The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)

J C

Wicknight wrote:

Neanderthals are believed to have had complex language, which means they were sentient, self aware and intelligent. Just like us. They used tools, wore clothes, and possibly even had sex with humans (inter-species breeding)


Are you honestly going to say that they were nothing like us?

They are EXACTLY like us!!!:D

....and they are NOT extinct.....

.....I am reliably informed that Neanderthals turn up all over the place.....


........and Homo Erectus are to be found regularly ‘strutting their stuff’ in Night Clubs throughout the land!!!!:D

J C

Medin

To be continued…..

robindch wrote:

Nice one, Wiki!

At this rate, we should hit ten thousand around August, 2008

Whenever I hear that Evolutionists are looking forward to protracted debates with Creation Scientists........thoughts of 'Turkeys and Christmas' come to mind.....
.....Roll on 2008!!!!:eek:

Son Goku

J C wrote:

I am honestly going to say that they are EXACTLY like us!!!:D

....and they are NOT extinct.....

.....I am reliably informed that Neanderthals turn up all over the place.....
.........claiming lineal descent from muck ..........

........and Homo Erectus are to be found regularly ‘strutting their stuff’ in Night Clubs throughout the land!!!!:D

I tell ya lads, Medin is a rank amateur compared with the true master of the random.

Zombrex

J C wrote:

I am honestly going to say that they are EXACTLY like us!!!:D

....and they are NOT extinct.....

.....I am reliably informed that Neanderthals turn up all over the place.....
.........claiming lineal descent from muck ..........

........and Homo Erectus are to be found regularly ‘strutting their stuff’ in Night Clubs throughout the land!!!!:D

What?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

At least attempt to make sense

bonkey

Medin wrote:

If yes, can you prove it? The opposite can be done - that actual infinity cannot exist.

No, it cannot be "done".

J C

Wicknight
If the genetic information was PRE-EXISTING then the bugs would already be resistant to the antibiotics. The fact that you can put 100 non-resistant bugs in a test tube, wait a couple of generations and end up with ones that are resistant tells us that this resistance was not PRE-EXISTING. It is a result of mutation of the genetic information.

If you put 100 NON-RESISTANT bugs in a test tube and expose them to the antibiotic ,,,,,,,

…….they will ALL die……that is what ‘non-resistant’ MEANS!!!

The reason that resistance builds up is BECAUSE a small minority of ALREADY RESISTANT bugs survive and build up their numbers when the non-resistant bacteria are eliminated by the A/B!!!


Originally Posted by J C
……so HOW LONG did God take to create the Universe and all life?

Spyral
you're making the mistake of thinking that I actually care

You appear to CARE ENOUGH to deny the veracity of the six day timescale that is clearly stated in Scripture …..

……so how long do YOU believe that God took to create the Universe and all life???


Originally Posted by J C
What does the terms “the evening and the morning” mean in the following passages of scripture :-

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. and the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:8 And god called the firmament heaven. and the evening and the morning were the second day.
Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Gen 1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
Gen 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day

Spyral
you are taking it literally. Nothing says that I have to take it literally.

A PLAIN reading of Genesis 1 and 2 would indicate that they are substantially literal Chapters.

Anyway, what do YOU believe that the terms ‘evening and morning’ METAPHORICALLY mean, then????


JimiTime
What would be the spiritual consequence of evolution being true, if God used it as his means of creation?

Because God is sovereign, there would be NO spiritual consequences IF God used Evolution as His means of Creation

However, IF macro-Evolution IS true, then there are major theological problems, because the Word of God states (a number of times) that God created the Universe and all life in six days.
Equally, God called this Creation ‘good’ (a number of times) and this would be untrue if Evolution via competition , disease and death were the mechanisms of this Creation.
Finally, Jesus Christ fully supported the Creation account in Genesis.

The widespread acceptance of Evolution is probably the most important reason for the decline in some mainstream Churches over the past 100 years – and conversely the emergence of ‘Creation Evangelism’ is one of the most important reasons for the rapid spread of Evangelical Christianity in the Americas over the past fifty years.


TimRobbins
I don't consider creationism a science.

I don’t consider ‘Creationism’ to be a science EITHER …..it is a Philosophy and/or Worldview……

……however, the RESULTS of Creation are accessible to science ……and are studied by Creation Scientists.

Similarly, Evolutionism is a Philosophy / Woirldview...…..but the putative results of Evolution can be studied by scientists ......

……and so far the scientific evidence favours Creation over Evolution as the best ‘origins’ explanation.:)


Originally Posted by J C
Yes, Spontaneous Evolution would need TEN THOUSAND BILLION BILLION BILLION YEARS to generate a sequence for a specific simple protein!!!!

TimRobbins
eh I don't think so.

It is a mathematical FACT!!!


TimRobbins
You are taking those quotes out of context.

The quotes are a fair reflection of Darwin’s doubts about his own theory as well as the doubts of leading modern Evolutionists about the validity of GRADUAL Evolution!!!!
Darwin was very 'open' about the shortcomings of his theory and many leading Evolutionists have also expressed grave reservations about the lack of evidence for GRADUAL Evolution.


DerKaiser
The crocodiles had little or no difference, I'll grant you, except the fact that they were much, much larger...............

Indeed, many of the fossilised Crocks were very large. This is explained by the great ages, which these pre-Flood creatures attained, in common with Humans.
Reptiles continue to grow throughout their lives, and they don’t attain maximum mature sizes like Mammals do – therefore very old pre-Flood Crocks were also very large Crocks, who in turn became very large fossilised Crocks during the Flood!!!:eek:


DerKaiser
You are steadfast in your beliefs, and I salute you for it,

Danke, danke schon, DerKaiser!!!:)

DerKaiser
but honestly, Creationism is a cop out, it just says "Why? Because God said so..."

