It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Creation, where is the evidence? I see none.
page: 1share:
Many creationists, young earth and old earth, attack evolution to "prove" their point.
I want to see some evidence for ID/creation, not evidence against evolution.
Where is the proof that the universe was created in 7 days?
Where is there evidence for a global flood?
What alternative mechanism exists for describing the millions of species that exist today, if it isn't evolution?
Why does all life on earth contain the same genetic material if it didn't come from a common ancestor?
How can we scientifically prove a supernatural designer?
Please keep in mind, "disproving" evolution has nothing to do with proving creation.
I want to see some evidence for ID/creation, not evidence against evolution.
Where is the proof that the universe was created in 7 days?
Where is there evidence for a global flood?
What alternative mechanism exists for describing the millions of species that exist today, if it isn't evolution?
Why does all life on earth contain the same genetic material if it didn't come from a common ancestor?
How can we scientifically prove a supernatural designer?
Please keep in mind, "disproving" evolution has nothing to do with proving creation.
Normally, as a personal philosiphy, I don't mix religion/spirituallity with politics! However I will chip in my 2 cents on this issue:
1. First, the Bible was written by humans. This leave room for mistakes and misunderstandings.
2. Second, the bible has been translated many times throughout history. Ever heard the saying: "Lost in Translation" ?
Now that I have addressed those issues. Allow me to address some facts:
You Asked: Where is there evidence for a global flood?
Are you aware that back in 1999 and 2000 Archaeologists found a large deposit of Sea Shells out in the Sahara Desert in Africa? If there are Sea Shells there, there Had to be water there at one time because those animals Require water to survive. Also, the Sahara isn't the only place on dry land where sea shells have been found.
You Asked: What alternative mechanism exists for describing the millions of species that exist today, if it isn't evolution?
Creativity! The Creator has imagination, and creativity! Before you attck this as just a crazy theory, allow me to quote the bible: "God Created man in his own image!"
This means we should have some god-like characteristics. Look at the world around you! We live in a world of cars, airplanes, ships, huge building and monuments, cell phones and computers. None of these thing evolved, we created them.
Why are humans the ONLY living creature that has this ability to create and invent on such a large scale? It is Easy to see how creativity is a survival advantage. However, the fact that only one species shows this ability developed to such a high level suggests that it was given to the human species for a reason. Each species was custom design for the role it fills in its paticular envirnment, just like people we design a philips-head screwdriver specifically for one type of screw, or we design a key only to open a single lock.
You Asked: Why does all life on earth contain the same genetic material if it didn't come from a common ancestor?
Some degree of commonality is to be expected! Look how we create, we use some elements of design over and over. For example dirt(including:mud & clay), water and sand are basic building materials. Out of these three elements we get: Concrete, Bricks, motar, glass, ceramics, ect. DID you Know?: the Bricks for your house, the China dinner plates in your cabinet, the heat absorbing tiles on a space shuttle, the inside of your bath tub and the body armor worn by soldiers in combat are all made out of a type of dirt called Clay?
How is that for commonality? The Creator could have done the same thing!
You Asked: How can we scientifically prove a supernatural designer?
The supernatural is tough to prove. However, there are many examples of supernatural forces in our world. In court witnesses are considered evidence. There are millions of people who have reported supernatural events. Explain these?
Here's my proof! Take it or leave it!
1. First, the Bible was written by humans. This leave room for mistakes and misunderstandings.
2. Second, the bible has been translated many times throughout history. Ever heard the saying: "Lost in Translation" ?
Now that I have addressed those issues. Allow me to address some facts:
You Asked: Where is there evidence for a global flood?
Are you aware that back in 1999 and 2000 Archaeologists found a large deposit of Sea Shells out in the Sahara Desert in Africa? If there are Sea Shells there, there Had to be water there at one time because those animals Require water to survive. Also, the Sahara isn't the only place on dry land where sea shells have been found.
You Asked: What alternative mechanism exists for describing the millions of species that exist today, if it isn't evolution?
Creativity! The Creator has imagination, and creativity! Before you attck this as just a crazy theory, allow me to quote the bible: "God Created man in his own image!"
This means we should have some god-like characteristics. Look at the world around you! We live in a world of cars, airplanes, ships, huge building and monuments, cell phones and computers. None of these thing evolved, we created them.
Why are humans the ONLY living creature that has this ability to create and invent on such a large scale? It is Easy to see how creativity is a survival advantage. However, the fact that only one species shows this ability developed to such a high level suggests that it was given to the human species for a reason. Each species was custom design for the role it fills in its paticular envirnment, just like people we design a philips-head screwdriver specifically for one type of screw, or we design a key only to open a single lock.
You Asked: Why does all life on earth contain the same genetic material if it didn't come from a common ancestor?
Some degree of commonality is to be expected! Look how we create, we use some elements of design over and over. For example dirt(including:mud & clay), water and sand are basic building materials. Out of these three elements we get: Concrete, Bricks, motar, glass, ceramics, ect. DID you Know?: the Bricks for your house, the China dinner plates in your cabinet, the heat absorbing tiles on a space shuttle, the inside of your bath tub and the body armor worn by soldiers in combat are all made out of a type of dirt called Clay?
How is that for commonality? The Creator could have done the same thing!
You Asked: How can we scientifically prove a supernatural designer?
The supernatural is tough to prove. However, there are many examples of supernatural forces in our world. In court witnesses are considered evidence. There are millions of people who have reported supernatural events. Explain these?
Here's my proof! Take it or leave it!
1. First, the Bible was written by humans. This leave room for mistakes and misunderstandings.
Exactly,what did humans know about the universe at that time? hardly anything,so they came up with divine stories that satisfied them because they explained the world they lived in.
Creativity! The Creator has imagination, and creativity! Before you attck this as just a crazy theory, allow me to quote the bible: "God Created man in his own image!"
This means we should have some god-like characteristics. Look at the world around you! We live in a world of cars, airplanes, ships, huge building and monuments, cell phones and computers. None of these thing evolved, we created them.
We look more like chimpanzee's than God,which is perfectly logical,as we are a branch of the primate family.
Some degree of commonality is to be expected! Look how we create, we use some elements of design over and over. For example dirt(including:mud & clay), water and sand are basic building materials. Out of these three elements we get: Concrete, Bricks, motar, glass, ceramics, ect. DID you Know?: the Bricks for your house, the China dinner plates in your cabinet, the heat absorbing tiles on a space shuttle, the inside of your bath tub and the body armor worn by soldiers in combat are all made out of a type of dirt called Clay?
How is that for commonality? The Creator could have done the same thing!
There is a HUGE difference in between bricks and life...The fact is that a common ancestor,because no matter what species you pick,the genetic code is universal.Plants genes can be transfered in to bacteria and human ones into mice for example.
Are you aware that back in 1999 and 2000 Archaeologists found a large deposit of Sea Shells out in the Sahara Desert in Africa? If there are Sea Shells there, there Had to be water there at one time because those animals Require water to survive. Also, the Sahara isn't the only place on dry land where sea shells have been found.
That doesn't prove that a flood happened 4000 years ago but that at one stage trough billions of years of earth crust changes,the sahara was once an ocean floor.
[edit on 29-6-2005 by DarkSide]
[edit on 29-6-2005 by DarkSide]
Originally posted by ghost
Normally, as a personal philosiphy, I don't mix religion/spirituallity with politics!
Who mentioned politics?
Why are humans the ONLY living creature that has this ability to create and invent on such a large scale? It is Easy to see how creativity is a survival advantage. However, the fact that only one species shows this ability developed to such a high level suggests that it was given to the human species for a reason. Each species was custom design for the role it fills in its paticular envirnment, just like people we design a philips-head screwdriver specifically for one type of screw, or we design a key only to open a single lock.
If the part in bold is true, then why do some transitional fossils exist? Why do we have dolphin fossils with legs, and giraffe fossils with shorter necks?
Some degree of commonality is to be expected! Look how we create, we use some elements of design over and over. For example dirt(including:mud & clay), water and sand are basic building materials. Out of these three elements we get: Concrete, Bricks, motar, glass, ceramics, ect. DID you Know?: the Bricks for your house, the China dinner plates in your cabinet, the heat absorbing tiles on a space shuttle, the inside of your bath tub and the body armor worn by soldiers in combat are all made out of a type of dirt called Clay?
That is a good example of commonality. However it is a bad analogy. ALL building materials would have to be made of clay for it to fit. There are sixteen different ways that genetic material could possibly combine, yet only one is used in life. In fact you help my argument as all those things made of clay have the same common ancestor, clay.
The supernatural is tough to prove. However, there are many examples of supernatural forces in our world. In court witnesses are considered evidence. There are millions of people who have reported supernatural events. Explain these?
