The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
...strong words from a crowd that believes that muck can spontanously 'morph' into Man ... with nothing added but time!!!!

monosharp
From the crowd who believe the Earth is 6000 years old, humans existed alongside dinosaurs, neanderthals are a myth, a flood covered the planet and a supernatural being made humans in his image, apparently because a supernatural infinitely complex being requires a badly designed body with a penis.

...glad you reminded me of that !!!


Strong words from a crowd :-

... who believe that the Earth is billions of years old and Humans have been around for millions of years despite the fact that recorded history is less than 10,000 years old ... and there is no evidence for the billions of Humans that should have been on Earth ... if Humanity and the Earth are as old as the Atheists claim!!!

... who deny Dinosaurs lived alongside Humans despite reports of 'dragons' living alongside and harassing Humans in practically every culture on Earth ... and T-Rex 'fossils' being discovered with intact red blood corpuscles and articulating ligaments!!!

... who deny that a catastrophic flood covered the planet despite the planet being covered in sedimentary rock layers (laid down by water) containing billions of fossilised dead things ... and if there were no mountains or ocean troughs and the surface of the Earth was smooth , there is enough seawater today to cover the entire planet to an average depth of 2.7 Kilometres (or 1.6 miles) !!!

... who deny that they are made in the image of God while simultaneously denying that God exists!!!

... and as for the Human penis, it is perfectly designed for purpose ... and pleasure ... within marriage ...
... but using it for other unintended purposes may invalidate the 'Manufacturers' warranty!!!!:eek::D:)

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
... God is doubly eternal ... He always was ... and He always will be.

The Human Spirit is singly eternal ... it starts at the moment of fertilisation ... and it always will exist.

The Mad Hatter
That's just regular eternal.

...and it's a VERY LONG TIME ... if you were to find yourself in eternal perdition (regular or otherwise) ... cut off from the love and grace of God - and at the 'tender mercy' of Satan and his buddies!!!:eek:

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by monosharp
Out of curiousity JC.

It takes a proton about a million years to traverse from the center to the surface of the sun and then 8 minutes to us.

This makes the sun a wee bit older then 6000 years doesn't it ? Or is it just the Earth itself thats 6000 years old ?

What scienmotology research have you found to contradict this ?

Genghiz Cohen
Also, stars.

Ge 1:14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Genghiz Cohen

J C wrote: »

...glad you reminded me of that !!!


Strong words from a crowd :-

... who believe that the Earth is billions of years old and Humans have been around for millions of years despite the fact that recorded history is less than 10,000 years old ... and there is no evidence for the billions of Humans that should have been on Earth ... if Humanity and the Earth are as old as the Atheists claim!!!

"The earliest known European cave paintings date to Aurignacian, some 32,000 years ago."

What kind of evidence for the billions of humans are you looking for?

And who said there were humans at birth of the Earth anyway!?

J C wrote:

... who deny Dinosaurs lived alongside Humans despite reports of 'dragons' living alongside and harassing Humans in practically every culture on Earth ... and T-Rex 'fossils' being discovered with intact red blood corpuscles and articulating ligaments!!!

Sea Serpents were still being sketched into maps in 1555. Were there dinosaurs living alongside man then?

Reports of Bigfoot are still being claimed today.

J C wrote:

... who deny that a catastrophic flood covered the planet despite the planet being covered in sedimentary rock layers (laid down by water) containing billions of fossilised dead things ... and if there were no mountains or ocean troughs and the surface of the Earth was smooth , there is enough seawater today to cover the entire planet to an average depth of 2.7 Kilometres (or 1.6 miles) !!!

No one denies that at any given point the surface of the earth looked different to what it is today. Mountains rose, seas were created by landmasses splitting. It's happening right now.

Weren't those fossils, which will date tens of thousands of years ago, put there by God to test us?

J C wrote:

... who deny that they are made in the image of God while simultaneously denying that God exists!!!

Yup.

Genghiz Cohen

J C wrote: »

Ge 1:14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

I can quote a book too. Doesn't mean it's fact.

Gen1:
14 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has lightz in the skiez for splittin day An no day.
15 It happen, lights everwear, like christmass, srsly.
16 An Ceiling Cat doeth two grate lightz, teh most big for day, teh other for no day.
17 An Ceiling Cat screw tehm on skiez, with big nails An stuff, to lite teh Urfs.
18 An tehy rulez day An night. Ceiling Cat sawed. Iz good.
19 An so teh furth day w00t.