Although Creationism may start from a position that “God said so..”
……Creation Science applies science to verifying that “God DID so…”!!!:cool:


Medin
If Jesus died on the cross for the reason ppl think, why we still have such a big a big mess around here? Probably bigger than it ever was.

Jesus died on the cross in perfect atonement for our sins……..

……..but each person still has the free will (and fallen inclination) to continue sinning….and that is why “the mess” continues!!!!:cool:

Tim Robbins

J C wrote:

TimRobbins
I don't consider creationism a science.

I don’t consider ‘Creationism’ to be a science EITHER …..it is a Philosophy and/or Worldview……

……however, the RESULTS of Creation are accessible to science ……and are studied by Creation Scientists.

Similarly, Evolutionism is a Philosophy / Woirldview...…..but the putative results of Evolution can be studied by scientists ......

……and so far the scientific evidence favours Creation over Evolution as the best ‘origins’ explanation.:)

Name one Scientist who has one a Nobel prize that agrees with you?

TimRobbins
You are taking those quotes out of context.

The quotes are a fair reflection of Darwin’s doubts about his own theory as well as the doubts of leading modern Evolutionists about the validity of GRADUAL Evolution!!!!

"Fair reflection" my evolved brain disagrees.

Can you tell us more about yourself?
I'm interested how you can keep on going. Are you sponsored?

J C

Originally Posted by Spyral
how come if you mix the life chemicals then you dont get life in a test tube ?

Wicknight
You do.

Well you get the early building blocks of life, complex self replicating molecules. Self replicating as in they make copies of themselves (a precursor to asexual reproduction in things like bacteria). This has been done in places like MIT, both in computer simulations and in actual chemical labs.

…… you may get a few lumpy ‘BLOCKS’ using random non-intelligently directed processes…..

….but you certainly won’t get a ‘HOUSE’ complete with broadband access and Plasma Screen TV……:D

......and such a 'HOUSE' pales into insignificance when compared to the
complexity of a living cell!!!


Wicknight
Considering it took approx 1 billion years for these types of molecules to evolve into what we would recognise as life it is a bit much to ask the boys in the chemistry labs to do this in front of us.

……it’s an even BIGGER ‘ask’ because the “boys in the chemistry labs” aren’t GOD!!!!!:D


Sangre
I also see JC is making the claim that creation scientists are 'legally' entitled to call themselvesa scientist despite showing him this was a nonsense claim only weeks ago. Obviously the copy and paste is out in force or he has the memory retention of a gold fish.

The 'gold fish memory' may actually reside somewhere ELSE!!!

I think the particular segment of the debate to which you refer, concluded that it would be unethical to claim to have a science qualification if one didn't have one…….

……and it would ALSO be fraudulent (and therefore illegal) for an unqualified person to apply for example, for a science teaching post, whilst declaring themselves to have a science qualification!!!!


Wicknight
Well biological systems aren't computers. A computer will crash if 1 line of code is out of place because the computer is tasked with doing a specific thing. Biology doesn't work like that.

Biological systems have sophisticated ‘autocorrect’ and ‘backup’ systems that can automatically ‘fix’ errors that appear…….but if a critical sequence is involved, the result of even one change in the genetic code can be fatal……and that is why Evolutionists are so (wisely) reticent about following through on the logic of their own beliefs in relation to the ‘creative properties’ of Mutagenesis!!!!!:D


Wicknight
You can have hundreds of lines out of place (mutations) and still produce a fully functioning life form because it is always going to produce something. That "something" might kill you but more likely than not it will do very little (having 6 toes won't kill you) and it might even produce something that is of advantage to you

…..whether it kills you or is advantageous, a mutation ALWAYS cause the genetic compliment of the organism to degrade……….and that is WHY Evolutionists are so (wisely) reticent about exposing themselves to Mutagenic Agents!!!!!:D


Wicknight
You contain on average 60 mutations from the genetic code of your parents, mutations that most likely do very little.

………and they are nearly all either ‘autocorrected’ already or masked by the ‘normal’ allele!!!!


Tar Aldarion
Why does our appendix no longer serve a function after we stopped eating grasses etc?

HOW has it been scientifically established that Humans EVER ate grass???…….

………BTW the latest research has established that the Human Appendix plays a key role in the immunological defence of the neo-natal gut and the prevention of gastro-intestinal conditions in infants……..

……and therefore the Human Appendix has NOTHING to do with ‘grass eating’ ......and EVERYTHING to do with infant survival on MILK!!!!
:eek:


Medin
So how about some serious proof from their side (the evolutionists) for a change, so I can give it a thought?

…..Medin, even a little evidence from the Evolutionists would be useful !!!!!:D


Medin
I'm serious enuff, but u gotta be serious enuff to present it. How can you expect me to be serious with no weight in my hands to weight? Only when I get something solid...

….I wouldn’t ‘hold my breath’ for an answer Medin, if I were you……

……I’ve been asking roughly the same question since the thread started in 2005 and I still haven’t been provided with ANY evidence for Evolution!!!!:D


Sapien
Do you imagine that all of evolutionary biology since The Origin of Species has been conducted on internet bulletin boards? Don't you think it's a little much to ask these guys, as patient as they have proven themselves to be, to educate you from scratch in a vast and intricate field of science through nugget-sized posts?

I see, Evolution is (almost) beyond the mind of Mortal Man to understand…………

………….so I suppose you will just have to trust the Evolutionists (who apparently do understand Evolution, but aren't willing to share their evidence) .......on this one…….:D


pH
Let's say you find a ham sandwich on a table, which looks to all intents and purposes that it was made by your mam. Fine, but who's to say that God didn't just make it? Saying, well I know that it could have been made by a person, but CAN YOU PROVE THAT GOD DIDN'T MAKE IT - well no, but isn't that a rather stupid question?