Eye witness testimony is considered evidence in court. Just not very good evidence, as each witness in some cases tells a different story to some degree. I will indeed concede the possibility of supernatural things, however that is far from proof of supernatural things, let alone a supernatural being that created the earth to look billions of years old even though it is only 6-10,000 years old. That will need more evidence than ancient "eye witness" accounts.
Thank you for responding, I would have said something about the sahara but darkside covered it.
Originally posted by ghost
Also, the Sahara isn't the only place on dry land where sea shells have been found.
This evidence, however, is far better explained by changes in sea level over geological time, not a single global flood. Indeed, the geological evidence seems to contradict there ever having been a global flood.
The Creator has imagination, and creativity! Before you attck this as just a crazy theory,
It can not be attacked as any kind of flawed theory, because it is not in anyway a theory. Its a faith based propsition. "God did it". Thats not a theory.
Why are humans the ONLY living creature that has this ability to create and invent on such a large scale?
"God did it" isn't much of an answer.
Some degree of commonality is to be expected!
However, deep homologies are not to be expected. Acutally, why should an omnipotent creator be expected to ever resort to duplication? And surely, if god was creating an entire world, he wouldn't be limited to making everything have not only the same genetic material but the same basic genetic code and the same chemical system for translating that code into proteins. Indeed, we'd expect to see some organisms that aren't made out of proteins and nucleotides and carbohydrates and the like.
Look how we create, we use some elements of design over and over.
However we do not use the same design for different functions. Most things that need wheels have wheels, because wheels do the job. We do not take wheels and use them to make wings. Nature, on the other hand, can't make stuff up by design, and has to work with what its got. So we have flying animals that hvae developed from animals with hands, and those hands have been altered to make wings. THis is not a pre-thoughtout design. And other animals that didn't evolve from handed animals use completely different strucutres to fly, like with insects. So there is no evidence of design here.
The Creator could have done the same thing!
The creator, being omnipotent and omniscient, could've done anything. There is nothing out there that couldn't've been made by an all-powerful supreme being. No matter what the earth and its organisms look like, you can equally say, 'this looks like it was done by god'.
However, there are many examples of supernatural forces in our world.
There are none.
In court witnesses are considered evidence.
The standards of a courtroom are far, far inferior to those used in science. Stories told by people are pretty much useless in science. And you will also notice that no one has ever proved, even in these poor standards courts, that the supernatural exists.
There are millions of people who have reported supernatural events.Explain these?
They are either mistaken or insane. Or they actually saw something supernatural, but there's no way to demonstrate, even for them to rationally demonstrate to themselves, that it was supernatural.
left behind
. In fact you help my argument as all those things made of clay have the same common ancestor, clay.
This actually does nothing for the arguement, tho it might appear to. Clays and building materials are not living things that reproduce in the wild. Thats the big thing that lets us say 'planes and buildings are designed' but that organisms weren't.
darkside
the genetic code is universal.Plants genes can be transfered in to bacteria and human ones into mice for example
I would jus like to distinguish between some things here. The genetic material is universal, dna and rna and the like. The code, the sequence of nucleic acids that 'say' a particular peptide, is not precisely universal. Some organisms have a slightly different 'code', they read "AAA" to mean a different peptide than other organisms.
But the fact that even when the codes are different, that they are practically the same, is far better explained by evolution than by divine planning, and it also remains that they are all using nucleic acids to make up their genetic materials, rather than, say, chains of sulfur and phosphate or any other imaginable things.
Here's my proof! Take it or leave it!
Does anyone else care to step forward with answers to my above questions. I will treat any scientific proof with respect.
Anyone have evidence for creation?
Anyone have evidence for Intelligent Design?
Anyone have evidence for creation?
Anyone have evidence for Intelligent Design?
No transitional fossils! Wait, there are some.... I never heard of the dolphin with legs but have heard of giraffes with short necks. Also, with
certain birds, they grew longer necks, shorter wings, whatever, and the old species died out. Or area evolution, like Osprey to Sharp Shinned
Hawk.
The Sharp Shinned Hawk, it has long legs and short wings, one of the few hawks that has to flap almost constantly unlike most that hover. But why? It hunts in swamps, in cramped trees, vines, and other things that regular/long wings would make it impossible to fly in. A Osprey can't fly in the same area cause it is a soar type bird of prey, with regular/long wings.
But a Sharp Shinned Hawk can't hunt the same prey an Osprey can. Why? Osprey eyes are special, they see through the water. What do I mean? The Osprey does not see reflection, it's eyes see through any reflection from the sun and into the water for fish. Humans see shiny water/whatever is reflecting, Osprey sees nothing but the fish below it.
Both birds, both have common ancestor, but evolution made them different, and that is more proof of evolution.
Hmmm, Earth is only 6,000 years old!!!! Well, it isn't, only ignoramuses think this. Anyone smart knows it is older. Something that is a million light years away would not be seen by us, but we can, therefor not 6,000 years old.
Alright, bible says so! But it also says Giants existed. And Jesus could fly after being dead for three days, and that heaven is in the sky, and hell is underground, and the earth is flat, but all those are wrong.
Thinking, no, what other lies do they use?
The Sharp Shinned Hawk, it has long legs and short wings, one of the few hawks that has to flap almost constantly unlike most that hover. But why? It hunts in swamps, in cramped trees, vines, and other things that regular/long wings would make it impossible to fly in. A Osprey can't fly in the same area cause it is a soar type bird of prey, with regular/long wings.
But a Sharp Shinned Hawk can't hunt the same prey an Osprey can. Why? Osprey eyes are special, they see through the water. What do I mean? The Osprey does not see reflection, it's eyes see through any reflection from the sun and into the water for fish. Humans see shiny water/whatever is reflecting, Osprey sees nothing but the fish below it.
Both birds, both have common ancestor, but evolution made them different, and that is more proof of evolution.
Hmmm, Earth is only 6,000 years old!!!! Well, it isn't, only ignoramuses think this. Anyone smart knows it is older. Something that is a million light years away would not be seen by us, but we can, therefor not 6,000 years old.
Alright, bible says so! But it also says Giants existed. And Jesus could fly after being dead for three days, and that heaven is in the sky, and hell is underground, and the earth is flat, but all those are wrong.
Thinking, no, what other lies do they use?
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Originally posted by ghost
Why are humans the ONLY living creature that has this ability to create and invent on such a large scale? It is Easy to see how creativity is a survival advantage. However, the fact that only one species shows this ability developed to such a high level suggests that it was given to the human species for a reason. Each species was custom design for the role it fills in its paticular envirnment, just like people we design a philips-head screwdriver specifically for one type of screw, or we design a key only to open a single lock.
If the part in bold is true, then why do some transitional fossils exist? Why do we have dolphin fossils with legs, and giraffe fossils with shorter necks?
Conditions change over time. Ideas are changed and inporved upon! Some ideas work great, others are not what we hoped they would be, so we go back and try again.Let me go Back to my point about how humans create: We invented the Car, right? If cars were invented, why do today's cars look a lot different then the first Model T? After all, the purpose of the car has not changed, we still use them to get around!
Originally posted by Nygdan
They are either mistaken or insane. Or they actually saw something supernatural, but there's no way to demonstrate, even for them to rationally demonstrate to themselves, that it was supernatural.
No way to Demonstrate it? Ok let me give you a few scientificly documented examples of seamingly supernatral events.
Case 1: Gettyburg, PA- Civil War Battlefeild
Test: a team of Scientist studying reports of paranomal activity, set up electronic recording devices on the battlefeild to look for evidence of determine if anything was occuring there or not.
Result: Low light video cameras picked up fussie images of poeple on the battle feild and in the building during the night despite the fact that scientist who where there, never saw anyone. Poloroid Photograph of some areas of the battle feild, such as Devil's Den and Little Roundtop, show streaks of light that travle across the image in a zig-zag pattern(The laws of phisics tell us that light travels in a straight line). Tape recorders have pickup footstep, moans, yelling, gun shots and even cannon fire around little roundtop during the night, when the part was close.
Case 2: Bremuda Triangle!
Test: Compasses and scientic inturment were taken to the area in 1976.
Result: Compasses stop pointing to magnetic North. Eletronic such as Radios, Video cameras, and ship board Radar quit working when they entered the area, as soon as they left, these object came back on by themselves. Later diagnostics found nothing wrong with the equipment.
Insane? I've never heard of a Video Camera with Schizphrania have you?
great thread ! the only proof creationists have is "its in the bible, and I believe it"
I bet all you will get is argumenta against evolution, as proof of creationism does not exist.
Very true Syrinx.
From all the so called evidence for creation I've seen in other threads, I'm suprised by the silence from the creationists.
I wonder though, is it because there is no evidence, or is it that they are afraid to discuss the truth about their claims.
Looking at some of the anti-evolution threads, I would have been better off just insulting christianity as much as possible, and misspelling everything.
Then I'd get responses.
From all the so called evidence for creation I've seen in other threads, I'm suprised by the silence from the creationists.