Ceiling Cat Bless...

J C

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

"The earliest known European cave paintings date to Aurignacian, some 32,000 years ago." ...more like about 4,000 years ago ... but isn't it amazing that Human Beings are supposed to have emerged hundreds of thousands of years ago (some evolutionists say millions of years ago) ... and yet recorded history began less than 10,000 years ago.

What kind of evidence for the billions of humans are you looking for? ...their billions of dwellings, construction projects and graves/tombs!!!

And who said there were humans at birth of the Earth anyway!? ...God!!



Sea Serpents were still being sketched into maps in 1555. Were there dinosaurs living alongside man then?

Reports of Bigfoot are still being claimed today. ...look, they have found fossilised Human footprints alongside dinosaur ones ... the evidence is literally written in stone!!!
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/taylor-all-14.jpg
http://ancientx.com/nm/anmviewer.asp?a=70
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i4/dinosaurs.asp
http://www.dinosaursandman.com/research/WALKING_WITH_DINOSAURS.pdf


No one denies that at any given point the surface of the earth looked different to what it is today. Mountains rose, seas were created by landmasses splitting. It's happening right now.

Weren't those fossils, which will date tens of thousands of years ago, put there by God to test us? ... no ... they were put there by God's judgement!!!

.

J C

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

I can quote a book too. Doesn't mean it's fact.

Gen1:
14 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has lightz in the skiez for splittin day An no day.
15 It happen, lights everwear, like christmass, srsly.
16 An Ceiling Cat doeth two grate lightz, teh most big for day, teh other for no day.
17 An Ceiling Cat screw tehm on skiez, with big nails An stuff, to lite teh Urfs.
18 An tehy rulez day An night. Ceiling Cat sawed. Iz good.
19 An so teh furth day w00t.

Ceiling Cat Bless...

....so is this the stuff that Evolutionists confuse themselves with?:rolleyes::D

Genghiz Cohen

J C wrote:

more like about 4,000 years ago

Why 4000?
The drawings have been carbon-dated at 32,000.

J C wrote:

...their billions of dwellings, construction projects and graves/tombs!!!

We are lucky to have Renaissance homes to look at. Even luckier still to have Bronze/Iron age ring forts scattered across the country side.

Why would you expect ancient wooden houses to stand for 10,000 years? If they did I'd build a time machine to go back and hire the builders to build me a house!

EDIT: If we should expect to see 10,000 year old homes, Noahs Ark should be lying around here somewhere.

J C wrote:

they have found fossilised Human footprints alongside dinosaur ones ... the evidence is literally written in stone!!!

"However, the "man track" claims have not stood up to close scientific scrutiny, and in recent years have been abandoned even by most creationists. "

J C wrote:

....so is this the stuff that Evolutionists confuse themselves with?

Basement Cat awaits non-believers!

Morbert

J C wrote: »

...not much explanatory power in these answers...but this is 'par for the course' with Evolutionism anyway!!!:eek::pac::):D

They are sufficient rebuttals.

Sam Vimes

wolfsbane wrote: »

Yes, I don't know the science well enough to assess the merits of each item, but I do know enough to see logical flaws and to recognise smoke & mirrors.

I really wish that was true. You seem like a genuine guy who's just been taken in by these people and it's a real shame

Take for example J C's quote from Stephen Gould. We have explained that it has been taken out of context to give a meaning that was never intended and Gould himself spend years trying to clarify what he meant to stop creationists using it out of context but they wouldn't and J C uses it to this day to try to blacken the reputation of a dead man. Do you not consider that "smoke and mirrors"?

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

Yes, I don't know the science well enough to assess the merits of each item, but I do know enough to see logical flaws and to recognise smoke & mirrors.

The way evolutionary scientists treat the arguments fellow evolutionists when they disagree is also telling regards their dismissive claims about Creation science.

Yes but again you don't know the way evolutionary scientists treat the arguments from fellow evolutions, you just know what Creationists claim happens.

You don't follow evolutionary biology, you don't keep up with the community or the publications.

Creationists tell you something terrible has happened ("censorship!!") and you believe them uncritically because they put forward an argument you want to be true.

wolfsbane wrote: »

Of course, if scientific expertise is required before one can have a view on the plausibility of any scientific theory or law, then very few scientists can have a view on evolution.