The logical law of ‘simplest valid explanation’ would indicate that a sandwich was made by a Human agent ……i.e. NOT a Mouse or a Cat and NOT God.
The mouse and cat are physically and intellectually incapable of making a ham sandwich while God stopped His Direct Creation activity on the Seventh Day of Creation Week!!!
.......and while mothers have been repeatedly observed making ham sandwiches, mice and cats have only ever been observed to EAT ham sandwiches!!!

Equally, the logical law of ‘simplest valid explanation’ would indicate that living creatures were made by a Divine agent ……i.e. NOT by blind natural forces – which don’t even have the potential ability to do so ……
………..and have never been observed to do so either!!!.:D


Wibbs
Does your right arm swing at the same time as your left? Nope it swings opposite. Just like in a four legged animal.

Four legged animals that ‘bound’, like Deer and Lions for example, have front legs that move in sequence with each other!!!!!:eek:

BTW I can swing my arms BOTH in phase AND out of phase with each other.....
....try it yourself and SEE!!!

In fact Apes tend to swing their arms in phase with each other .....I have never saw a Monkey marching with a 'miltary style' arm movement!!!

Wicknight
we have established that nearly every single piece of electronics in your TV has to be present for the TV to work (otherwise why would the piece be there).

Now get a TV from the 1970s. None of the electrical equipment that is in your TV is present in the TV from the 70s. Yet, bizarrely the TV from the 70s worked and possibly still works.

How can this be? Your TV will flatly refuse to function at all if you remove any of the bits, yet this TV from the 70s, that has none of the bits in your TV still some how works.

You might be saying “Oh course it works, they are different designs!”

And if you are you have hit on the key to evolution.

OK Wicknight, you could save me a lot of money here!!!!:)

So, tell me exactly HOW I can EVOLVE my old Black and White television, ONE STEP AT A TIME into a nice new Plasma Screen TV???

Could I suggest that ALL intermediate stages between a working B & W television and a working Plasma Screen TV will be functionally useless ……and it would actually be eminently more sensible, and efficient, to produce the Plasma Screen ‘from scratch’ rather than bothering with the Black and White TV at all!!!!:eek:


Wibbs
I think wicknight's analogy to TV design has flown right over your head.

…..are you suggesting that old Black and White TV’s can eventually evolve into jet aircraft, by altering them one piece at a time??????

……. the following devastating comment from Prof Stephen Jay Gould, comes to mind:-
“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organ design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.”


Wicknight
A TV from 2007 isn't simply a TV from the 70s with bits added on,.

.......just like a Human Being ALSO isn't a Primordial Ape "with bits added on" !!!!

My new 2007 Plasma Screen TV is a SEPARATE DIRECT CREATION of the intellect of Mankind!!!!

…...and you are correct that it WASN’T evolved by an incremental gradual process from some old scrapped Black and White TVs!!!

Different Kinds were also Directly Created by the intellect of God….and they WEREN’T evolved by any incremental gradual process from Primordial Mud EITHER!!!:)


Jonny 72
I mean heres a good example..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...urce=&ito=1490

These animals have changed and adapted

Yes indeed it is a good example of Natural Selection in action……..but the lions are still lions and the Buffalo are……..
…….still Buffalo!!!!


Jonny 72
I want some creationists to build an Ark and see how many species they can get on it.

Here is the link to a podcast that will answer the question “Was the Ark big enough?”
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/2007/05/07/the-ark-was-it-big-enough/

…and you can read all about it here:-
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/caring-for-the-animals

Gen 6:15 confirms the size of the Ark to be 300x50x30 Cubits – which was 137x23x13.7 metres or 43,160 cubic metres.
To put it into perspective, The Ark was equivalent to the volume of 522 standard railway stock wagons, each of which can hold 250 sheep i.e. over 130,000 ‘sheep spaces’ so to speak. The Ark was a truly massive vessel, unmatched in size by modern shipping until the building of The Great Eastern Liner by Isambard Kingdom Brunel in 1858.

Taking young semi-mature animals on board would greatly reduce the space and feed requirements as well as minimising any mortality risk.

Examples of every KIND were commanded by God to be taken on board. Creationists DO accept that speciation occurs (using EXISTING genetic diversity) and it is thought that as little as 16,000 KINDS would have been sufficient to generate the diversity of terrestrial and avian species seen in the World today.
For example a single pair of the Dog Kind could have given rise to Domestic Dogs, Wolves, Wolverines, Cape Hunting Dogs, Hyenas, Jackals, Foxes, etc.

The vast majority of Kinds would be small animals such as young lizards and mice that would literally fit into a match box. Other animals such as lambs, calves and baby elephants would require somewhat more space. However, if we assume 32,000 animals (including birds) on the Ark each with a generous average space requirement of 50x50x50 cm (0.125 cubic metres), then all 32,000 animals could be accommodated in about 10% of the space in the Ark – leaving plenty of room for feed, straw bedding and access.

In addition, we should bear in mind that the animals themselves didn’t have any fear of Man before the Flood (see Gen 9:2) and they therefore would have been very placid and easy to manage on the Ark, unlike what “wild” animals would be like nowadays. They may also have gone into a type of hibernation during the flood, which would have saved on feed as well as making management even easier.

The new Answers in Genesis Creation Museum has built a full scale model of a section of Noah's Ark……

......and Johan Huibers has built a ONE FIFTH SCALE Ark and will be sailing it down the canals of Holland during 2007.
According to Jacky Baken who was recently hired to help with this unique Christian outreach, a number of towns and cities have already invited Johan to visit their area with the Ark. It will remain in Schagen until August and then will head to the Dutch port of Rotterdam which is the busiest seaport in the world. – and you can read all about it here:-

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/netherland-ark


Wibbs
We can go all the way back to milliseconds after the big bang, but beyond that is conjecture(branes etc)

The conjecture starts the very moment anybody mentions the Big Bang!!!!