I wonder though, is it because there is no evidence, or is it that they are afraid to discuss the truth about their claims.
Looking at some of the anti-evolution threads, I would have been better off just insulting christianity as much as possible, and misspelling everything.
Then I'd get responses.
Ignorance is bliss? No, thats religon.
Also, no proof of creation. What they do is "Darwin spelled this word wrong, it's Ietonit, not Ietonet, so burn every copy of 'The Origin of Species' until none are left."
One thing Nazis and christians have in common, both love to burn books. What do I mean?
Christians, and Nazis, are/were known for burning books. Christians today burn The Davinci Code, Harry Potter Series, and biology/science books. Nazis burned others, but since this is about christians gonna leave the Nazis alone.
Still love Channel 6, not 62 or 74, although they probably show the same show, it was called "The Evils of Harry Potter" it was all about christians buying every Potter book and burning them. Then they cut away to some christian whining about something or other, then back to this huge pile of books burning. But it was steange, goes from like Little Rock to Memphis to Atlanta, and all of them have christians buying thousands of books just so they can burn them.
I still don't understand how people in todays age can be so ignorant of the real world. I understand some 70-100+ years old person screaming about blacks voting is the devil, or women being more then baby factories like they should be according to the bible is evil, but you have younger people who went to school and some college yet are busy going around dousing things in gasoline and burning them because they aren't 10 chapters of worshipping a mass murderer.
EDIT
Anyways, was gone for a few days, nice little vacation, got so much stuff done you wouldn't believe it! But now I am back, and my real life will go down the crapper again.
[edit on 2-7-2005 by James the Lesser]
Also, no proof of creation. What they do is "Darwin spelled this word wrong, it's Ietonit, not Ietonet, so burn every copy of 'The Origin of Species' until none are left."
One thing Nazis and christians have in common, both love to burn books. What do I mean?
Christians, and Nazis, are/were known for burning books. Christians today burn The Davinci Code, Harry Potter Series, and biology/science books. Nazis burned others, but since this is about christians gonna leave the Nazis alone.
Still love Channel 6, not 62 or 74, although they probably show the same show, it was called "The Evils of Harry Potter" it was all about christians buying every Potter book and burning them. Then they cut away to some christian whining about something or other, then back to this huge pile of books burning. But it was steange, goes from like Little Rock to Memphis to Atlanta, and all of them have christians buying thousands of books just so they can burn them.
I still don't understand how people in todays age can be so ignorant of the real world. I understand some 70-100+ years old person screaming about blacks voting is the devil, or women being more then baby factories like they should be according to the bible is evil, but you have younger people who went to school and some college yet are busy going around dousing things in gasoline and burning them because they aren't 10 chapters of worshipping a mass murderer.
EDIT
Anyways, was gone for a few days, nice little vacation, got so much stuff done you wouldn't believe it! But now I am back, and my real life will go down the crapper again.
[edit on 2-7-2005 by James the Lesser]
Darn I was really hoping the creationists would post some of the evidence backing up their "scientific" theory thats on par with evolution. The
silence speaks volumes.
shells have also be found on mountain tops. wow...that means water must have been up that high, the same as the sahara desert would have been under
water because sea shells were found there... no!
sea shells on mountain tops mean that the mountain top was once at sea level or below sea level. we all know mountain aren't created in 10,000 years, so this also points toward the earth being a great age. im not going to say the sahara wasn't once under water, because it could have been. however, this is not proof that there was a great flood, hence it does not prove the creationist theory. a thousand years ago, or maybe slightly more you could walk from england to france, the english channel was land. the earth changes, so the sahara could have been under water at one point in time, yet this in no way proves noah's ark or the creationist theory.
i read the first post and thought, right we'll have loads of christians proving how their 6 days creation is fact and how noah's ark is fact. the only two arguements ive heard for these is that 'it only took 6 days because god is endless, hence time has no meaning'...so why say its 6 days if with god time has no meaning? people also say that the grand canyon was eroded by noah's flood. again lets ask where's the proof? where's the facts? i haven't seen any. i haven't been told any, and christians can't come up with any. its pathetic.
sea shells on mountain tops mean that the mountain top was once at sea level or below sea level. we all know mountain aren't created in 10,000 years, so this also points toward the earth being a great age. im not going to say the sahara wasn't once under water, because it could have been. however, this is not proof that there was a great flood, hence it does not prove the creationist theory. a thousand years ago, or maybe slightly more you could walk from england to france, the english channel was land. the earth changes, so the sahara could have been under water at one point in time, yet this in no way proves noah's ark or the creationist theory.
i read the first post and thought, right we'll have loads of christians proving how their 6 days creation is fact and how noah's ark is fact. the only two arguements ive heard for these is that 'it only took 6 days because god is endless, hence time has no meaning'...so why say its 6 days if with god time has no meaning? people also say that the grand canyon was eroded by noah's flood. again lets ask where's the proof? where's the facts? i haven't seen any. i haven't been told any, and christians can't come up with any. its pathetic.
I find it ironic that a post discrediting evolution will continue on for pages, while one asking for creationist's to support their theories with
scientific evidence doesn't even pass one.
flu virus. same virus, just changes from time to time otherwise we would have become amune to it. this change its the virus' evolution. if evolution
works for virus', then it works for plants and animals as well. in virus' the change is quicker as it is less complex, yet it takes many more years
for any noticable change in animals.
you wanted proof of evolution... the flu virus is proof. it's proof that organisms have to change to suit their surroundings and evolve to survive. this is what the virus does time and time again. how can you deny evolution, when that evidence is staring you right in your face?
you wanted proof of evolution... the flu virus is proof. it's proof that organisms have to change to suit their surroundings and evolve to survive. this is what the virus does time and time again. how can you deny evolution, when that evidence is staring you right in your face?
if you are open minded you will read all of this post.
since I was challenged into joining this thread. I have a few questions.
but before I ask them let me educate you on a few things
II Peter 3:3 says "knowing this first, there will come in the last days scoffers walking after their own lusts, saying where is the promise of his coming? for since the father fell asleep all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. for this they are willingly ignorant(dumb on purpose) that by the word of God the heavens were of old and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water and perished" you have to have help to be dumb enough to believe that the earth is millions of years old.
I believe in the Bible... if you read the bible and understand it thoroughly, and you do your research on evolution, you will find that they are opposites. one of them is wrong. anyways...
there are SIX different meanings to the word Evolution...
1. Cosmic Evolution- The origin of time space and matter. (Big Bang), there is no proof for this theory, but it is stated that it is a fact and it happens every 100 billion years.
2. Chemical Evolution- All 92 elements plus the synthetic ones evolve somehow. Energy is needed for fusion to occur. Fusion does occur in stars, but you cannot fuse past iron. but there is a chicken and the egg problem. you need stars for the energy, but you need the chemicals to make up the stars.
3. Stellar Evolution- Stars and planets evolving. no one has ever seen a star form, nor have they witnessed a planet form.
4. Organic Evolution- Life evolving from non-living material. this was proven wrong a while ago. life begats life. and it was even proved in the lab.
5. Macro Evolution- Evolving from one KIND of animal to a different KIND of animal. example: from a cat to a dog.
6. Micro Evolution- Variation within the KIND of animal.
you need the first three in order to get the last three. you cant just skip the first three and end up with the last three.
now it is a fact that there are variations within different KINDS of animals. but you will never get Macro Evolution. I dont know what exactly people mean when they say speciation, but you can crossbreed whatever you want. but you will always get the same KIND you started with maybe a different species but the same KIND. you will never get a tomatoe to grow on your cornstalk. and you will never produce a non-dog from a dog.
the first FIVE are religious. no one has ever had scientific proof for any of these.
How does a big bang occur and somehow go against "the law of conservation of angular momentum"? the law states, that if a spinning object breaks apart in a frictionless environment, the pieces that break off will be spinning in the same direction as the original object. that is one law it goes against.
a quote from a science text book... HBJ General Science pg 362
"in the realm if the universe, nothing really means nothing. not only would matter and energy disappear but also space and time. however physicists theorize that from this state of nothingness, the universe began in a gigantic explosion about 16.5 billion years ago. (by the way, that would have been a long long time ago).
another quote from Discover Magizine 2002, the article was titled "where did everything come from?"
it read "the universe bursted in to something from absolutely nothing-zero, nada. as it got bigger it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere. how is that possible?"
my theory, its not.
Alan Guth quoted in Scientific America on page 128 from 1996 "the observable universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal region. its then temping to go on one step further ans speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing."
it also goes against the first law of thermal dynamics
"matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed"
it also goes against the 2nd law of thermal dynamics that states
"everything tends toward disorder"
life cannot be generated from non-living material. no one has ever made life from non-living material. there was a scientist that did make a virus, but there was a few hidden facts about that. first off, a virus is not a living thing by definition, and second, he had to insert that virus into a dead cell. virus' become alive once they find a host. Darwin thought that a cell in your body was just a little simple sack of jelly. but now we know that it is very complex. each one more complex than the space shuttle.