Well yes, that is a good point. Which is why Creationists wheeling out chemical engineers or astronomers to tell us all about the "logical flaws" in evolutionary theory that biologists are hiding is a bit silly. It is far more likely that these Creationists who don't study the field they are discussion simply don't understand it well enough.

Anyone can have a view on anything, but it is silly for someone to pretend to be an expert to rubbish the idea itself.

wolfsbane wrote: »

Yet the mass of biologists, geologists, chemists, physicists, etc. seem very defensive of it. Who are they trusting? Have they already decided what must be true and their opinions worthless?

No, they have put evolutionary biology through 150 years or rigurous science and found the theory very accurate.

They are defensive because people who simply refuse to accept this based on religious grounds want to by pass the scientific process and have evolution removed or their own theories that haven't passed scientific standards shoe horned in.

Scientists (proper ones) get very defensive when the scientific standards that have worked so well are threatened by those with an agenda for pre-ordained "truths".

Religion doesn't have a particularly good track record in this regard, does it?

wolfsbane wrote: »

Both both sides have their experts in the relevant scientific fields.

One side has a million times more experts in the relevant scientific fields. That should tell you something.

When pressed to name Creationist biologists on this forum you guys struggled to get above 50. 50 out of the millions of active biologists who use evolutionary theory every day.

Given that you claim to not really understand the claims that either side are putting forward it seems bizarre that you would side with the 50.

Bizarre until you look at your shared religious beliefs.

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

But any definition of science that excludes Creation as the origin of the universe is a religious one.

The definition of science says nothing about the origin of the universe or any other area of scientific study.

The definition of science is the definition of the process scientists must go through to maintain scientific standards.

Behe and other IDs and Creationists have long tried to change this process, to lower scientific standards, because their own ideas such as irreduciable complexity and intelligent design, can't pass this process and are not considered science.

It is like a prosecutor trying to change the law to remove the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard for criminal evidence because they can't demonstrate someone committed a crime but really "know" they did.

As Sam says this should speak volumes to you about how much IDers and Creatoinists respect the scientific standards modern understanding are built upon and the motivations behind their movement.

Of course it won't though because you have never shown any regard for scientific standards yourself or how important they are.

monosharp

J C wrote: »

... who believe that the Earth is billions of years old and Humans have been around for millions of years

No, scientists don't.

Humans are bipedal primates belonging to the species Homo sapiens (Latin: "wise man" or "knowing man") in Hominidae, the great ape family.[2][3] They are the only surviving members of the genus Homo. Humans have a highly developed brain, capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, and problem solving. This mental capability, combined with an erect body carriage that frees the arms for manipulating objects, has allowed humans to make far greater use of tools than any other species. Mitochondrial DNA and fossil evidence indicates that modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago.

despite the fact that recorded history is less than 10,000 years old

Recorded history (sometimes called record history) is human history that has been written down or recorded by the use of language. It starts in the 4th millennium BC, with the invention of writing. The period before this is known as prehistory.

Timeline of human prehistory.

Paleolithic
c. 120,000 BP - Anatomically modern Homo sapiens appears in Africa.
c. 300,000 BP to 30,000 BP. Mousterian (Neanderthal) culture in Europe.[10]
c. 75,000 BP - Toba Volcano supereruption.[11]
c. 70,000 - 50,000 BP - Homo sapiens move from Africa to Asia.[12] In the next millennia, these human group's descendants move on to southern India, the Malay islands, Australia, Japan, China, Siberia, Alaska, and the northwestern coast of North America.[13]
Mesolithic
c. 32,000 BP - Aurignacian culture begins in Europe.
c. 30,000 BP / 28,000 BC - A herd of reindeer is slaughtered and butchered by humans in the Vezere Valley in what is today France.[14]
c. 28,500 BCE - New Guinea is populated by colonists from Asia or Australia.[15]
c. 28,000 BP - 20,000 BP - Graveltian period in Europe. Harpoons, needles, and saws invented.
c. 26,000 BP / c. 24,000 BC - Women around the world use fibers to make baby-carriers, clothes, bags, baskets, and nets.
c. 25,000 BP / 23,000 BC - A hamlet consisting of huts built of rocks and of mammoth bones is founded in what is now Dolni Vestonice in Moravia in the Czech Republic. This is the oldest human permanent settlement that has yet been found by archaeologists.[16]
c. 20,000 BP or 18,000 BC - Chatelperronian culture in France.[17]
c. 16,000 BP / 14,000 BC - Wisent sculpted in clay deep inside the cave now known as Le Tuc d'Audoubert in the French Pyrinees near what is now the border of Spain.[18]
c. 14,800 BP / 12,800 BC - The Humid Period begins in North Africa. The region that would later become the Sahara is wet and fertile, and the Aquifers are full.[19]