Sapien
Can we have JC back?

I’m Back!!!!……

…..I just knew that you would miss me!!!!….

J C

Tim Robbins wrote:

Name one Scientist who has one a Nobel prize that agrees with you?

Provide the EVIDENCE for Macro-Evolution ......and stop stalling!!!!:D

Tim Robbins wrote:

I'm interested how you can keep on going. Are you sponsored?

I am 'sponsored' by Jesus Christ!!!!:D

Red Hand

J C wrote:

Here is the link to a podcast that will answer the question “Was the Ark big enough?”
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/2007/05/07/the-ark-was-it-big-enough/

…and you can read all about it here:-
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/caring-for-the-animals

Gen 6:15 confirms the size of the Ark to be 300x50x30 Cubits – which was 137x23x13.7 metres or 43,160 cubic metres.
To put it into perspective, The Ark was equivalent to the volume of 522 standard railway stock wagons, each of which can hold 250 sheep i.e. over 130,000 ‘sheep spaces’ so to speak. The Ark was a truly massive vessel, unmatched in size by modern shipping until the building of The Great Eastern Liner by Isambard Kingdom Brunel in 1858.

Taking young semi-mature animals on board would greatly reduce the space and feed requirements as well as minimising any mortality risk.

Examples of every KIND were commanded by God to be taken on board. Creationists DO accept that speciation occurs (using EXISTING genetic diversity) and it is thought that as little as 16,000 KINDS would have been sufficient to generate the diversity of terrestrial and avian species seen in the World today.
For example a single pair of the Dog Kind could have given rise to Domestic Dogs, Wolves, Wolverines, Cape Hunting Dogs, Hyenas, Jackals, Foxes, etc.

The vast majority of Kinds would be small animals such as young lizards and mice that would literally fit into a match box. Other animals such as lambs, calves and baby elephants would require somewhat more space. However, if we assume 32,000 animals (including birds) on the Ark each with a generous average space requirement of 50x50x50 cm (0.125 cubic metres), then all 32,000 animals could be accommodated in about 10% of the space in the Ark – leaving plenty of room for feed, straw bedding and access.

In addition, we should bear in mind that the animals themselves didn’t have any fear of Man before the Flood (see Gen 9:2) and they therefore would have been very placid and easy to manage on the Ark, unlike what “wild” animals would be like nowadays. They may also have gone into a type of hibernation during the flood, which would have saved on feed as well as making management even easier.

The new Answers in Genesis Creation Museum has built a full scale model of a section of Noah's Ark……

......and Johan Huibers has built a ONE FIFTH SCALE Ark and will be sailing it down the canals of Holland during 2007.
According to Jacky Baken who was recently hired to help with this unique Christian outreach, a number of towns and cities have already invited Johan to visit their area with the Ark. It will remain in Schagen until August and then will head to the Dutch port of Rotterdam which is the busiest seaport in the world. – and you can read all about it here:-

I'm going to regret this...but what the heck!:)

OK, if we accept the existence of an Ark of the dimensions you describe, and accept that there was enough food for every animal on board...what happened to the excrement (the poo)? Slatted units? If the poo was gathered up, and tipped over the side, wouldn't that have stability issues for the Ark after a few days (it is going to lie higher in the water, therefore more inclined to tip over? Or were there gyroscopical stabiliers on board?) And how did Noah get his hands on rare food that, say, only a Gadfly in deepest darkest Boreo eats?

Along with two of every species, did Noah bring along a herd of cattle for both himself, and the carnivores on board? Your figure of 32,000 animals doesn't gel with me...there are probably more than 32,000 species of ant in the world alone.

Lets not forget about Kingdom Plantae, Fungi, Nemotoba...and something else! (My biology is giving up on me!) What happend to the plants? Just let seawater get everywhere, and hope that the seeds come up? You know, there are going to be an awful lot of hungry animals after the flood with no plants...

Tim Robbins

J C wrote:

Provide the EVIDENCE for Macro-Evolution ......and stop stalling!!!!:D

DNA analysis and one billion fossils.

I am 'sponsored' by Jesus Christ!!!!:D

I am really interesting in the pyschology of your brain. Can you tell us anything else about yourself besides your faith in Jesus Christ?

Zombrex

J C wrote:

Provide the EVIDENCE for Macro-Evolution ......and stop stalling!!!!:D

Any time you are presented with evidence for macro-evolution (and that is quite often) you simply dismiss it as "Pre-existing Genetic Information", as if the blue print to change from one species to another (which you require by the way for your "kind" idea to explain the Ark) is some how already encoded in the DNA of all species.

You have never been able to define what you mean by "Pre-exiting genetic information", nor have you been able to explain how all this information is stored dormant in the DNA, nor how it comes out of this dormant state to actually alter the organism, though you claim that all this does happen.

We both admit that change of species does happen (evolution says it take hundreds of thousand of year, you claim it can happen in decades).

Evolutionary theory explains how this happens perfectly, and there is a mountain of evidence that it does (none of which you accept on religious grounds). You have never even put forward a explanation on how this happens within a Creationists framework, let alone evidence of it happen. You simply say it does.

If it happens in the time frame that you claim (decades) then it should be possible to actually observe it happening. No creationists has ever done this, and in fact you all seem to claim that this process has some how magically stopped working since science started looking properly at the natural world (rather convenient, no?)