Earnie Haeckel claimed during his confession "that spontaneous generation must be true, not because it has been proven in the laboratory, but because othewise...it would be necessary to believe in a creator"
if you look in the lowest layes of the geologic collumn, even the lowest layers are claimed to having oxygen in those layers.
miller and urey tried to make life in the lab. they didnt tell you that they excluded oxygen, excluding oxygen prevents their product from oxidizing. their results actually turned out to be 98 percent toxic to life (85% TAR and 13% CARBOXYLIC ACID) and 2 percent amino acids. now if this occured in water, then UV light would be totally blocked so that the process could take place. however, amino acids bond quicker to water than to eachother. so that doesnt work. and if it occured ouTside of water, the bonding could happen but the product would oxydize with oxygen, without oxygen there would be no ozone to block enough UV light.
the earths magnetic field has lost 6% within the past 150 years. indicating that the earth is less than 25,000 years old. go back 25-30 thousand even with a reversed magnetic field. and the heat generated from the magnetic field would have destroyed life on earth. if you look at the pangea theory, look at age 1. when all the continents fit together like a puzzle. central america does not exist in that phase, but somehow it just pops up at phase four which is what we see today. now let me point something out. lets say you could take all the water out of the oceans. you will notice that there is dirt underneath where the water was. the continents are not lilly pads floating around in the bath tub. they are connected by the crust. now just because the continents are shifting doesnt mean they have always been shifting. check out Walt Browns hydroplate theory.
The earth is spinning abotu 1,000 MPH at the equator but it is also slowing down at the rate of 1/1000 of a second every day. which means that used to be going faster. now if you go back 6,000 years when adam and eve were in the garden of eden, the days would be a little shorter, but not enough to notice. adam didnt have a watch anyways(as far as we know). but the big bang theory says that the earth is billions of years old. now thats a problem. if you go back too far, the coriolis effect would cause the winds to be over 5,000 miles per hour because of the earths fast rotation.
the sehara desert expands through a process called desertification. but its been calculated that the sehara desert is less than 4000 years old. REFERENCE is from HBJ Earth Science pg 277.
well lets just say that there was a flood that destroyed the whole earth and covered every moutain top and every piece of land, that fits my theory. the bible says that the beginning was about 6,000 years ago. and the flood was about 4400 years ago. fits my theory just fine. now if the earth is billions of years old, how come there isnt a desert older than 4000 years old? why isnt there one that is 10,000 years old? the evolution theory has many flaws and is based off of many assumptions.
the so-called magnetic reversals at the mid-atlantic ridge are flase. there are no magnetic reversals. there are areas of stronger and weaker magnetic strength, but no where will a north-seeking compass point south. there is only areas of stronger and weaker magnetism.
Annual Ice rings are not a indication of one ring per year. research the "lost squadron" that got lost in WWII and crash landed in greenland.
in 1990 they found them using radar. the airplanes were down there for 48 years. they were 263 feet below the surface. but while melting through the ice, hundreds of ice rings were melted through. a guy names Bob Cardin was on the team that dilled down to the aircraft. check out www.thelostsquadron.com
the oldest reef in the world in located in australia, its called the great barrier reef. they estimated that the reef is less then 4000 years old. this was based off of a 20 year observation.
the oldest languages are known to be less than 6,000 years old. the chinese calandar starts back around at the end of noahs flood instead of like our calander where we start about 2000 years ago when Jesus was here.
Fossils do not count for evidence for evolution. if you want to think they do, you think that all you want. but they dont count. they cant. what can you conclude from observing a fossil? it died... thats about it. what else can you observe?
they used to teach the humans and the chimp are very similar in DNA. well the difference between the two is a difference of 1.6 percent. but if you click on this link. you will find that there is no way for humans to evolve from the chimp or the chimp from the human. its states "Now the genetic difference between human and his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6%. That doesn't sound like much, but calculated out, that is a gap of at least 48,000,000 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal; there is no possibility of change." another thing to think about is what darwin said... on the same site, there is a quote from his book that states. "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." but Dr. Barney Maddox is probably a crack addict or something. evolutionists will probably find some reason to discredit him.
here is a link to that page Dr Maddox is on
www.trueauthority.com...
the geologic collumn was thought up in 1830, long before radiometric dating was ever invented. how this happened, it was thought up. Charles Lyell made up the whole thing. see he ASSUMED that each layer is a different age. how did he know that each layer was a different age? he didnt he wanted to make people think that the earth was millions of years old. so he divided the earth into layers and gave each layer an index fossil. this was all based on the assumption that the earth is millions of years old and each layer was a different age. how he knows is anyones guess. the layers of strata are dated by the fossils they find in that layer. and the fossils are dated by which layer of strata they come from. this is called circular reasoning.
grand canyon did not form by the colorado river. the colorado river is what is draining through what we call grand canyon. its more probable that grand canyon formed during the flood with LOTS of water and LITTLE time.
the scientists say that the canyon on mars that is much bigger than grand canyon, and there is no water on mars as far as we know. there is a bunch of frozen CO2(dry ice)
here is why.
the top of grand canyon is higher than the bottom, the river flows through the bottom. the river enters the canyon at 2800 elevation. and the river exits the canyon at 1800 feet elevation. for about 270 miles through the snow ridge of grand canyon, the top of grand canyon reaches elevation levels of 6900ft to 8500ft elevation. now it is a fact that grand canyon exists. but are you trying to tell me that the colorado river cut through multiple layers of rock by flowing uphill and made that canyon over millions of years. yeah ill bet that water used to be able to flow uphill, millions of years ago. and plus, they cant find the delta for grand canyon, no one knows where it is.
how does the evolutionist explain polystrata fossils?
if you get a petrified tree standing up running through multiple layers how do you explain that? well I have a theory about that. I believe that there was a flood about 4400 years ago, and so do many cultures. there are at least 200 surviving legends on a worldwide flood. here is one link I found
www.nwcreation.net...
but anyways, lets do a little science here... if you get sand with different colors representing different densitys and put that in water, shake it up, you will get different layers in a couple of seconds. now lets say we put a few twigs in there representing trees, shake it up again, an you will get those twigs standing up and or in some weird position. but you will get some connecting many layers. this is exactly what would happen in a great flood. you would get many layers of strata and many things between them and many things such as trees runing through them. the evolution theory states that each layer is a different age. but there are no signes of erosion between the layers. now when they find a petrified tree upside down, the evolutionist has no explanation for this. how fo you get a tree upsidedown running through multiple layers. I have a theory about that. see about 4400 years ago, there was a great flood. and mixed up a bunch of dirt along with trees, and that how the trees got there upsidedown. and no tree is going to stand there for millions of years waiting for layers to form around them without rotting away. It does not take things very long to petrify.
Ok Evolutionist... give me a good scientific reason why trees are running through multiple layers of strata, you cant have a tree stand there waiting for millions of years for layers to form around it. trees dont grow through multiple layers of rock looking for sunlight. and trees cannot petrify in the air, they oxidize. and there are no erosion marks between the layers. wonder why...
see the bible says that God created the heaven and the earth roughly 6,000 years ago. and everything in it was good.
Man wrecked this world, man brought death by sin, so yes, if adam never sinned, no one would have ever died. The bible also says that God made us of one blood, meaning that all humans are equal. no matter what color your skin is, we are all equal. if you thnk that you are better than someone because of the color of your skin, you have personal problems.
the bible also teaches that there was a layer of water above the atmostphere, how it was held up is supported a theory, such as the meisner effect. if it were ice, the magnetic field would have held it up because supercold ice is magnetic. if it were in some other form other than ice, I dont really know how else it could have been help up. but this layer of water, if it were ice, could have cause hyperbarrick conditions in the earths atmosphere, explaining the existance of dinosaurs, and larger animals and humans.
Now if God created everything. he could have made the star light visible to whatever is on earth. he could have made anything that we see today.
Evolution wants us to believe that we came from soup that came from rocks that got rained on. so ultimately we came from a rock according to the evolution theory. like I said before there are six different meanings to the word evolution. you have to have the first three in order to get the last three. so no matter what you may think, the first three have a lot to do with the last three, because without the first three, you cant have the last three.
the only thing darwin ever observed was MIRCO evolution. this term confuses people. it should be called just a variation within the kind of animal. the bible does not go against this. the bible says in Genesis "they will bring forth after their KIND" not species. and you can have many species within one KIND. the bible has nothing against MICRO evolution.
and this also applies to plants. the bible says that they will bring forth after their KIND.
you can crossbreed corn all you want... you will always get corn. you will never get anything else but corn. maybe different species, but nothing other than corn.
so what evidence is there for evolution?
well I have yet to see some.
and by the way... if there is a mutation caused by a scrambling of the genetic code and it is actually beneficial. that is no proof for evolution. was any information added? no. now yes it was copied more than it was supposed to be, but nothing NEW was added. mutations are a mixing of existing information. often the way new species come to be, is by parts of the gene code that were not used before now being used. here is an example. some people already have in their genes, a resistance to penicillin. there were some people found burried in ice that were resistant to penicillin before it was even discovered.
check out what darwin said. he siad on page 170 of his book. basically that all all plants and all animals are related, meaning, birds are related to bananas.