... and there is no evidence for the billions of Humans that should have been on Earth ... if Humanity and the Earth are as old as the Atheists claim!!!

What kind of evidence would you like for 200,000 years of homo sapiens existence ?

... who deny Dinosaurs lived alongside Humans despite reports of 'dragons' living alongside and harassing Humans in practically every culture on Earth ... and T-Rex 'fossils' being discovered with intact red blood corpuscles and articulating ligaments!!!

Been debunked so many times I am not even going to comment. Even the majority of Creationists don't come out with this rubbish anymore.

... who deny that a catastrophic flood covered the planet despite the planet being covered in sedimentary rock layers (laid down by water) containing billions of fossilised dead things ... and if there were no mountains or ocean troughs and the surface of the Earth was smooth , there is enough seawater today to cover the entire planet to an average depth of 2.7 Kilometres (or 1.6 miles) !!!

So the surface of the Earth was smooth 6,000 years ago ? Where in the olde bible does it say that ?

... who deny that they are made in the image of God while simultaneously denying that God exists!!!

I don't deny I'm made in the image of God, my body is extremely god like. Every morning when I wake up I admire my nakedness in the mirror. :pac:

... and as for the Human penis, it is perfectly designed for purpose ... and pleasure ... within marriage ...
... but using it for other unintended purposes may invalidate the 'Manufacturers' warranty!!!!:eek::D:)

Does god have a penis ?

monosharp

wolfsbane wrote: »

That assumes the protons that have hit earth over this last 6000 years originated at the centre of the sun.

But a mature creation is one in which all the necessities of life are present from the word Go. Adam did not start life as a sperm and egg collision, but as an adult male. Ditto for all the rest.

Right so. The reason we see stars is because God made the light come quicker to us so that we could see beautiful sparklely things in the sky at night yeah ? Since the light from them would take millions of years to reach us otherwise.

Does that honestly make sense to you ?

J C

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Why 4000?
The drawings have been carbon-dated at 32,000.

We are lucky to have Renaissance homes to look at. Even luckier still to have Bronze/Iron age ring forts scattered across the country side.

Why would you expect ancient wooden houses to stand for 10,000 years? If they did I'd build a time machine to go back and hire the builders to build me a house!

EDIT: If we should expect to see 10,000 year old homes, Noahs Ark should be lying around here somewhere.

...yet every ancient city is well preserved either under its modern replacement ... or on its own where abandoned ... the only problem is that they ALL seem to have been founded less than 10,000 years ago!!!!

wrote:

Monosharp

Timeline of human prehistory.

Quote:

Paleolithic
c. 120,000 BP - Anatomically modern Homo sapiens appears in Africa.
c. 300,000 BP to 30,000 BP. Mousterian (Neanderthal) culture in Europe.[10]
c. 75,000 BP - Toba Volcano supereruption.[11]
c. 70,000 - 50,000 BP - Homo sapiens move from Africa to Asia.[12] In the next millennia, these human group's descendants move on to southern India, the Malay islands, Australia, Japan, China, Siberia, Alaska, and the northwestern coast of North America.[13]
Mesolithic
c. 32,000 BP - Aurignacian culture begins in Europe.
c. 30,000 BP / 28,000 BC - A herd of reindeer is slaughtered and butchered by humans in the Vezere Valley in what is today France.[14]
c. 28,500 BCE - New Guinea is populated by colonists from Asia or Australia.[15]
c. 28,000 BP - 20,000 BP - Graveltian period in Europe. Harpoons, needles, and saws invented.
c. 26,000 BP / c. 24,000 BC - Women around the world use fibers to make baby-carriers, clothes, bags, baskets, and nets.
c. 25,000 BP / 23,000 BC - A hamlet consisting of huts built of rocks and of mammoth bones is founded in what is now Dolni Vestonice in Moravia in the Czech Republic. This is the oldest human permanent settlement that has yet been found by archaeologists.[16]
c. 20,000 BP or 18,000 BC - Chatelperronian culture in France.[17]
c. 16,000 BP / 14,000 BC - Wisent sculpted in clay deep inside the cave now known as Le Tuc d'Audoubert in the French Pyrinees near what is now the border of Spain.[18]
c. 14,800 BP / 12,800 BC - The Humid Period begins in North Africa. The region that would later become the Sahara is wet and fertile, and the Aquifers are full.[19]