The burden is on YOU JC. Evolution has its model and it has its evidence. Your ideas has neither.

mossieh

J C wrote:

Gen 6:15 confirms the size of the Ark to be 300x50x30 Cubits – which was 137x23x13.7 metres or 43,160 cubic metres.
To put it into perspective, The Ark was equivalent to the volume of 522 standard railway stock wagons, each of which can hold 250 sheep i.e. over 130,000 ‘sheep spaces’ so to speak. The Ark was a truly massive vessel, unmatched in size by modern shipping until the building of The Great Eastern Liner by Isambard Kingdom Brunel in 1858.

Taking young semi-mature animals on board would greatly reduce the space and feed requirements as well as minimising any mortality risk.

Examples of every KIND were commanded by God to be taken on board. Creationists DO accept that speciation occurs (using EXISTING genetic diversity) and it is thought that as little as 16,000 KINDS would have been sufficient to generate the diversity of terrestrial and avian species seen in the World today.
For example a single pair of the Dog Kind could have given rise to Domestic Dogs, Wolves, Wolverines, Cape Hunting Dogs, Hyenas, Jackals, Foxes, etc.

The vast majority of Kinds would be small animals such as young lizards and mice that would literally fit into a match box. Other animals such as lambs, calves and baby elephants would require somewhat more space. However, if we assume 32,000 animals (including birds) on the Ark each with a generous average space requirement of 50x50x50 cm (0.125 cubic metres), then all 32,000 animals could be accommodated in about 10% of the space in the Ark – leaving plenty of room for feed, straw bedding and access.

In addition, we should bear in mind that the animals themselves didn’t have any fear of Man before the Flood (see Gen 9:2) and they therefore would have been very placid and easy to manage on the Ark, unlike what “wild” animals would be like nowadays. They may also have gone into a type of hibernation during the flood, which would have saved on feed as well as making management even easier.

Extraordinary. Truly extraordinary. A wooden ship, capable of holding 32,000 animals and surviving the biggest oceanic cataclysm since your god created the planet? Wouldn't it have been easier just to drown them all and start from scratch? Also presumably the carnivores on board were not fed straw, so what was the story there? Which of these 'seed' species gave rise to the duck-billed platypus?

If you can believe that these original 32,000 creatures gave rise to the vast biodiversity we have today, why is evolution and natural selection such a struggle for you to understand?

Given the problems that arise from inbreeding in small animal populations, how can you see a whole species surviving with just two animals to begin it?

I genuinely don't know whether you're on a massive wind-up or whether you can actually believe this.

Zombrex

J C wrote:

If you put 100 NON-RESISTANT bugs in a test tube and expose them to the antibiotic ,,,,,,,

…….they will ALL die……that is what ‘non-resistant’ MEANS!!!

The reason that resistance builds up is BECAUSE a small minority of ALREADY RESISTANT bugs survive and build up their numbers when the non-resistant bacteria are eliminated by the A/B!!!

You are an idiot.

They will not all die, because some of them will produce mutated children before the antibiotic kills them. This has been explained to you before.

You are an idiot ::D :rolleyes: :eek: :eek: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Zombrex

mossieh wrote:

I genuinely don't know whether you're on a massive wind-up or whether you can actually believe this.

I imagine he is taking the piss, judging by the many times he has contradicted himself. He couldn't possibly believe what he is saying because he has contradicted himself more often than we have show he is wrong.

Either that or he suffers from some serious mental problems.

DerKaiser

Quote by J C:
Although Creationism may start from a position that “God said so..”
……Creation Science applies science to verifying that “God DID so…”!!!

Howso? Creation science is a contradiction in terms, list your theories that set up the scriptured "creation"

It also leads to another question, outlawed on this particular post, begging the existence of said Deity,

Theorise in fine detail the creation of everything in 6 days

Zombrex

DerKaiser wrote:

Theorise in fine detail the creation of everything in 6 days

At this stage I would pay to see JC attempt to do that ... #6000 posts later and he still hasn't even attempted it

2Scoops

The votes are in and... J C is an EVOLUTIONIST!!:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:

J C wrote:

I don’t consider ‘Creationism’ to be a science EITHER …..it is a Philosophy and/or Worldview……

jonny72

ok funny joke, I didn't think people actually really Believed the Ark story!!!!

Where do I start???

First off the specification 'argument' is of course another hijacking to try and plug a gigantic hole in the Ark fairy story.

Are we to assume Noah went to the North and South poles?
That he discovered the Americas?, the Galapagos Islands?..
How did he navigate? Did this incredible advanced art of ship-building suddenly disappear only to slowly _develop_ centuries later?
How did creatures with a very short lifespan survive on this miraculous boat?
To build a boat this size, at that time, and scour the entire earth would have taken more than a lifetime..


Wow to be a creationist I have to discard so many things..
Evolution for a start..
There was no ice age 10,000 years ago or ice ages before that..
That dinosaurs lived less than 6,000 years ago..
That every single time I hear that a mountain is such and such an age or

Look JC you put up a nice spirited defence, but I really think the Bible is to be read metaphorically rather than taken literally..

Remember it was written at a time when people knew nothing and out of all the crazy stories trying to describe everything, it probably seemed amongst the best..

As a religion it was survival of the fittest.. thats until civilisation started advancing out of the dark ages and actually discovered things such as the fact that the Sun doesn't actually rotate around the Earth, etc.. although try telling that to 1 in 5 Americans..

Wait, do you believe the Sun rotates around the Earth aswell?

Son Goku

JC wrote:

If you put 100 NON-RESISTANT bugs in a test tube and expose them to the antibiotic ,,,,,,,

…….they will ALL die……that is what ‘non-resistant’ MEANS!!!

The reason that resistance builds up is BECAUSE a small minority of ALREADY RESISTANT bugs survive and build up their numbers when the non-resistant bacteria are eliminated by the A/B!!!

This is what I can't stand about Creationists. "Evolution isn't true lol. I'm sick. Guess I'll just use some antibiotics manufactured using the theory of evolution".

