and regression equations.
Creation Scientists estimate that they both lived less than 10,000 years ago ... living together also helped them to 'get it together' so to speak!!!:)

doctoremma wrote: »

And do you REALLY understand what the terms 'mitochondria Eve' and 'Y-chromosome Adam' mean? Do you get what the concept is? You know there were other women around, yeah?

... now you're making unfounded assumptions ... the evidence shows that we are all descended from one woman and one man ... we cannot prove scientifically what their names were ... for that you gotta have Faith !!!:)

doctoremma wrote: »

And how can you accept the data when the timescales are so far off what you believe (without evidence)? When do you think mitochondrial Eve existed? Why do you accept a method that allows us to determine that there WAS a 'mitochondria Eve' but reject it when the same method, employed by the same type of scientist, tells us that the data says humans split from chimps 5m years ago?

It isn't the same method ... it logically follows that we are all descended from some Human ... and the fact that it is ultimately one Human is very significant, in view of the Christian belief that we are all descended from Eve.
When it come to 'Bubbles' the Chimp there is no evidence that we share a common ancestor ... just a common designer.:)

J C · 11-04-2013 11:25PM

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

At least that is true! But has she spotted that her Dad is a shocking spoofer!

She thinks that I am the 'greatest scientist in the world' ... but then doesn't every 10 year old think that their dad is the greatest ... even though we may only be the second greatest ... or much, much further down the line of greatness!!!:)

Brian Shanahan · 11-04-2013 11:31PM

tim3000 wrote: »

Isn't he somehow involved with science? I think I remember reading it somewhere on this thread?

He claims to be, just like a certain German claimed to be a brilliant strategist.

J C · 11-04-2013 11:34PM

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

I think you had better stick to "It says so in the Bible so what more proof do we need".

It's no harm to have both scientific and Biblical proofs.:pac:

The Concrete Doctor · 11-04-2013 11:53PM

J C wrote: »

It's no harm to have both scientific and Biblical proofs.:pac:

Isn't it interesting that the words proof and spoof are so similar.

You have presented no evidence for the stories of Genises, yet you continue to argue as if you had. What kind of scientist keeps going with zero evidence for his/her position?

The Ark, Noah etc. show us the evidence JC. (Speculation is not evidence)

tim3000 · 12-04-2013 01:31AM

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

He claims to be, just like a certain German claimed to be a brilliant strategist.

Hitler was Austrian I am afraid haha Godwins law in action again ha

tim3000 · 12-04-2013 02:54AM

J C wrote: »

I agree Birds (and mammals) co-existed with Dinosaurs ... its only the Evolutionists who deny this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwa6o-s1Yvs

Here is some thought provoking evidence (presented from an 'old Earth' perspective).

Evidence tends to be fitted into the pardigm of the beholder.

I agree with aspects of Evolution, for example Natural / Sexual Selection (of pre-existing genetic diversity) is a proven scientific fact ... its the idea that Pondkind can evolve into Mankind that I disagree with.
http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-evolution.html

I watched that documentary then I did a quick google search about those foot prints and it seems even the most militant Creationists have abandoned those as false. It seems that there were fake ones cared by the locals and the ones present in the riverbed were shown to be a bipedal dinosaur.

Have you ever heard the phrase everyone is marching out of step except me?

You say you are a scientist, so you must be trained in the scientific method how would you proceed to prove your hypothesis for a young earth?

There is nothing wrong with faith but if having it means that huge chapters of human achievement and ingenuity are closed off to you due to the writings of a single text well then it may be time to re-examine your relationship with your deity. It may interest you to know that I have read 500 odd pages of the bible ( I tried to read it for cover to cover one summer). But I still rely on modern scientific methods to inform me of the natural history of the earth.

doctoremma · 12-04-2013 10:42AM

J C wrote: »

I agree Birds (and mammals) co-existed with Dinosaurs ... its only the Evolutionists who deny this.

No they don't. There are lots of data to show that mammals coexisted with dinosaurs.

J C wrote: »

I know all about ab resistance ... it occurs by loss of genetic information and pre-existing genetic diversity.

You still haven't answered questions about what you mean by "information destruction".

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

Comments