...if you close your eyes and really really try you just might believe it ...
...otherwise it just looks like the rest of the 'deep time' baloney that the latter-day Materialists confuse themselves with!!!
...though at least, they are talking in thousands rather than millions of years!!!

Genghiz Cohen wrote:

"However, the "man track" claims have not stood up to close scientific scrutiny, and in recent years have been abandoned even by most creationists. "

...are you also in denial of the Russian evidence for Human Dinosaur co-existence?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i4/dinosaurs.asp
http://www.dinosaursandman.com/research/WALKING_WITH_DINOSAURS.pdf

Genghiz Cohen wrote:

Basement Cat awaits non-believers!

..and 'Basement Cat' will be the least of what awaits them, if they die Unsaved ... and face an eternity of mauling by demons!!!:eek:

J C

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I really wish that was true. You seem like a genuine guy who's just been taken in by these people and it's a real shame

Take for example J C's quote from Stephen Gould. We have explained that it has been taken out of context to give a meaning that was never intended and Gould himself spend years trying to clarify what he meant to stop creationists using it out of context but they wouldn't and J C uses it to this day to try to blacken the reputation of a dead man. Do you not consider that "smoke and mirrors"?

...you guys are in such denial that even when an 'icon of evolutionism' like Prof Gould makes true statements about the paucity of evidence for gradual (Darwinian) evolution you start alleging that he is somehow being quoted 'out of context' ... even though an earlier generation of Darwinists persecuted the self same Prof Gould for making precisely these statements!!!!

...and suddenly in some sort of orwellian revisionism ... I'm the one supposedly 'blackening the name' of a great scientist ... even though I defended Prof Gould against the unfounded attacks of Darwinists when you were still in nappies ... on precisely these same issues and arguments!!!!!!

Could I gently point out that Prof Gould's Punctuated Equilibrium Theory is still denied by Darwinists ... with almost as much vehemence as they deny Creation!!!!:eek:

...so quit the 'crocodile tears' over Prof Gould's reputation ... he was a great scientist and an original thinker ... and my quote is an accurate reflection of his position on the lack of support in the fossil record for gradual evolution ... a position that I myself continue to endorse!!!

...he was, of course an evolutionist despite the lack of evidence for its validity ... but nobody is perfect!!!:eek::)

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by: monosharp
... a supernatural being made humans in his image, apparently because a supernatural infinitely complex being requires a badly designed body with a penis.


Reply by: J C
...and as for the Human penis, it is perfectly designed for purpose ... and pleasure ... within marriage ...
... but using it for other unintended purposes may invalidate the 'Manufacturers' warranty!!!!

monosharp
Does god have a penis ?

...no ... God doesn't require such an appendage ....
Human men do require it for various reasons ... but using it for unapproved purposes can get you into all kinds of trouble!!!:eek:;)

Genghiz Cohen

J C wrote: »

...yet every ancient city is well preserved either under its modern replacement ... or on its own where abandoned ... the only problem is that they ALL seem to have been founded less than 10,000 years ago!!!!

Srsly?
If some cities were destroyed. How are we supposed to know they were there?
You can't tell me that every city ever to have existed is still, in some way, present on the face of the earth.

J C wrote: »

...are you also in denial of the Russian evidence for Human Dinosaur co-existence?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i4/dinosaurs.asp
http://www.dinosaursandman.com/research/WALKING_WITH_DINOSAURS.pdf

"There is no discernible ball-arch-heel pattern on the print bottom, and overall, it appears at least as compatible with a metatarsal dinosaur print as a human print. "

"the shapes are not natural or anatomically correct, and lack normal human bottom contours."