I genuinely don't know whether you're on a massive wind-up or whether you can actually believe this.

I'd imagine JC is like Kent Hovind or Ken Ham, in the sense that he uses "isn't evolution so silly" style jokes as the bulk of his arguement. However he does believe it.

DerKaiser

I don't think J C is joking at all, every Creationist I've ever talked to or read about has the same stubborn unwaivering attitude, "Evolution is spreading the word of science (A.K.A. Lucifer) & that's that"

We're not here to knock his beliefs but offer our own opinions, even if we do think he's joined the circus

Xaniaj

I must say all, this has been a fascinating (if not a little terrifying!) read. Thanks to all who have so patiently answered question after question.

I’m managed to go through the whole 302 pages in the last month; although I must admit I skipped some of the more technical posts!

It has certainly been an experience noticing the common trends going through the whole thread. Every 20 or 30 pages, JC refutes evolution by stating something along the lines of “Evolution cannot explain the origin of life, and is therefore false!!!!!”. Someone then comes along to (gently) remind JC that evolution doesn’t deal with the origin of life, biogenesis does. 30 pages later, JC makes the exact same statement, hoping that newcomers (or frustrated old posters??) will agree with him this time round!

Wolfbanes pops in every 50 or so pages to remind us all of the huge lesbian, nazi conspiracy there is in the Scientific Community against Creationism. Flash to an argument about peer reviewed articles (and the the supposed “Catch 22” that won’t allow Creationism articles to be published).

JC then rambles about how growing children are actually mutating (whilst subtly mentioning that Evolution can’t explain the origin of life). He uses the statement “as a qualified scientist”. Enter Scofflaw deriding his qualifications.

Oh gosh, and how did I forget the lazy lions feasting on the “fresh” meat that resurfaces after 150+ days under water! (And of course, dinosaurs were warm blooded and therefore mammals.)

Keep it coming, this is better than paying entrance to comedy club!

DerKaiser

Yes it is good fun, isn't it?:D

Tim Robbins

J C wrote:

Provide the EVIDENCE for Macro-Evolution ......and stop stalling!!!!:D

One Billion fossils and infinite amount of DNA evidence

I am 'sponsored' by Jesus Christ!!!!:D

Like I said I'd really like to know what is going on inside your head. I am really interested in J C the person. What else are you interested in beside Christianity?

I thought I was stubborn but you make me look like the most easy going person in the world. You're a legened.

J C

Wicknight
You might be saying “Oh course it works, they are different designs!”

And if you are you have hit on the key to evolution

Wicknight, you have just committed the ‘Unpardonable Sin’ of Evolutionism (by mentioning the word DESIGN) – which has been banned by law from Science Classrooms and has been completely purged from the Evolutionist Lexicon!!!!:eek:

Go wash your mouth out, and stand in the ‘bold corner’!!!!!:D

…..or better still make a step change in your intellectual development ……and start studying Intelligent Design!!!

…….I have seen the future of Evolution…….and it is ID!!!!!:cool:


Jeremiah 16:1
I'm going to regret this...but what the heck!

Ultimately, the only REAL regret is that of the Unsaved Dead ……..for not getting saved when they were alive!!!!


Jeremiah 16:1
If the poo was gathered up, and tipped over the side, wouldn't that have stability issues for the Ark after a few days (it is going to lie higher in the water, therefore more inclined to tip over?)

In a commissioned study by an evolutionist Naval Architect and Ships Engineer, Dr Seon Won Hong, found that the design of Noah’s Ark carefully balanced the conflicting demands of stability (resistance to capsizing), comfort (“seakeeping”), and strength. In fact, the Ark has the same proportions as a modern computer-designed cargo ship.
The study also confirmed that the Ark could handle waves as high as 100 ft (30 m). …….

…and you can read all about it here
http://www.worldwideflood.com/ark/hull_form/hull_optimization.htm
and here
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/thinking-outside-the-box


Jeremiah 16:1
And how did Noah get his hands on rare food that, say, only a Gadfly in deepest darkest Boreo eats?

Insects were not carried on the Ark – and they survived the Flood on pieces of driftwood, floating carcasses, etc.
In relation to your point on "rare food"... it is thought that many creatures have more specialised diets today - due to the effects of speciation and reductions in genetic diversity.:cool:


Jeremiah 16:1
Your figure of 32,000 animals doesn't gel with me...there are probably more than 32,000 species of ant in the world alone.

As I said, insects were not carried on the Ark – and they survived the Flood on pieces of driftwood, floating carcasses, etc


Jeremiah 16:1
Lets not forget about Kingdom Plantae, Fungi, Nemotoba...and something else! (My biology is giving up on me!) What happend to the plants? Just let seawater get everywhere, and hope that the seeds come up? You know, there are going to be an awful lot of hungry animals after the flood with no plants...

There were VERY FEW animals after the Flood and the resources of the whole World were available to feed them.

Some critical plant seeds may have been carried on board the Ark …….and the rest survived as seed or whole uprooted plants outside of the Ark. Also please bear in mind that many plant species became extinct during the Flood – which was the greatest extinction event in World History!!!!

Plant life returns very rapidly after catastrophes.
.....and because God was personally intervening with His Judgement on the Earth with the Flood, it is also probable that God personally intervened with His assistance to Noah and all of the creatures on the Ark.
Such Divine intervention isn’t unknown – for example, God personally intervened to provide Manna and water to save the Israelites in the Sinai Desert, following their departure from Egypt – and, of course, His greatest personal salvation intervention, was as Jesus Christ.:cool:


Originally Posted by J C
Provide the EVIDENCE for Macro-Evolution ......and stop stalling!!!!

Tim Robbins
DNA analysis and one billion fossils.