Richard C Lewontin stated in a text book that "Evolution is a fact"... he went further to explain what he meant by evolution. he said, "bird rose from non-birds and humans from non-humans, anyone who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts..."
Spiders are able to make seven different types of webs, which they use for different purposes, such as for catching prey, for walking on, for anchor points, for wrapping prey, and for other functions. It is ridiculous to suggest that a creature could randomly develop the irreducibly complex apparatuses to make and eject one type of webbing, but to make seven types is mind-boggling. An irreducibly complex apparatus is something that could not operate if even one of its components were missing. The chances of something of this nature to appear by accident with all of its necessary parts intact are essentially zero.
This amazing material is five times stronger than steel thread, but it will stretch to over four times its length without breaking. 1 It has been used to make bulletproof vests, it can be used to close bleeding wounds, and scientists have produced nothing with which it can be compared. Furthermore, spiders have an amazing range of talents that for which they utilize their webs. Making a regular spider web is amazing enough. Many spiders make a complex web every day and eat it later as it starts to wear, after which they make a new web. How do they know how to produce such elaborate structures without instruction? It does not stop there. Harun Yahya has provided the following astonishing examples of how spiders use their webs and camouflage for hunting. 2
Trapdoor spiders build a door with their webs and attach a web hinge to them so that they may close them and remain concealed until prey comes along. Did this happen by chance, and how did it get to be a trait of all trapdoor spiders? Bola spiders make a bola out of their webs and even put small weights on them. They are quite accurate too. They wait until a moth flies by, then they throw this bola like a lasso with great accuracy and reel in their prey. I had to practice a while with my bola from Argentina in order to get reasonably good with it. The bola spider did not have to practice. He would have starved to death if he did have to do so. This could not be accounted for by evolutionary theory. The same question could be asked about Dinopsis spiders. These amazing spiders make nets out of their webs that they throw over their prey. Their mothers are not around to teach them how to do this. How does such a skill evolve?
Even more amazing are bell spiders. The bell spider makes a diving bell out of its web and actually uses it to hunt under water. How did this entire species figure out how to do this if their creator had not implanted in them the knowledge required?
There is a species of spiders called Myrmarachne that look almost like ants, except for having eight legs. They will stand around waving their two extra legs in the air to resemble antennae until an ant comes close so that they can pounce on them. How did such a small creature end up looking like an ant, and with their minute brains how do they know how to utilize this resemblance so ingeniously?
There are a number of spider kinds that surf the sky as babies. These kinds of spiders will spin a thin strand of web and leap into the wind where they can sometimes be carried thousands of feet into the air and for hundreds of miles. They are able to hang on to their threads and ride them like air surfboards. Scientists have spotted baby spiders as high as 16,000 feet in the air. This explains why spiders are often one of the first creatures to inhabit volcanic islands. How did they learn this skill on their own? 3
A very lengthy book could be written on the miraculous nature of spiders, but I'll stop here for now. Spiders are amazingly sophisticated creations, and give us many reasons to stand in awe of God's creativity.
Spiders are able to make seven different types of webs, which they use for different purposes, such as for catching prey, for walking on, for anchor points, for wrapping prey, and for other functions. It is ridiculous to suggest that a creature could randomly develop the irreducibly complex apparatuses to make and eject one type of webbing, but to make seven types is mind-boggling. An irreducibly complex apparatus is something that could not operate if even one of its components were missing. The chances of something of this nature to appear by accident with all of its necessary parts intact are essentially zero.
This amazing material is five times stronger than steel thread, but it will stretch to over four times its length without breaking. 1 It has been used to make bulletproof vests, it can be used to close bleeding wounds, and scientists have produced nothing with which it can be compared. Furthermore, spiders have an amazing range of talents that for which they utilize their webs. Making a regular spider web is amazing enough. Many spiders make a complex web every day and eat it later as it starts to wear, after which they make a new web. How do they know how to produce such elaborate structures without instruction? It does not stop there. Harun Yahya has provided the following astonishing examples of how spiders use their webs and camouflage for hunting. 2
Trapdoor spiders build a door with their webs and attach a web hinge to them so that they may close them and remain concealed until prey comes along. Did this happen by chance, and how did it get to be a trait of all trapdoor spiders? Bola spiders make a bola out of their webs and even put small weights on them. They are quite accurate too. They wait until a moth flies by, then they throw this bola like a lasso with great accuracy and reel in their prey. I had to practice a while with my bola from Argentina in order to get reasonably good with it. The bola spider did not have to practice. He would have starved to death if he did have to do so. This could not be accounted for by evolutionary theory. The same question could be asked about Dinopsis spiders. These amazing spiders make nets out of their webs that they throw over their prey. Their mothers are not around to teach them how to do this. How does such a skill evolve?
Even more amazing are bell spiders. The bell spider makes a diving bell out of its web and actually uses it to hunt under water. How did this entire species figure out how to do this if their creator had not implanted in them the knowledge required?
There is a species of spiders called Myrmarachne that look almost like ants, except for having eight legs. They will stand around waving their two extra legs in the air to resemble antennae until an ant comes close so that they can pounce on them. How did such a small creature end up looking like an ant, and with their minute brains how do they know how to utilize this resemblance so ingeniously?
There are a number of spider kinds that surf the sky as babies. These kinds of spiders will spin a thin strand of web and leap into the wind where they can sometimes be carried thousands of feet into the air and for hundreds of miles. They are able to hang on to their threads and ride them like air surfboards. Scientists have spotted baby spiders as high as 16,000 feet in the air. This explains why spiders are often one of the first creatures to inhabit volcanic islands. How did they learn this skill on their own? 3
A very lengthy book could be written on the miraculous nature of spiders, but I'll stop here for now. Spiders are amazingly sophisticated creations, and give us many reasons to stand in awe of God's creativity.
Any tracker, from beginner to expert, knows the difference between canine and feline tracks and would never mistake one for the other. Dogs leave nail marks in all of their tracks, while cats never do. This in itself may not seem too striking, but it is a wonderful fact that helps make evolutionists look stupid. What amazes me so much is that I have read numerous books on tracking in which the author makes some idiotic allusion to our distant past as apes, or to the evolution of four-legged critters. All they need to do to know that this is idiotic is to look at the tracks of dogs and cats, but I guess that they are missing the forest due to the trees.
Cats have retractable claws and dogs do not. Dogs rely on their teeth to hunt, while cats rely mostly on their claws. A dog only uses its claws to help it with its footwork when it is walking or running, digging, holding pray once its caught and scratching fleas and such. They do not need to be sharp like the cat's claws so they do not need protection. What is amazing is that the cat's claws are retracted to protect them when they are not in use and they are only ejected when the cat needs to use them to hunt, defend itself, climb or for sharpening purposes. This requires specialized muscles to extend the claws like a switchblade and a specially designed sheath for these claws for when they are drawn back. It is absurd to assume that these specially designed features would have evolved by chance.
What did the cats do before they "evolved" the amazing feature of having retractable claws. They would have to have behaved like dogs. What made them decide to behave like cats and how did mindless Mother Nature respond by sticking those specially designed muscles in their paws? Was it by chance that these muscles and sheaths showed up at the same time? Did they think them into existence? Did they develop gradually over millions of years? If the latter is the case, how did they get along during the transition? Of course, they both do just fine as they were made, so why would it have been necessary for the design of either to be changed? It does not take a lot of brains to realize that they are both obviously well designed (especially dogs -- no offence to any of you who might be cat people). All of the alternatives are preposterous.
darwin also said... in his book( not sure on what page) but he even questioned his own theory, he basically stated that its hard to even imagine how his theory could have worked. when I get the page number I will let you know what it is... if you really want to know, its in his book. "the origin of species" (by the way, thats not the whole title to the book). I think its on page 268 or something like that.. im not sure. thats actually just a guess. Ive seen it somewhere. I just cant rememebr where.
anyways... moving along to other things. VESTIGAL organs or body parts would not be supportive to evolution, vestigal things is losing something not gaining. as far as I can figure out. there is not one vestigal piece found in any organism. the human tailbone is not vestigal, if you think yours is, I will pay to have yours removed. the appendix is not vestigal, it is true you can live without it, but that does not mean, you do not need it. you can live without both your eyes, arms and legs, but that doesn prove you dont need them.
i think I have typed enough for now. my brain kinda hurts. I had to pull a lot of knowledge from a lot of places and a lot of truth from a lot of places.
the bible says that God created everything. and I believe that to be true.
the bible also says that God is al-powerful. meaning he is not limited. he is not limited by time space of matter. God can be outside of time he can also be in time. God can be outside of space totally. as well as matter.