"the tracks in question cannot be regarded as reliable or even probable human prints. "

"Golovin's suggestion that the those who do not accept the human track claims suffer from "evolutionary indoctrination" rings hollow."
Sound like anyone we know?

J C wrote: »

..and 'Basement Cat' will be the least of what awaits them, if they die Unsaved ... and face an eternity of mauling by demons!!!:eek:

Those who do not accept Ceiling Cat are doomed to be without internets. Forevar!
What could be worse!?!?


You haven't told me about the experiments you've conducted to prove the 32,000 year old carbon dating wrong either.

J C

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Srsly?
If some cities were destroyed. How are we supposed to know they were there?
You can't tell me that every city ever to have existed is still, in some way, present on the face of the earth.

... yes, they should be ... and they are ... but there are very few of them if man has been around for hundreds of thousands of years!!!!

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

"There is no discernible ball-arch-heel pattern on the print bottom, and overall, it appears at least as compatible with a metatarsal dinosaur print as a human print. "

"the shapes are not natural or anatomically correct, and lack normal human bottom contours."

"the tracks in question cannot be regarded as reliable or even probable human prints. "

"Golovin's suggestion that the those who do not accept the human track claims suffer from "evolutionary indoctrination" rings hollow."
Sound like anyone we know?

...denial is a terrible thing!!!!

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

You haven't told me about the experiments you've conducted to prove the 32,000 year old carbon dating wrong either.

..you can read all about carbon dating ... and its limitations here....
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-c14-disprove-the-bible

monosharp

J C wrote: »

..you can read all about carbon dating ... and its limitations here....
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-c14-disprove-the-bible

The previously linked rubbish wrote:

When a scientist’s interpretation of data does not match the clear meaning of the text in the Bible, we should never reinterpret the Bible. God knows just what He meant to say, and His understanding of science is infallible, whereas ours is fallible.

And this is the type of crap creationists are trying to claim is science.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you irrefutable proof of creationist stupidity from their own website.

Sam Vimes

J C wrote: »

...you guys are in such denial that even when an 'icon of evolutionism' like Prof Gould makes true statements about the paucity of evidence for gradual (Darwinian) evolution you start alleging that he is somehow being quoted 'out of context' ... even though an earlier generation of Darwinists persecuted the self same Prof Gould for making precisely these statements!!!!

...and suddenly in some sort of orwellian revisionism ... I'm the one supposedly 'blackening the name' of a great scientist ... even though I defended Prof Gould against the unfounded attacks of Darwinists when you were still in nappies ... on precisely these same issues and arguments!!!!!!

Could I gently point out that Prof Gould's Punctuated Equilibrium Theory is still denied by Darwinists ... with almost as much vehemence as they deny Creation!!!!:eek:

...so quit the 'crocodile tears' over Prof Gould's reputation ... he was a great scientist and an original thinker ... and my quote is an accurate reflection of his position on the lack of support in the fossil record for gradual evolution ... a position that I myself continue to endorse!!!

...he was, of course an evolutionist despite the lack of evidence for its validity ... but nobody is perfect!!!:eek::)

www.skepticwiki.org/index.php/Punctuated_Equilibrium


Creationist Arguments
A number of efforts have been made by creationists trying to shoe-horn the claims of Gould and Eldredge into fitting one or the other of their dogmas. As usual with creationist blunders, the one thing they all have in common is that they bear no relation to the facts (in this case, what Gould and Eldredge wrote); and as usual, this disconnection from the facts is the reason why their blunders on the subject are so disparate and contradictory: in order to agree on a single story, they'd have to agree on what Gould and Eldredge meant: which would involve reading what they actually wrote, rather than merely distorting, quote-mining, and just plain lying about their views.

"No Intermediate Forms" revisited

One popular creationist myth is that punctuated equilibrium was thought up to explain the absence of intermediate forms in the fossil record. There are, of course, an abundance of such forms: and if they were absent, the claim of Gould and Eldredge that most evolution takes place during speciation would not explain their absence. Punctuated equilibrium purports to explain the relative scarcity (not complete absence) of intermediate forms at the species level only.