There may be one billion fossils – but there isn’t any continuum between different fossil species whose supposed evolutionary ‘missing links’ are all still MISSING!!:)

Equally, modern DNA analysis has been a great disappointment to Evolutionists with the ‘closeness’ of DNA sequences amongst different species bearing no relationship to their supposed Evolutionary ‘closeness’.

The genetic information in DNA cannot be translated except with many different enzymes, which are THEMSELVES encoded. So the genetic code cannot be translated itself, except via the pre-existing products of it’s own translation, a vicious circle that ties evolutionary origins of life theories up in knots!!!
The genetic code that’s almost universal to life on Earth has numerous systems, for protecting it against errors. These ‘proofing systems’ include double-sieve enzymes to make sure that the right amino acid is linked to the right tRNA. One sieve rejects amino acids that are too large, while the other rejects those that are too small. Indeed the latest research indicates that RNA may be even MORE important than DNA in the synthesis of proteins thereby posing more insurmountable ‘explanatory headaches’ for Spontaneous Evolutionism.

The genetic code also has vital editing machinery that is itself encoded in DNA and mediated by RNA. This shows that the system was fully functional and ‘correct’ from the beginning – another vicious circle for Evolutionists.

Yet another vicious circle, and there are many more, is that the enzymes that produce the amino acid Histidine, themselves require Histidine. How Histidine could arise without an intelligent input is yet another IMPOSSIBILITY for Evolutionists to explain!!!!

The complex compound eyes of some types of Trilobites (extinct and supposedly “primitive” invertebrates) were amazingly designed. They comprised tubes that each pointed to a different point on the horizon and had special lenses that focussed light from any distance. Some Trilobites had a sophisticated lens design comprising a layer of Calcite on top of a layer of Chitin – materials with precisely the right refractive indices – and a wavy boundary between them of a precise mathematical shape. The Designer of these eyes is a Master Physicist, who applied what we now know as the physical laws of Fermat’s Principle of Least Time, Snell’s Law of Refraction, Abbé’s Sine Law and Birefringent Optics!!!!:D

The amazingly designed echolocation sonar system of Fishing Bats is able to detect a Minnow’s fin, as fine as a Human hair extending only 2mm above the water surface. The best manmade sonar can only distinguish ultra-sound echoes 6 millionths of a second apart – but Bats can easily distinguish echoes that are only 2 millionths of a second apart.


Mossieh
Extraordinary. Truly extraordinary. A wooden ship, capable of holding 32,000 animals and surviving the biggest oceanic cataclysm since your god created the planet?

Yes indeed Noah’s Ark was indeed an amazing feat of Naval Engineering……unsurpassed in scale in Europe until The Great Eastern Liner during the mid-nineteenth Century.

This proves that the Ante-Diluvian peoples were just as sophisticated (and possibly even more so) than people are today.
Other TRULY EXTRAORDINARY artefacts from this period include the Pyramids of Egypt and Mexico as well as the massive stone structures in Peru, Stonehenge, Easter Island and Newgrange!!! The observable presence of these structures today, proves that the construction a ship on the scale of the Ark was well within the competence of these very sophisticated people!!!!:D


Mossieh
Wouldn't it have been easier (for God) just to drown them all and start from scratch?

It would indeed…….but God wanted to deliver the message that only those, like Noah, who believe on Him will be saved…….and today it is also true that we must believe on Jesus Christ in order to be saved!!!
…..Jesus is our latter day ‘Ark of Salvation’…….and we must seize the opportunity of being saved while we can!!!


Mossieh
Also presumably the carnivores on board were not fed straw, so what was the story there?

The carnivores may have been less ‘obligate’ in their dietary requirements, than they are today and they may therefore have survived on vegetative material.
Equally, a state of suspended animation, similar to Hibernation, may have prevailed amongst the creatures on board the Ark – which would have greatly reduced the husbandry workload as well as the feed requirements.:cool:


Mossieh
Which of these 'seed' species gave rise to the duck-billed platypus?

Probably the Duck-billed Platypus!!!:D


Mossieh
If you can believe that these original 32,000 creatures gave rise to the vast biodiversity we have today, why is evolution and natural selection such a struggle for you to understand?

I have no problem accepting ‘downhill’ Evolution from the perfect, genetically diverse creatures that were originally Created. It is like accepting that a circular stone can run downhill off the top of a mountain.

However, the production of the enormous volumes of complex specified information observed in living Creatures ‘from scratch’ via some ‘uphill’ Evolutionary process is logically impossible. It is like expecting stone to run UP a mountain!!!:D


Mossieh
Given the problems that arise from inbreeding in small animal populations, how can you see a whole species surviving with just two animals to begin it?

Outbred animals DO have enormous genetic diversity.

JUST TWO Mongrel dogs, for example, will produce litters of pups with enormous genetic and phenotypic diversity – and the original Dog Kind had much greater diversity!!!!
Contrast such diversity, if you will, with pedigree dogs whose inbred crosses ALWAYS produce practically identical offspring!!!
So genomes CAN contain enormous diversity OR almost total uniformity!!!

Also please note that creatures with diverse genomes are found to have hybrid vigour, while highly selected, low diversity organisms suffer from inbreeding depression (which is mostly caused by the unmasking of recessive deleterious allelles. This is a further indication of the degeneration of a once-perfect, genetically diverse Creation!!!