Evolution is a religion. no one can ever prove that COSMIC, CHEMICAL, STELLAR, ORGANIC or MACRO evolution can take place.
Evolution is not a part of science. and if you want me to admit that creation is not a part of science, then I will admit that. both theories are religious, now how about you admit that your theory is not a part of science and teach is to those who want to learn about it. Evolution has no scientific evidence to back it up. creation on the other hand does. I believe that I have given you a few points of evidence in this post.
Science is things that we can observe, and test and demonstrate.
Evolution does not fit in this category. you have to believe that it all happened. just like I bellieve that God created everything.
Atheism is a religion, because you have to believe that there is no god.
evolution falls in with atheists, both of them support eachother as well. evolutionists believe that everything evolved by uniformitarian processes. and atheists believe in Evolution because its the only thing that sounds good enough to explain our existance. but the fact is, evolution is not scientific.
it is a tax supported RELIGION
since I was challenged into joining this thread. I have a few questions.
but before I ask them let me educate you on a few things
II Peter 3:3 says "knowing this first, there will come in the last days scoffers walking after their own lusts, saying where is the promise of his coming? for since the father fell asleep all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. for this they are willingly ignorant(dumb on purpose) that by the word of God the heavens were of old and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water and perished" you have to have help to be dumb enough to believe that the earth is millions of years old.
I believe in the Bible... if you read the bible and understand it thoroughly, and you do your research on evolution, you will find that they are opposites. one of them is wrong. anyways...
there are SIX different meanings to the word Evolution...
1. Cosmic Evolution- The origin of time space and matter. (Big Bang), there is no proof for this theory, but it is stated that it is a fact and it happens every 100 billion years.
2. Chemical Evolution- All 92 elements plus the synthetic ones evolve somehow. Energy is needed for fusion to occur. Fusion does occur in stars, but you cannot fuse past iron. but there is a chicken and the egg problem. you need stars for the energy, but you need the chemicals to make up the stars.
3. Stellar Evolution- Stars and planets evolving. no one has ever seen a star form, nor have they witnessed a planet form.
4. Organic Evolution- Life evolving from non-living material. this was proven wrong a while ago. life begats life. and it was even proved in the lab.
5. Macro Evolution- Evolving from one KIND of animal to a different KIND of animal. example: from a cat to a dog.
6. Micro Evolution- Variation within the KIND of animal.
you need the first three in order to get the last three. you cant just skip the first three and end up with the last three.
now it is a fact that there are variations within different KINDS of animals. but you will never get Macro Evolution. I dont know what exactly people mean when they say speciation, but you can crossbreed whatever you want. but you will always get the same KIND you started with maybe a different species but the same KIND. you will never get a tomatoe to grow on your cornstalk. and you will never produce a non-dog from a dog.
the first FIVE are religious. no one has ever had scientific proof for any of these.
How does a big bang occur and somehow go against "the law of conservation of angular momentum"? the law states, that if a spinning object breaks apart in a frictionless environment, the pieces that break off will be spinning in the same direction as the original object. that is one law it goes against.
a quote from a science text book... HBJ General Science pg 362
"in the realm if the universe, nothing really means nothing. not only would matter and energy disappear but also space and time. however physicists theorize that from this state of nothingness, the universe began in a gigantic explosion about 16.5 billion years ago. (by the way, that would have been a long long time ago).
another quote from Discover Magizine 2002, the article was titled "where did everything come from?"
it read "the universe bursted in to something from absolutely nothing-zero, nada. as it got bigger it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere. how is that possible?"
my theory, its not.
Alan Guth quoted in Scientific America on page 128 from 1996 "the observable universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal region. its then temping to go on one step further ans speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing."
it also goes against the first law of thermal dynamics
"matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed"
it also goes against the 2nd law of thermal dynamics that states
"everything tends toward disorder"
life cannot be generated from non-living material. no one has ever made life from non-living material. there was a scientist that did make a virus, but there was a few hidden facts about that. first off, a virus is not a living thing by definition, and second, he had to insert that virus into a dead cell. virus' become alive once they find a host. Darwin thought that a cell in your body was just a little simple sack of jelly. but now we know that it is very complex. each one more complex than the space shuttle.
Earnie Haeckel claimed during his confession "that spontaneous generation must be true, not because it has been proven in the laboratory, but because othewise...it would be necessary to believe in a creator"
if you look in the lowest layes of the geologic collumn, even the lowest layers are claimed to having oxygen in those layers.
miller and urey tried to make life in the lab. they didnt tell you that they excluded oxygen, excluding oxygen prevents their product from oxidizing. their results actually turned out to be 98 percent toxic to life (85% TAR and 13% CARBOXYLIC ACID) and 2 percent amino acids. now if this occured in water, then UV light would be totally blocked so that the process could take place. however, amino acids bond quicker to water than to eachother. so that doesnt work. and if it occured ouTside of water, the bonding could happen but the product would oxydize with oxygen, without oxygen there would be no ozone to block enough UV light.
the earths magnetic field has lost 6% within the past 150 years. indicating that the earth is less than 25,000 years old. go back 25-30 thousand even with a reversed magnetic field. and the heat generated from the magnetic field would have destroyed life on earth. if you look at the pangea theory, look at age 1. when all the continents fit together like a puzzle. central america does not exist in that phase, but somehow it just pops up at phase four which is what we see today. now let me point something out. lets say you could take all the water out of the oceans. you will notice that there is dirt underneath where the water was. the continents are not lilly pads floating around in the bath tub. they are connected by the crust. now just because the continents are shifting doesnt mean they have always been shifting. check out Walt Browns hydroplate theory.
The earth is spinning abotu 1,000 MPH at the equator but it is also slowing down at the rate of 1/1000 of a second every day. which means that used to be going faster. now if you go back 6,000 years when adam and eve were in the garden of eden, the days would be a little shorter, but not enough to notice. adam didnt have a watch anyways(as far as we know). but the big bang theory says that the earth is billions of years old. now thats a problem. if you go back too far, the coriolis effect would cause the winds to be over 5,000 miles per hour because of the earths fast rotation.
the sehara desert expands through a process called desertification. but its been calculated that the sehara desert is less than 4000 years old. REFERENCE is from HBJ Earth Science pg 277.
well lets just say that there was a flood that destroyed the whole earth and covered every moutain top and every piece of land, that fits my theory. the bible says that the beginning was about 6,000 years ago. and the flood was about 4400 years ago. fits my theory just fine. now if the earth is billions of years old, how come there isnt a desert older than 4000 years old? why isnt there one that is 10,000 years old? the evolution theory has many flaws and is based off of many assumptions.
the so-called magnetic reversals at the mid-atlantic ridge are flase. there are no magnetic reversals. there are areas of stronger and weaker magnetic strength, but no where will a north-seeking compass point south. there is only areas of stronger and weaker magnetism.
Annual Ice rings are not a indication of one ring per year. research the "lost squadron" that got lost in WWII and crash landed in greenland.
in 1990 they found them using radar. the airplanes were down there for 48 years. they were 263 feet below the surface. but while melting through the ice, hundreds of ice rings were melted through. a guy names Bob Cardin was on the team that dilled down to the aircraft. check out www.thelostsquadron.com
the oldest reef in the world in located in australia, its called the great barrier reef. they estimated that the reef is less then 4000 years old. this was based off of a 20 year observation.
the oldest languages are known to be less than 6,000 years old. the chinese calandar starts back around at the end of noahs flood instead of like our calander where we start about 2000 years ago when Jesus was here.
Fossils do not count for evidence for evolution. if you want to think they do, you think that all you want. but they dont count. they cant. what can you conclude from observing a fossil? it died... thats about it. what else can you observe?
they used to teach the humans and the chimp are very similar in DNA. well the difference between the two is a difference of 1.6 percent. but if you click on this link. you will find that there is no way for humans to evolve from the chimp or the chimp from the human. its states "Now the genetic difference between human and his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6%. That doesn't sound like much, but calculated out, that is a gap of at least 48,000,000 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal; there is no possibility of change." another thing to think about is what darwin said... on the same site, there is a quote from his book that states. "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." but Dr. Barney Maddox is probably a crack addict or something. evolutionists will probably find some reason to discredit him.
here is a link to that page Dr Maddox is on
www.trueauthority.com...
the geologic collumn was thought up in 1830, long before radiometric dating was ever invented. how this happened, it was thought up. Charles Lyell made up the whole thing. see he ASSUMED that each layer is a different age. how did he know that each layer was a different age? he didnt he wanted to make people think that the earth was millions of years old. so he divided the earth into layers and gave each layer an index fossil. this was all based on the assumption that the earth is millions of years old and each layer was a different age. how he knows is anyones guess. the layers of strata are dated by the fossils they find in that layer. and the fossils are dated by which layer of strata they come from. this is called circular reasoning.
grand canyon did not form by the colorado river. the colorado river is what is draining through what we call grand canyon. its more probable that grand canyon formed during the flood with LOTS of water and LITTLE time.
the scientists say that the canyon on mars that is much bigger than grand canyon, and there is no water on mars as far as we know. there is a bunch of frozen CO2(dry ice)
here is why.
the top of grand canyon is higher than the bottom, the river flows through the bottom. the river enters the canyon at 2800 elevation. and the river exits the canyon at 1800 feet elevation. for about 270 miles through the snow ridge of grand canyon, the top of grand canyon reaches elevation levels of 6900ft to 8500ft elevation. now it is a fact that grand canyon exists. but are you trying to tell me that the colorado river cut through multiple layers of rock by flowing uphill and made that canyon over millions of years. yeah ill bet that water used to be able to flow uphill, millions of years ago. and plus, they cant find the delta for grand canyon, no one knows where it is.
how does the evolutionist explain polystrata fossils?
if you get a petrified tree standing up running through multiple layers how do you explain that? well I have a theory about that. I believe that there was a flood about 4400 years ago, and so do many cultures. there are at least 200 surviving legends on a worldwide flood. here is one link I found
www.nwcreation.net...
but anyways, lets do a little science here... if you get sand with different colors representing different densitys and put that in water, shake it up, you will get different layers in a couple of seconds. now lets say we put a few twigs in there representing trees, shake it up again, an you will get those twigs standing up and or in some weird position. but you will get some connecting many layers. this is exactly what would happen in a great flood. you would get many layers of strata and many things between them and many things such as trees runing through them. the evolution theory states that each layer is a different age. but there are no signes of erosion between the layers. now when they find a petrified tree upside down, the evolutionist has no explanation for this. how fo you get a tree upsidedown running through multiple layers. I have a theory about that. see about 4400 years ago, there was a great flood. and mixed up a bunch of dirt along with trees, and that how the trees got there upsidedown. and no tree is going to stand there for millions of years waiting for layers to form around them without rotting away. It does not take things very long to petrify.
Ok Evolutionist... give me a good scientific reason why trees are running through multiple layers of strata, you cant have a tree stand there waiting for millions of years for layers to form around it. trees dont grow through multiple layers of rock looking for sunlight. and trees cannot petrify in the air, they oxidize. and there are no erosion marks between the layers. wonder why...
see the bible says that God created the heaven and the earth roughly 6,000 years ago. and everything in it was good.
Man wrecked this world, man brought death by sin, so yes, if adam never sinned, no one would have ever died. The bible also says that God made us of one blood, meaning that all humans are equal. no matter what color your skin is, we are all equal. if you thnk that you are better than someone because of the color of your skin, you have personal problems.
the bible also teaches that there was a layer of water above the atmostphere, how it was held up is supported a theory, such as the meisner effect. if it were ice, the magnetic field would have held it up because supercold ice is magnetic. if it were in some other form other than ice, I dont really know how else it could have been help up. but this layer of water, if it were ice, could have cause hyperbarrick conditions in the earths atmosphere, explaining the existance of dinosaurs, and larger animals and humans.
Now if God created everything. he could have made the star light visible to whatever is on earth. he could have made anything that we see today.
Evolution wants us to believe that we came from soup that came from rocks that got rained on. so ultimately we came from a rock according to the evolution theory. like I said before there are six different meanings to the word evolution. you have to have the first three in order to get the last three. so no matter what you may think, the first three have a lot to do with the last three, because without the first three, you cant have the last three.
the only thing darwin ever observed was MIRCO evolution. this term confuses people. it should be called just a variation within the kind of animal. the bible does not go against this. the bible says in Genesis "they will bring forth after their KIND" not species. and you can have many species within one KIND. the bible has nothing against MICRO evolution.
and this also applies to plants. the bible says that they will bring forth after their KIND.
you can crossbreed corn all you want... you will always get corn. you will never get anything else but corn. maybe different species, but nothing other than corn.
so what evidence is there for evolution?
well I have yet to see some.
and by the way... if there is a mutation caused by a scrambling of the genetic code and it is actually beneficial. that is no proof for evolution. was any information added? no. now yes it was copied more than it was supposed to be, but nothing NEW was added. mutations are a mixing of existing information. often the way new species come to be, is by parts of the gene code that were not used before now being used. here is an example. some people already have in their genes, a resistance to penicillin. there were some people found burried in ice that were resistant to penicillin before it was even discovered.
check out what darwin said. he siad on page 170 of his book. basically that all all plants and all animals are related, meaning, birds are related to bananas.
Richard C Lewontin stated in a text book that "Evolution is a fact"... he went further to explain what he meant by evolution. he said, "bird rose from non-birds and humans from non-humans, anyone who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts..."
Spiders are able to make seven different types of webs, which they use for different purposes, such as for catching prey, for walking on, for anchor points, for wrapping prey, and for other functions. It is ridiculous to suggest that a creature could randomly develop the irreducibly complex apparatuses to make and eject one type of webbing, but to make seven types is mind-boggling. An irreducibly complex apparatus is something that could not operate if even one of its components were missing. The chances of something of this nature to appear by accident with all of its necessary parts intact are essentially zero.
This amazing material is five times stronger than steel thread, but it will stretch to over four times its length without breaking. 1 It has been used to make bulletproof vests, it can be used to close bleeding wounds, and scientists have produced nothing with which it can be compared. Furthermore, spiders have an amazing range of talents that for which they utilize their webs. Making a regular spider web is amazing enough. Many spiders make a complex web every day and eat it later as it starts to wear, after which they make a new web. How do they know how to produce such elaborate structures without instruction? It does not stop there. Harun Yahya has provided the following astonishing examples of how spiders use their webs and camouflage for hunting. 2
Trapdoor spiders build a door with their webs and attach a web hinge to them so that they may close them and remain concealed until prey comes along. Did this happen by chance, and how did it get to be a trait of all trapdoor spiders? Bola spiders make a bola out of their webs and even put small weights on them. They are quite accurate too. They wait until a moth flies by, then they throw this bola like a lasso with great accuracy and reel in their prey. I had to practice a while with my bola from Argentina in order to get reasonably good with it. The bola spider did not have to practice. He would have starved to death if he did have to do so. This could not be accounted for by evolutionary theory. The same question could be asked about Dinopsis spiders. These amazing spiders make nets out of their webs that they throw over their prey. Their mothers are not around to teach them how to do this. How does such a skill evolve?
Even more amazing are bell spiders. The bell spider makes a diving bell out of its web and actually uses it to hunt under water. How did this entire species figure out how to do this if their creator had not implanted in them the knowledge required?
There is a species of spiders called Myrmarachne that look almost like ants, except for having eight legs. They will stand around waving their two extra legs in the air to resemble antennae until an ant comes close so that they can pounce on them. How did such a small creature end up looking like an ant, and with their minute brains how do they know how to utilize this resemblance so ingeniously?
There are a number of spider kinds that surf the sky as babies. These kinds of spiders will spin a thin strand of web and leap into the wind where they can sometimes be carried thousands of feet into the air and for hundreds of miles. They are able to hang on to their threads and ride them like air surfboards. Scientists have spotted baby spiders as high as 16,000 feet in the air. This explains why spiders are often one of the first creatures to inhabit volcanic islands. How did they learn this skill on their own? 3
A very lengthy book could be written on the miraculous nature of spiders, but I'll stop here for now. Spiders are amazingly sophisticated creations, and give us many reasons to stand in awe of God's creativity.
Spiders are able to make seven different types of webs, which they use for different purposes, such as for catching prey, for walking on, for anchor points, for wrapping prey, and for other functions. It is ridiculous to suggest that a creature could randomly develop the irreducibly complex apparatuses to make and eject one type of webbing, but to make seven types is mind-boggling. An irreducibly complex apparatus is something that could not operate if even one of its components were missing. The chances of something of this nature to appear by accident with all of its necessary parts intact are essentially zero.
This amazing material is five times stronger than steel thread, but it will stretch to over four times its length without breaking. 1 It has been used to make bulletproof vests, it can be used to close bleeding wounds, and scientists have produced nothing with which it can be compared. Furthermore, spiders have an amazing range of talents that for which they utilize their webs. Making a regular spider web is amazing enough. Many spiders make a complex web every day and eat it later as it starts to wear, after which they make a new web. How do they know how to produce such elaborate structures without instruction? It does not stop there. Harun Yahya has provided the following astonishing examples of how spiders use their webs and camouflage for hunting. 2
Trapdoor spiders build a door with their webs and attach a web hinge to them so that they may close them and remain concealed until prey comes along. Did this happen by chance, and how did it get to be a trait of all trapdoor spiders? Bola spiders make a bola out of their webs and even put small weights on them. They are quite accurate too. They wait until a moth flies by, then they throw this bola like a lasso with great accuracy and reel in their prey. I had to practice a while with my bola from Argentina in order to get reasonably good with it. The bola spider did not have to practice. He would have starved to death if he did have to do so. This could not be accounted for by evolutionary theory. The same question could be asked about Dinopsis spiders. These amazing spiders make nets out of their webs that they throw over their prey. Their mothers are not around to teach them how to do this. How does such a skill evolve?
Even more amazing are bell spiders. The bell spider makes a diving bell out of its web and actually uses it to hunt under water. How did this entire species figure out how to do this if their creator had not implanted in them the knowledge required?
There is a species of spiders called Myrmarachne that look almost like ants, except for having eight legs. They will stand around waving their two extra legs in the air to resemble antennae until an ant comes close so that they can pounce on them. How did such a small creature end up looking like an ant, and with their minute brains how do they know how to utilize this resemblance so ingeniously?
There are a number of spider kinds that surf the sky as babies. These kinds of spiders will spin a thin strand of web and leap into the wind where they can sometimes be carried thousands of feet into the air and for hundreds of miles. They are able to hang on to their threads and ride them like air surfboards. Scientists have spotted baby spiders as high as 16,000 feet in the air. This explains why spiders are often one of the first creatures to inhabit volcanic islands. How did they learn this skill on their own? 3
A very lengthy book could be written on the miraculous nature of spiders, but I'll stop here for now. Spiders are amazingly sophisticated creations, and give us many reasons to stand in awe of God's creativity.
Any tracker, from beginner to expert, knows the difference between canine and feline tracks and would never mistake one for the other. Dogs leave nail marks in all of their tracks, while cats never do. This in itself may not seem too striking, but it is a wonderful fact that helps make evolutionists look stupid. What amazes me so much is that I have read numerous books on tracking in which the author makes some idiotic allusion to our distant past as apes, or to the evolution of four-legged critters. All they need to do to know that this is idiotic is to look at the tracks of dogs and cats, but I guess that they are missing the forest due to the trees.
Cats have retractable claws and dogs do not. Dogs rely on their teeth to hunt, while cats rely mostly on their claws. A dog only uses its claws to help it with its footwork when it is walking or running, digging, holding pray once its caught and scratching fleas and such. They do not need to be sharp like the cat's claws so they do not need protection. What is amazing is that the cat's claws are retracted to protect them when they are not in use and they are only ejected when the cat needs to use them to hunt, defend itself, climb or for sharpening purposes. This requires specialized muscles to extend the claws like a switchblade and a specially designed sheath for these claws for when they are drawn back. It is absurd to assume that these specially designed features would have evolved by chance.
What did the cats do before they "evolved" the amazing feature of having retractable claws. They would have to have behaved like dogs. What made them decide to behave like cats and how did mindless Mother Nature respond by sticking those specially designed muscles in their paws? Was it by chance that these muscles and sheaths showed up at the same time? Did they think them into existence? Did they develop gradually over millions of years? If the latter is the case, how did they get along during the transition? Of course, they both do just fine as they were made, so why would it have been necessary for the design of either to be changed? It does not take a lot of brains to realize that they are both obviously well designed (especially dogs -- no offence to any of you who might be cat people). All of the alternatives are preposterous.
darwin also said... in his book( not sure on what page) but he even questioned his own theory, he basically stated that its hard to even imagine how his theory could have worked. when I get the page number I will let you know what it is... if you really want to know, its in his book. "the origin of species" (by the way, thats not the whole title to the book). I think its on page 268 or something like that.. im not sure. thats actually just a guess. Ive seen it somewhere. I just cant rememebr where.
anyways... moving along to other things. VESTIGAL organs or body parts would not be supportive to evolution, vestigal things is losing something not gaining. as far as I can figure out. there is not one vestigal piece found in any organism. the human tailbone is not vestigal, if you think yours is, I will pay to have yours removed. the appendix is not vestigal, it is true you can live without it, but that does not mean, you do not need it. you can live without both your eyes, arms and legs, but that doesn prove you dont need them.
i think I have typed enough for now. my brain kinda hurts. I had to pull a lot of knowledge from a lot of places and a lot of truth from a lot of places.
the bible says that God created everything. and I believe that to be true.
the bible also says that God is al-powerful. meaning he is not limited. he is not limited by time space of matter. God can be outside of time he can also be in time. God can be outside of space totally. as well as matter.
Evolution is a religion. no one can ever prove that COSMIC, CHEMICAL, STELLAR, ORGANIC or MACRO evolution can take place.
Evolution is not a part of science. and if you want me to admit that creation is not a part of science, then I will admit that. both theories are religious, now how about you admit that your theory is not a part of science and teach is to those who want to learn about it. Evolution has no scientific evidence to back it up. creation on the other hand does. I believe that I have given you a few points of evidence in this post.
Science is things that we can observe, and test and demonstrate.
Evolution does not fit in this category. you have to believe that it all happened. just like I bellieve that God created everything.
Atheism is a religion, because you have to believe that there is no god.
evolution falls in with atheists, both of them support eachother as well. evolutionists believe that everything evolved by uniformitarian processes. and atheists believe in Evolution because its the only thing that sounds good enough to explain our existance. but the fact is, evolution is not scientific.
it is a tax supported RELIGION
expert999, dude...why do you feel the need to copy and paste the exact same post into EVERY creation vs evolution thread you can find?...is it really
necessary?
expert999, you say there is no proof of cosmic evolution... yet we see the universe is expanding, which is why there is thought to be an initial burst
of energy which is still having a knock on effect today. however, it depends what you mean by 'proof'. the bible is a book that has been translated
in to the incoherant word of man. you say the bible is true, yet you can't prove it, you can't prove jesus ever was resurected, you can't prove he
ever did one single miracle, you can't prove he is the son of god. science does actually have facts and evidence to suggest certain things, such as
evolution and the big bang, most of the bible's proof is hearsay.
yes you are right I cant prove any of it. but if you really think about it, the stars that we know about, are moving away. but you are assuming that
we are somewhere near the center of the universe. and we may not be. you assume that a big bang occured. just like I assume that God created
everything. evolution is just as much a religion as creation (christianity) and no the bible has not been translated and translated. over and over. of
you know anything about the KJV of the bible. it was translated from the original greek. thats why I use that version. all of the others were
translated over and over. but that was only part of the truth that have been informed with. I just informed you of the other other part.
5. Macro Evolution- Evolving from one KIND of animal to a different KIND of animal. example: from a cat to a dog.
This sentence,shows that expert999 hasn't understood evolution,and how animals are classified in the evolution tree.
just like I assume that God created everything. evolution is just as much a religion as creation (christianity) and no the bible has not been translated and translated
The Bible is mix of precious beliefs that were found in the oriental area. Not much of it is original.
[edit on 5-7-2005 by DarkSide]
new topics
-
Fire insurance in LA withdrawn months ago
General Conspiracies: 2 hours ago -
Bizarre Labour Party Tic Toc Video Becomes Even More Embarrassing
Regional Politics: 10 hours ago
top topics
-
The elephant in the room (wearing a hoodie)
US Political Madness: 17 hours ago, 15 flags -
Dr. Demento
Music: 17 hours ago, 6 flags -
Fire insurance in LA withdrawn months ago
General Conspiracies: 2 hours ago, 6 flags -
Bizarre Labour Party Tic Toc Video Becomes Even More Embarrassing
Regional Politics: 10 hours ago, 4 flags -
Potter to WHU
World Sports: 15 hours ago, 2 flags
active topics
-
Los Angeles brush fires latest: 2 blazes threaten structures, prompt evacuations
Mainstream News • 286 • : NorthOS -
Fire insurance in LA withdrawn months ago
General Conspiracies • 10 • : rickymouse -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3979 • : Guyfriday -
Judge rules president-elect Donald Trump must be sentenced in 'hush money' trial
US Political Madness • 84 • : Vermilion -
S.C. Jack Smith's Final Report Says Trump Leads a Major Conspiratorial Criminal Organization!.
Political Conspiracies • 47 • : Vermilion -
Statements of Intent from Incoming Trump Administration Members - 2025 to 2029.
2024 Elections • 61 • : cherokeetroy -
Gravitic Propulsion--What IF the US and China Really Have it?
General Conspiracies • 39 • : budbayview -
The elephant in the room (wearing a hoodie)
US Political Madness • 26 • : xuenchen -
Its Looking Like Schiff - Vindman - Ciaramella Conspired to Impeach President Trump.
Political Conspiracies • 188 • : WeMustCare -
Trump's idea to make Canada the 51st US state: 'Potential is massive'
Mainstream News • 155 • : DaydreamerX