To quote Gould:
Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists — whether through design or stupidity, I do not know —as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups. Yet a pamphlet entitled "Harvard Scientists Agree Evolution Is a Hoax" states: "The facts of punctuated equilibrium which Gould and Eldredge …are forcing Darwinists to swallow fit the picture that Bryan insisted on, and which God has revealed to us in the Bible. (Stephen Jay Gould, Evolution As Fact And Theory [1] )

We too cannot say whether creationists are acting through "design or stupidity" when they summarize Gould's work as "Harvard Scientists Agree Evolution Is a Hoax"; it is true that the amount of stupidity requisite would be enormous, but not necessarily beyond the abilities of a creationist.

Sam Vimes

J C wrote: »

Could I gently point out that Prof Gould's Punctuated Equilibrium Theory is still denied by Darwinists ... with almost as much vehemence as they deny Creation!!!!:eek:

Oh, and:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/5/l_035_01.html

The concept of punctuated equilibrium was, to some, a radical new idea when it was first proposed by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge in 1972. Now it is widely recognized as a useful model for one kind of evolutionary change. The relative importance of punctuated and gradual patterns of evolution is a subject of debate and research.

Scientists have scrutinized the fossil records of many organisms looking for evidence of punctuated evolution. One group of coral-like sea organisms in particular, called bryozoan, shows this kind of pattern. The well-preserved fossil record of bryozoans shows that one species first appeared about 140 million years ago and remained unchanged for its first 40 million years. Then there was an explosion of diversification, followed by another period of stability for vast amounts of time.

Although the patterns predicted by punctuated equilibrium have been observed in at least some cases, debate continues over how frequently this model of evolutionary change occurs -- is it the norm, or only an exception? Punctuated equilibrium also generates interesting questions for further research. What, for example, are the processes that produce rapid evolution? Population genetic studies show us that small changes can accrue quickly in small populations. And evolutionary developmental biology is revealing new mechanisms that regulate the expression of small genetic changes in ways that can have a large effect on phenotype. Which evolutionary factors are primarily responsible for the periods of stasis -- in which lineages persist without change -- that can be observed in the fossil record? In seeking the answers to these questions, researchers will continue to advance our understanding of the evolutionary processes that produced the remarkable variety of life on Earth

It seems they don't vehemently deny puntuated equilibrium and it is in fact the subject of much debate and research, unlike creationism which has rightly been debunked as nonsense. It appears that what you said bears little relation to reality. What a surprise

Genghiz Cohen

J C wrote: »

... yes, they should be ... and they are ... but there are very few of them if man has been around for hundreds of thousands of years!!!!


...denial is a terrible thing!!!!


..you can read all about carbon dating ... and its limitations here....
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-c14-disprove-the-bible

So many ironings...

J C

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Oh, and:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/5/l_035_01.html


It seems they don't vehemently deny puntuated equilibrium and it is in fact the subject of much debate and research, unlike creationism which has rightly been debunked as nonsense. It appears that what you said bears little relation to reality. What a surprise

...the fact that Prof Gould's ideas were dismissed as the 'Hopeful Monster' Theory, illustrates what Evolutionists really thought of Punctuated Equilibrium, at the time.

Of course, the fact that Prof Gould is now dead and his ideas have been 'sanitised' sufficiently so as not to be direct threat to the core beliefs of Darwinism ... means that hecan now be 'safely' given a place in the 'Pantheon of Evolutionism'!!!!:D

I can also see a day when ID will be sufficiently emasculated, from a Darwinian point of view, to also be assimilated 'safely' by Darwinism ... possibly by the transformation of ID into AID ... or the Appearance of Intelligent Design!!!

Sam Vimes wrote: »

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it

...so how come you are aligning yourself with Dogmatic Darwinism then???

J C

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

So many ironings...

...or even ironies perhaps?!!!:D:)

Genghiz Cohen

J C wrote: »

...or even ironies perhaps?!!!:D:)

Intentional misspelling is intentional.

You talk about denial when faced with a source that completely refutes your evidence. Not a great argument TBH.

Here is a summary for the growth of the human population.
Link

I do love how you keep going on about how there are no human settlements before 10,000BC.
Especially since man has only been building settlements since 10,000BC.
Remember that whole hunter gatherer phase?

Sam Vimes

J C wrote: »

...the fact that Prof Gould's ideas were dismissed as the 'Hopeful Monster' Theory, illustrates what Evolutionists really thought of Punctuated Equilibrium, at the time.