J C

DerKaiser
Creation science is a contradiction in terms, list your theories that set up the scriptured "creation"

Here are some predictions of Creation Science that have been recently confirmed by Evolutionists:-

A vast reservoir of water as big as the Artic Ocean, deep inside the mantle of the earth and leftover from when “the fountains of the deep” burst open through the Earth’s Crust, during Noah’s flood:-
http://www.livescience.com/environment/070228_beijing_anomoly.html

A perfectly preserved prehistoric whale’s skeleton which has been discovered in Tuscany. This WASN’T a rock fossil but a supposedly 4 million year old SKELETON buried in clay. Makes one wonder where all of the skeletons of the billions of Humans that supposed lived and died over the same 4 million years are buried????
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-04-03-prehistoric-whale_N.htm

……or how about sandstone produced from sand in HOURS using biocement from NATURALLY occurring micro-organisms…..proving that sandstone DOESN’T require either enormous pressures or millions of years to form, as proposed by Evolutionists:-
http://www.constructionindustrynews.net/storyView.asp?StoryID=70034
http://www.technologyhorizons.co.uk/industry_sectors/structural_&_civil.cfm?faarea1=customWidgets.contentitem_displaypage&cit_id=4121

…..or what about the supposed 340 million year old fossil MEAT that was unearthed recently. The following article confirms that “fossilized muscle is quite rare, and the new finds are even more exceptional, because they weren't flattened but rather preserved with their three-dimensional shape intact”…….
……..so the surrounding rock WASN’T formed by the appliance of enormous pressure over enormous time – it most likely was formed within hours via cementing processes, as predicted by Creation Science!!!
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070212-fossil-tissue.html

……and this supposed 10 million year old bone marrow, is so fresh that it could almost be used in a bone marrow transplant!!!!:eek:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/07/060725-fossil-bone.html

……and here is proof that LARGE Gold deposits could be laid down in a matter of DAYS, as Creation Scientists would predict and NOT millions of years as Evolutionists used to believe:-
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/mg19325871.500-instant-gold-and-where-to-find-it.html

It really is a very exciting time to be a Creation Scientist with all of these amazing discoveries proving Creation Science to be correct during the past year!!!!:D

Pretty soon, the Gold Mining Companies will be employing (even more) Creation Scientists to assist them in prospecting!!!!:D
To quote Mark Hannington, an expert in economic geology at the University of Ottawa, Canada "Just when we thought we had a handle on how gold forms, the rapid formation at Lihir is turning everything we've known on its head,"
…..all he needs to do is to consult a Creation Geologist…..who will explain how to strike Gold every time!!!!:eek:

…… and pretty soon the Oil Companies will also begin to appreciate the benefits of Creation Geology!!!!!!:D


Originally Posted by J C
If you put 100 NON-RESISTANT bugs in a test tube and expose them to the antibiotic ,,,,,,,
….they will ALL die……that is what ‘non-resistant’ MEANS!!!

Wicknight
You are an idiot.

...and you are an exceptionally large brained Evolutionist!!!!:D


Wicknight
They will not all die, because some of them will produce mutated children before the antibiotic kills them.

The reason that resistance builds up is BECAUSE a small minority of ALREADY RESISTANT bugs survive and build up their numbers when the non-resistant bacteria are eliminated by the A/B…….

….and NOT because some of the non-resistant bugs produce mutated children, as you suggest………they won’t do this because the antibiotic will ALREADY have killed them ALL…….

…and dead bugs DON’T reproduce!!!:D


Son Goku
This is what I can't stand about Creationists. "Evolution isn't true lol. I'm sick. Guess I'll just use some antibiotics manufactured using the theory of evolution".

……but antibiotics AREN’T manufactured using the theory of evolution……

…..they ARE manufactured using complex biochemical engineering processes……..

……and some of the process engineers are Evolutionists …..and some are Creationists!!!!:cool:


Muiriosa B
I must say all, this has been a fascinating (if not a little terrifying!) read.

There is no need to be terrified.

Be not afraid ……for Jesus Christ loves you and goes before you, so come follow Him and He will give you rest!!!!:eek:


Muiriosa B
Thanks to all who have so patiently answered question after question.

Your thanks are graciously accepted!!!:D


Muiriosa B
I’m managed to go through the whole 302 pages in the last month; although I must admit I skipped some of the more technical posts!

Some of the more technical Creation Science posts are well worth the effort…….

…….you might like to go back and read them all again, perhaps????

….or alternatively you could just fully read this particular posting!!!!!!:D


DerKaiser
Yes it is good fun, isn't it?

This thread must be just about as much fun for an Evolutionist……..as Christmas is for a Turkey!!!!!

……… more stuffing anybody ???????

Spyral

right so then explain how we become resistant to anti-biotics then ?

2Scoops

J C wrote:

Insects were not carried on the Ark – and they survived the Flood on pieces of driftwood, floating carcasses, etc.
In relation to your point on "rare food"... it is thought that many creatures have more specialised diets today - due to the effects of speciation and reductions in genetic diversity.:cool:

Captain, the BS detector is going crazy.

J C wrote:

The carnivores may have been less ‘obligate’ in their dietary requirements, than they are today and they may therefore have survived on vegetative material.
Equally, a state of suspended animation, similar to Hibernation, may have prevailed amongst the creatures on board the Ark – which would have greatly reduced the husbandry workload as well as the feed requirements.:cool:

She canna take much more of this!!

J C wrote:

JUST TWO Mongrel dogs, for example, will produce litters of pups with enormous genetic and phenotypic diversity – and the original Dog Kind had much greater diversity!!!!

[KABOOM] ARRRRGH! [/KABOOM]

MooseJam

I've a question on evolution if anyone could be so good as to answer me, say my child has a mutation which proves advantageous, how does this spread to the whole population, surely it can't just be by her children having the same and on to the grandchildren etc, that would take forever to spread, is it a case of the very same mutation has occured many thousands of times in different children at the same time ? the population is big enough for this not to be impossible ?, i can see how that could spread to the whole population , does anybody know the mechanism ?

Asiaprod

2Scoops, this is your captain speaking, cut out the sarcasm or you get a Photon Torpedo where you will feel it.