Of course, the fact that Prof Gould is now dead and his ideas have been 'sanitised' sufficiently so as not to be direct threat to the core beliefs of Darwinism ... means that hecan now be 'safely' given a place in the 'Pantheon of Evolutionism'!!!!:D

His ideas were never sanitised mate, as evidenced quite clearly in the quote I gave from the man himself, his theories never actually said what creationists claimed they said. They just kept using out of context quotes to try to dishonestly try to bolster their nonsense ideas. Punctuated equilibrium is evolution, it follows exactly the same mechanism and produces exactly the same results, he simply theorised the model shown in the second diagram over the first:

Note that the horizontal lines actually represent a period of about 50,000 years

J C wrote: »

I can also see a day when ID will be sufficiently emasculated, from a Darwinian point of view, to also be assimilated 'safely' by Darwinism ... possibly by the transformation of ID into AID ... or the Appearance of Intelligent Design!!!

That's already happened. I have no problem granting you that when you look at it superficially it can appear that life has been intelligently designed but when you look a bit deeper you realise that is neither necessary nor supported by evidence.

J C wrote: »

...so how come you are aligning yourself with Dogmatic Darwinism then???

I'm not. I am 100% sure that there are parts of the theory of evolution that are wrong, I am 100% sure that it will continue to be updated for hundreds of years to come. Evolution is not "the truth", it's simply the best model we currently have and it is supported by a mountain of evidence.

And you've prompted me to be the second person to post this picture in this thread:

J C

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Here is a summary for the growth of the human population.
Link

I do love how you keep going on about how there are no human settlements before 10,000BC.
Especially since man has only been building settlements since 10,000BC.
Remember that whole hunter gatherer phase?

...there were no human settlements before 10,000 BC because there were no Humans alive before 10,000BC!!!!

..and the so-called 'hunter gatherer' phase is just another myth that Evolutionists confuse themselves with!!!:D

Sam Vimes

J C wrote: »

...there were no human settlements before 10,000 BC because there were no Humans alive before 10,000BC!!!!

..and the so-called 'hunter gatherer' phase is just another myth that Evolutionists confuse themselves with!!!:D

That's something that doesn't get nearly enough attention in this thread. The main focus is the nonsense idea that if you prove evolution wrong somehow that will mean creationism is right but in order to believe creationism you have to ignore vast swathes of scientific knowledge from biology to geology to astronomy to, in this case, archeology and history. The "hunter gatherer" phase has nothing to do with evolution, it's just one of the many many areas of science that all slot in easily together when you accept that the world is billions of years old and that life evolved.

To believe in creationism you would have to have so little faith in the human ability to "do science" that I find it amazing that creationists ever step onto a plane or go to a hospital. Sure aeronautics is "just a theory" and so is all of medicine. Your plane could fall out of the sky any minute and that drug the doctor told you to take could have a vast movement of opponents who know "the truth" but are being censored by those evil scientists.

J C

Sam Vimes wrote: »

His ideas were never sanitised mate, as evidenced quite clearly in the quote I gave from the man himself, his theories never actually said what creationists claimed they said. They just kept using out of context quotes to try to dishonestly try to bolster their nonsense ideas. Punctuated equilibrium is evolution, it follows exactly the same mechanism and produces exactly the same results, he simply theorised the model shown in the second diagram over the first:

Note that the horizontal lines actually represent a period of about 50,000 years

... these lines are very thick lines (in every sense of the word)!!!!:eek::D
...Punctuated Equilibrium was indeed scoffed at by many Darwinists as it was perceived as an embarassment to the gradualism of Darwinism ... and a significant threat due to its perceived highlighting of the lack of intermediate forms in the fossil record.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

That's already happened. I have no problem granting you that when you look at it superficially it can appear that life has been intelligently designed but when you look a bit deeper you realise that is neither necessary nor supported by evidence.

...so when will Prof Behe et al be accorded membership of the Pantheon of the Evolutionist Gods????

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I'm not. I am 100% sure that there are parts of the theory of evolution that are wrong, I am 100% sure that it will continue to be updated for hundreds of years to come. Evolution is not "the truth", it's simply the best model we currently have and it is supported by a mountain of evidence.

... micro-evolution, using pre-existing information is a fact ... all the rest is an unfounded belief that is promoted in order to 'shore up' Atheistic Materialism!!!

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And you've prompted me to be the second person to post this picture in this thread:

...so is that how Evolutionists study physics??:eek: