Sorry, I don’t accept Evolution as a science as it cannot be proven. Rather, it is a belief based on a theory competing with other similar beliefs. It has no place in the discipline of science – (Guyana Online)
[…]
The Evolution debate cum the ingenuity of Homo sapiens will rage until the end times. The subject is intriguing for the reason we know so little about how the creature Homo sapiens was originally formed. Whether one subscribes to faith base beliefs or the Big Bang theory (another belief), the intrigue fuelled by the unknown is the same.
Here is the link to an interesting paper titled HOMO SAPIENS posted to Guyana Online newspaper by Leslie Chin and submitted to BU by Errol Harry.
Homo sapiens is undoubtedly the most intelligent creature that ever existed, together with a favourable anatomy he has come to dominate the world. However Homo sapiens is a flawed species with many shortcoming which may eventually lead to his demise. Homo sapiens is essentially a cave man who lives by the tenet “survival of the fittest” which is a legacy of our time as hunter gathers. In an increasingly crowded and complex world we have to suppress our warlike tendency if we want to live in peace. With nuclear and chemical weapons we have the potential to annihilate ourselves many times over. Until we evolve into a more benign, more empathic species (by Darwinian evolution?) we will continue to behave as we do – competitive, selfish, greedy, vindictive and homicidal, hell bent on destroying each other.
I’m surprised about your stance on evolution cos if you reject it you should not consult Dr’s. Go to you tube n look at What Darwin never knew…..a BBC documentary then see if evolution is an un proven belief as you believe human gnome mapping and all Modern medical science has ratified Darwin from the dna discovery in 1954 to Chimps being 99% human genetically.
A genetic eye problem in Germany was traced to the fruit fly the identical gene too AND WHY would the Great Designer in the sky contrive to make the humble rice grain more complex than we humans genetically? 4600 vs 2800 genes. In Guyana we used to disparage ragamuffin dogs as Rice – eaters. …
The growing Immunity to antibiotics is evolution right there..Fin ally..after exercising take off your tee shirt n ID where the biggest wet mark is yeah on your back …why ? When we were on all fours Bro you are entitled to your beliefs but not to yr own facts as the Guardian comments section says..
all the major Christian faiths have now secretly prepared doctrinal shape-shifting to deal with the discovery of alien life…which is expected.
While On you tube .type in Big Youth and play Natty cultural dread Pope Paul God made the world n all within it.. must be slightly amended from world to universe to encompass galaxies n the aliens. Some even believe they are already among us have a closer look at the messianic countenances of Tony Blair or George Bush or Trump..in full verbal flight…
This is sheer political prejudice of course Because my scant knowledge of human origins allied to the age of our planet 4 billion years and our first appearance in Africa 2.5 million years ago I think but millions not billions should have led me to expect the aliens to start cloning we Africans first. So have a closer Look at Robert Mugabe Idi Amin or Zuma on the continent or closer to home where all the hatred is . just.look at Dr Ben gifted hands Carson in the USA
Now besides all of his embarrassing (to the race) utterances why would this ex rucciatingly brilliant human suddenly feel the urge to deal with Pyramids?
or cleave to the ADVENTISTS of all the 30000 Christian denominations available to him?
Must be the X factor indeed but Isn’t that a strange religious choice Dr Sawak?
and what about our dear brother Prof Cornel West…see also on you tube the film Brother from another planet ..it’s great.
Me? Oh I’m a Catholic jus stickin to the Devil I know…
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
167 responses to “HOMO SAPIENS, more Questions than Answers”
Dav Good
I am totally confused, what was that?
Loading…
lawson
It probably will make sense after the second bottle of old gold
Loading…
thejustician
To my knowledge today there has still been no real evidence found by these scientists to substantiate this theory, only their own talk about their own ‘findings’ that we will never get to verify. There are primate fossils, there are human fossils, and if man evolved from primates there would also be millions of fossil skeletons indicating gradual changes from primate to human over millions of years; they call this the ‘missing link man’… because they don’t have ONE. I wasn’t there so I can only say that it will take more than the word of white men in lab coats to convince me.
Loading…
Well Well & Consequences
Interesting, another perspective.
Loading…
lawson
White men in lab coats, I can understand how you could be skeptical of them especially when they are chasing you with a butterfly net. But let me assure your attendants are only vocalizing what most people have come to accept. Records, fossils, actual proof, and a little faith pale in comparison to your….oh yeh book…
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ thejustician December 2, 2015 at 9:28 AM
“There are primate fossils, there are human fossils, and if man evolved from primates there would also be millions of fossil skeletons indicating gradual changes from primate to human over millions of years; they call this the ‘missing link man’…”
But “man” is a primate! Or do you consider him to be a bird or a reptile?
Man (humanoids) did not evolve from a monkey. Both share the same ancestry and this is borne out by the same fossil records you assert are “missing”.
You might wish to dismiss the “white men in lab coats” as mad but are still prepared to send your children to study biology to become a doctor. What do you think that branch of scientific knowledge called DNA is based on if not on the theory of Evolution?
You would be only too keen to rely on the same DNA to confirm or disprove paternity or used as ‘objective’ evidence to find a rapist guilty but just as eager to reject when it confirms that you (and me) share 98% genetic similarity with chimps.
Loading…
thejustician
I do not discount DNA. I am saying that nothing found substantiates the theory that man evolved from primates, and that man is not the haphazard end product of monkey/baboon/chimp ancestry who ‘got smart and physically adapted’. Funny how that sounds a lot like Mr. Annunaki’s “Man (humanoids) did not evolve from a monkey.” Two assumptions and misinterpretations in one post… nice.
Lawson, I don’t have a book, or a religion; let me just say that now and preempt any imminent asinine comments. Good to know that you will accept “what most people have come to accept.” Gotta know who is who.
Loading…
thejustician
“What do you think that branch of scientific knowledge called DNA is based on if not on the theory of Evolution?”
Hmmm, seems it’s a good thing they gave you that theory then… if not you wouldn’t have any (knowledge called) DNA…
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ thejustician December 2, 2015 at 12:16 PM
Do you really understand what is meant by “theory”?
If you think evolution is some bogus theory of mad atheists why can’t you proffer your own ‘scientific’ theory about the origins of human beings?
But before you do that you must answer this question:
Do you accept the Earth is older than 1milion years old?
Loading…
Georgie Porgie
that branch of scientific knowledge called DNA is NOT IN ANY WAY based on the theory of Evolution?”
That Watson & Crick worked out the structure of DNA is very well known
Loading…
Vincent Haynes
The Role of DNA in Evolution – About.com
evolution.about.com › … › Evolution › Microevolution › Genetics Basics
How changes in DNA can lead to evolution in species over time.
DNA Proves Evolution | Eveloce
eveloce.scienceblog.com/16/dna-proves-evoution/
Aug 4, 2011 – In many ways our DNA defines us. Consider identical twins, which are the result of an embryo splitting in early life. They are actually a single …
Evolution of DNA – Exploredna.co.uk http://www.exploredna.co.uk › GeneticsNov 20, 2015 – DNA discovery has supported evolutionary theory and taught us a great deal about variation and development among organisms.
@Miller interesting how many scientists agree with your observation.
Loading…
Zoe
millertheanunnaki December 2, 2015 at 11:39 AM #
@ thejustician December 2, 2015 at 9:28 AM
“There are primate fossils, there are human fossils, and if man evolved from primates there would also be millions of fossil skeletons indicating gradual changes from primate to human over millions of years; they call this the ‘missing link man’…”
You are correct ‘thejustician’ the Fossils Still SAY NO!
But “man” is a primate! Or do you consider him to be a bird or a reptile?
Man (humanoids) did not evolve from a monkey. Both share the same ancestry and this is borne out by the same fossil records you assert are “missing”.
Miller, you are WRONG, again! There is NO EVIDENCE either in the present world, or in the world of the past to link primates to any other creature. Right at the very start, then, an evolutionary origin of man, IS* invalidated by actual empirical scientific EVIDENCE!
You might wish to dismiss the “white men in lab coats” as mad but are still prepared to send your children to study biology to become a doctor. What do you think that branch of scientific knowledge called DNA is based on if not on the theory of Evolution?
You would be only too keen to rely on the same DNA to confirm or disprove paternity or used as ‘objective’ evidence to find a rapist guilty but just as eager to reject when it confirms that you (and me) share 98% genetic similarity with chimps.
Because man share a 98% genetic similarity with chimps, DOES NOT = common descent, this is the kind of ‘Gorilla’ crap, bilge (BULL) that evolutionists believe we came from!
Loading…
Zoe
As interesting as genetic similarities between chimpanzees and humans are, they are not evidence for Darwinism.
Design is also able to explain them. Designers often make different products by utilization of similar parts, materials and arrangements. The common percentage pertains to the regions of our DNA that result in proteins.
It makes more sense of the data for the Designer of nature to have used the same proteins to perform the same function in a variety of organisms. http://www.gotquestions.org
Loading…
Zoe
Similarity (“homology”) is not an absolute indication of common ancestry (Evolution) but certainly points to a common designer (creation).
Think about a Porsche and Volkswagen “beetle” car. They both have air-cooled, flat, horizontally-opposed, 4-cylinder engines in the rear, independent suspension, two doors, boot (trunk) in the front, and many other similarities (‘homologies’).
Why do these two very different cars have so many similarities? Because they had the same designer! Whether similarity is morphological (appearance), or biochemical, is of no consequence to the lack of logic in this argument for evolution.
Loading…
Zoe
When we start our thinking with God’s Word, we see that the world is about 6,000 years old. When we rely on man’s fallible (and often demonstrably false) dating methods, we can get a confusing range of ages from a few thousand to billions of years, though the vast majority of methods do not give dates even close to billions.
Cultures around the world give an age of the earth that confirms what the Bible teaches. Radiometric dates, on the other hand, have been shown to be wildly in error.
“But before you do that you must answer this question:
Do you accept the Earth is older than 1milion years old?”
Nonsense! No!
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ Zoe December 2, 2015 at 4:53 PM
“When we start our thinking with God’s Word, we see that the world is about 6,000 years old..”
I guess that applies to the Aborigines of Australia too who can trace their genealogy back to Methuselah.
So yes Zoe, whales, sharks crocodiles and even the platypus have been in existence only about 6,000 years and with that timeframe you can rule out the fossil evidence that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.
Now what does that say about you, Zoe? That the higher the monkey called Zoe climbs the more he exposes himself to be a jackass of the Noah variety.
i have held on firm and fast to the belief that creation and evolution two powerful forces of the Universe get along very well with each other Creation start the process and evolution is an unending and continual process to recreate The only dividing line is when mankind interjects their form of intelligence which cause division and separation among themselves
here is Pope Francis thoughts on creation and evolution with breathless articulation and pinpoint accuracy
Pope Francis has stated: “God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life…Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”[17][18] The rules of genetic evolutionary inheritance were first discovered by a Catholic priest, the Augustinian monk Gregor Mendel, who is known today as the founder of modern genetics.
Loading…
Zoe
Miller, the Fossil record, does NOT confirm this Evolutionary nonsense of Dinos having existed millions of years ago; that’s pseudo-intellectually DISHONEST science, just wait and see, the Fossil info is ALL there, to Confirm the Creationists model, exactly as narrated in the Genesis account in God’s Word.
Some dinos, at least, must have survived until relatively recent times—for example, evidence of UK dinosaur depictions from the 1400s,16 and a Cambodian stegosaur carving centuries (but likely not millennia) old.17 This is completely unacceptable to ‘old-Earth’ believers, of course, who insist that the last dinosaur died out 65 million years ago, way before people arrived.
But there is other evidence, too, that literally shouts that the dinosaur fossils cannot be millions of years old—the discovery of soft tissue, including not just stretchy ligaments with identifiable proteins, but flexible transparent branching blood vessels, containing an ooze that could be squeezed out like toothpaste. And inside these vessels were the easily identifiable remains of red blood cells, even showing the nuclei,18 typical of reptiles (cf. pp.13–14).
When you put all of the evidence together, dinosaurs are no problem for a Christian worldview. God made them, along with the rest of His creation, around 6,000 years ago. We find their fossilized bones alongside those of other animals because of the great Flood around 4,500 years ago. They lived after the Flood but gradually died out (like so many other species have).
There is no ‘huge mystery’ about the existence and extinction of dinosaurs when viewed from the perspective of God’s Word. The Bible actually provides a better explanation for these things than does the evolutionary view. http://www.creationministries.com
Loading…
lawson
Wait so Noah had two brontosaurus, two T rex etc all on the same boat, and nobody got hungry, or is that why we only have green alligators and long necked geese some humpty back camels and some chimpanzees some cats and rats and elephants and as sure as your born because he got the short straw you aint gonna see no unicorn.
Loading…
Zoe
Don’t the Fossils Prove Evolution?
by John D. Morris, Ph.D.
Resources › Earth Sciences Resources › Fossil Record
For decades students have been shown a representation of the fossil record appearing as a vertical column with marine invertebrates on the bottom, overlain by fish, then amphibians, reptiles, and mammals, with man on the top. The column is a column of time, they are told, with the long ago past on the bottom and the present on top.
The fossil column (or similar figure) is presented without question as if it were true—as if it were real data. Students are led to believe that the order of first appearance of the fossils over time proves evolution.
I suggest that it does NO SUCH THIN, for several reasons. First, the fossils DO NOT occur in this order, simple to complex from bottom to top. The fossils at the bottom (i.e., long ago) are equally as complex as any animal today, and are essentially the same as their modern counterparts. In reality, the fossils APPEAR ABRUPTLY in the record, FULLY FORMED and fully functional without less adapted ancestors in lower levels that would have preceded them in time.
To be honest, the entire fossil record consists of predominately marine invertebrates (animals without a backbone, like clams, jellyfish, coral). The column is nothing more than a statement of evolutionary thinking. A case can perhaps be made for the order of first appearance of vertebrates (i.e., fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals), but vertebrate fossils are exceptions to the rule and usually quite fragmentary, with the lower range of each often being extended downward with new discoveries. Most come from Ice Age deposits which sometimes contain human remains also.
Second, the evolutionary presentation in the textbook column implies that all life has come from one (or perhaps a few) common ancestor(s). But the Cambrian System, the lowest (i.e., oldest) level containing extensive multicellular fossils, exhibits a virtual explosion of life. Suddenly (by this I mean without the necessary ancestors lower in the column), every phylum of life is found—every basic body style, including vertebrate fish. The abrupt appearance of diverse forms of life does not match with evolutionary predictions of one form descending into many.
Third, these diverse forms continue up the column (i.e., throughout time) with much the same appearance possessed at the start. The term stasis describes the tendency to “stay” the same, remain “stationary” or “static.” Some body styles go extinct as you come up the column, but no new basic styles are introduced.
Summarizing:
1) Abrupt appearance
2) Diversity at the start, and
3) Stasis.
Certainly the fossil record does not prove evolution. On the other hand, its character fully supports creation of multiple “kinds” at the start with no evolutionary lineage, and continuance of those rather static kinds with limited adaptations into the present, or else going extinct. This is the creation idea.
The fossils further support the Flood. While no evolutionary trends can be seen bridging the basic kinds and producing new ones, we do see a transition from totally marine at the bottom to more terrestrial toward the top. At every level the dominant fossil is marine, but more and more land-dwelling fossils creep in. What more persuasive testimony to the Biblical model could there be? http://www.icr.org
Loading…
Zoe
EVOLUTION: the fossils STILL say NO!
The point is, that no matter how much fancy, pseudo-scientific jargon is brought by the Evolutionary camp, there ARE some some very simple scientific FACTS, that point to, in fact, are directly confirmative of Creation, as specifically outlined in the Genesis account narrative of the Bible, God’s Word.
“So God CREATED great sea creatures and EVERY LIVING THING that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their KIND, and every winged bird according to ITS KIND…| ( Gen. 1: 21) Emphasis added.
The Creation model IS* emphatically supported thousands of years AFTER the FACT, by literally MILLIONS of Fossil finds, all of which, each and every time they are discovered, no matter where on earth, or in the sea, each and every time, regardless of the species, they ALL appear ‘abruptly’ that is, FULLY and completely FORMED, exactly as they were Created in the first place, by Almighty God.
The plain simple FACTS of MILLIONS of FOSSILS, repeatedly speak in their eloquent silence, loudly, that we were ALL Created, by God, that’s why we ALL appear FULLY formed, NO ‘transitional’ fossils will ever be found, as we did NOT ‘Evolve’ we were Created!
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ lawson December 3, 2015 at 5:19 AM
Poor Noah he also forgot to ‘catch’ two cobras, two boa constrictors, two anacondas, two desert sidewinders, two Komodo dragons, two black widow spiders, two desert scorpions from the Mojave desert subsequently inundated by Noah’s Flood and most importantly, two yetis (abominable snow apes from the Himalayas whose peaks were eventually covered by the waters from Noah’s Flood).
Loading…
Bush Tea
Steupsss
@ Miller
Why the hell don’t you stop provoking Zoe with tripe and let David’s blog rest in peace nuh?
You and ingrunt Vincent!!!
‘Evolution’ is a natural process where livings things adapt to their surroundings over time. It is ongoing, obvious and is indeed a CRITICAL and VITAL aspect of the natural characteristic of survival of the fittest in our world.
The question of the origin of our world (including the brilliant reality of evolution) is a wholly different matter.
It is SCIENTIFICALLY indisputable that at some time T=0, there was NOTHING in existence as we know it. (a basic understanding of entropy will establish this indisputable fact).
After that point, somehow everything that we now know, came into existence (scientists have conceptualised a ‘BIG BANG’ to explain the start of that process…
A little common sense….
There are TWO basic possibilities…
1 .. Some unknown entity / entities, with powers beyond our capabilities to even sense or conceptualise, are the designers and creators behind this whole shebang….
if so, it would follow that these ‘boss engineers’ are BRIGHTER than even Ping Pong and Grenville, and therefore more than likely to have a coherent, rational, strategic plan and implementation scheme in place….even if brass bowls are unable to understand it..
2 ..The OTHER possibility is that somehow a mighty explosion occurred (The Big Bang) at T=0, which just happened to convert nuff energy into nuff matter….and then, over millions of years this formless, lifeless, meaningless matter gradually morphed into the complex, finely balanced and intricately interwoven network of life as we know it on Earth.
Of course, if you bothered to check on entropy, you would know that one of the SCIENTIFIC LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS is that, UNLESS EXTERNAL ENERGY IS INJECTED FROM OUTSIDE A SYSTEM, that system tends towards a state of decay (and NOT the reverse as the ‘Theory of Evolution’ would have us believe actually happened.)
Perhaps Miller can offer some additional possibilities… 🙂
…cause lem-me-tell-ya, that second option (the theory of Evolution) is a lotta shiite…
whether you contemplate the intricacies of the mechanics of the eye ….. or try to explain which came first of the chicken or the egg….
Obviously, BBE is a BOSS…..!!!
Loading…
Zoe
Where do the Fossils of Dinosaurs and other extinct animals fit into the Bible record?
There thus appear to be sound reasons for questioning the orthodox evolutionary interpretation of the fossil record and its uniformitarian framework of earth history. Furthermore, there does exist a legitimate alternative explanation. 8-4
It is significant that fossils, especially of large animals such as the dinosaur, must be buried quickly or they will not be preserved at all.
Furthermore, the sediments entrapping them must harden into stone fairly quickly, inhibiting the action of air, bacteria, etc., or else they will soon be decomposed and disappear.
The very nature of fossilization thus seems to require catastrophism. Most certainly must this be true of the great dinosaur beds, the massive fish-bearing shale’s, the tremendous deposits of elephants and other animals in the arctic regions, and the great numbers of other “fossil graveyards” with which the geologic column abounds.
According to the Bible, death did not even “enter the world” until after Adam’s sin (Romans 5:12). And the fossil record, more than anything else, is a record of death—in fact, of sudden death—and on a worldwide scale!
At the end of the creation period (Genesis 1:31), God pronounced everything in the whole universe “very good.” Thus the struggling, groaning creation (Romans 8:22) everywhere evident in the fossil record must be dated Biblically as occurring after man’s sin and God’s curse on man’s dominion (Genesis 3:15).
And this can only mean that most of the sedimentary rocks of the earth’s crust, with their fossils, were laid down during the awful year of the great Flood, when “every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground” (Genesis 7:23).
This must have included the dinosaurs and all other terrestrial , except those preserved in Noah’s ark.
Evidence is available (in the form of human and dinosaur footprints in the same formation, of dinosaur pictographs left by primitive tribes in Africa and North America, and of the universally prevalent traditions of dragons among ancient peoples) that dinosaurs lived contemporaneously with early man.
The geologic column, rightly interpreted, therefore, does not tell of a long, gradual evolution of life over the geologic ages, but rather its polar opposite—the rapid extinction of life as a result of God’s judgment on the antediluvians when “the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished” (2 Peter 3:6).
@ Miller
Why the hell don’t you stop provoking Zoe with tripe and let David’s blog rest in peace nuh?
You and ingrunt Vincent!!!
BT, man, I LOVE it, though it is ‘TRIPE’, it affords the opportunity to REFUTE them with FACT and EVIDENCE, historically, they have NO answer for.
Loading…
Vincent Haynes
@Bush Tea December 3, 2015 at 9:08 AM #
Steupsss
@ Miller
Why the hell don’t you stop provoking Zoe with tripe and let David’s blog rest in peace nuh?
You and ingrunt Vincent!!!
…………………………………………….
Chuckle…..Skippah…..yuh see me interfer wid ah fellah bout hear……….I know that I knows not……..let the ones who know keep on spouting.
Levity on a blog is always good especially when fiction becomes fact……only bout hear…lol
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ Bush Tea December 3, 2015 at 9:08 AM
“Some unknown entity / entities, with powers beyond our capabilities to even sense or conceptualise, are the designers and creators behind this whole shebang….”
Riddle me, riddle me, riddle me ree… which came first?
“The designers and creators behind this whole shebang” or the designer(s) and creator(s) that designed and created the same “designers and creators behind this whole shebang”?
The same chicken and egg scenario i.e. “circulus in probando”.
“Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.” ~ Donald Rumsfeld.
“What we caught we threw away;
what we didn’t catch, we kept.
–the riddle put to Homer by fishermen of Ios,
said to have caused his death.
Bushie let us agree to disagree and sit on the side of tangible evidence called Science.
Loading…
Zoe
The Human fossils still speak!
The human fossil record is completely compatible with special creation. In contrast, the human fossil evidence is so contrary to evolution that it effectively falsifies the idea that humans evolved.
Future fossil discoveries will not substantially change the picture because future discoveries cannot nullify the objective evidence already unearthed. This message is not what we hear from a hundred different voices coming at us from a dozen different directions. But the human fossils themselves tell the real story. http://www.creation.com
What about the evidence in the fossil record for ‘transitional’ forms leading up to the modern apes,- gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, gibbons, and those leading up to man’s putative ape-like ancestor, the australopithecines? They are NOWHERE to be found!!! Why not?
Because they simply DO NOT exist!
The FACTS remain, that there IS* only a single species in the Hominidae, the FAMILY of man – Homo sapiens, or modern man.
In the Creationist view, man has ALWAYS been separate and distinct from ALL other creatures, as a unique Created being, as specifically recorded in God’s Word, the Bible.
One of many objective, cogent, coherent proof’s, for the self-authenticating authority of God’s Word, IS* overwhelmingly supported by TRUE scientific evidence, as confirmed by the FOSSIL record, time and time again!!!
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ Zoe December 3, 2015 at 10:23 AM
“One of many objective, cogent, coherent proof’s, for the self-authenticating authority of God’s Word, IS* overwhelmingly supported by TRUE scientific evidence, as confirmed by the FOSSIL record, time and time again!!!”
Why don’t you drop the phrase “scientific evidence” from your compendium of bull-shit tautological contradictions?
How can you talk about “scientific evidence” when you can argue that not only the Earth but also the Sun and the rest of the billions of billions stars and planets making up the Universe were “created’ only 6,000 years ago?
It seems from the verbal diarrhea vomited across the pages of BU you, Zoe, have been masticated from a headless jackass swallowed by a constipated python into a massive ball of amoebic crap of the intellectual variety.
Loading…
Vincent Haynes
@millertheanunnaki December 3, 2015 at 10:55 AM #
Chuckle………..Wuhloss yuh gine kill he wid dem blows.
Loading…
Bush Tea
@ Miller
Bushie let us agree to disagree and sit on the side of tangible evidence called Science.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You would be well advised to desist from arguing about ‘science’ with Bushie…..
…with Zoe – yes! 🙂
The question of ‘who created the designers?’ is a primary school level riddle Miller.
Grown-ups long understand that in arithmetic, one does NOT mix apples and pears.
Did Bushie not explain to you that the VERY CONCEPT of Time – and hence of ‘who created what and when’ is a construct that is LIMITED To OUR reality. When Zoe and GP talk of a ‘world without end’ they are describing a DIFFERENT reality where there is NO SUCH THING as time…..so your question is meaningless and illogical BEYOND who created our reality.
Your riddle is much like when Simple Simon argued that 1 plus 1 ALWAYS equals 2.
…… In HER limited reality it is…. but for the enlightened, the picture is MUCH bigger …and CLEARER.
You would do well to drop this topic and get back to party politics …where you are no more ignorant than most…. and hence not so obviously out of your depth…
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ Bush Tea December 3, 2015 at 11:57 AM
You won the one, Bushie! Neither do you mix folly with commonsense.
Who am I to fly in the face of the mighty Mr. Know-it-all?
A minor god on Earth with a direct link to the BBE; but also a brass-bowl whacker of a simple man who can explain the concept of time.
Well tell the ignoramuses Bushie, who or what is time ?
The invisible spirit in the Trinity?
THOU FOOL, do you see your self as the Alpha and Omega of all things?
So what will be the time at your death? The Twelfth of Never or when the Son of BBE returns at the appointed hour?
Loading…
Zoe
Biological evidence for a young age of the earth
Cells and connective tissue can be clearly seen.
The finding of pliable blood vessels, blood cells and proteins in dinosaur bone is consistent with an age of thousands of years for the fossils, not the 65+ million years claimed by the paleontologists.
DNA in ‘ancient’ fossils. DNA extracted from bacteria that are supposed to be 425 million years old brings into question that age, because DNA could not last more than thousands of years.
Lazarus bacteria—bacteria revived from salt inclusions supposedly 250 million years old, suggest the salt is not millions of years old. See also Salty saga.
The decay in the human genome due to multiple slightly deleterious mutations each generation is consistent with an origin several thousand years ago. Sanford, J., Genetic entropy and the mystery of the genome, Ivan Press, 2005; see review of the book and the interview with the author in Creation 30(4):45–47,September 2008. This has been confirmed by realistic modelling of population genetics, which shows that genomes are young, in the order of thousands of years. See Sanford, J., Baumgardner, J., Brewer, W., Gibson, P. and Remine, W., Mendel’s Accountant: A biologically realistic forward-time population genetics program, SCPE 8(2):147–165, 2007.
The data for ‘mitochondrial Eve’ are consistent with a common origin of all humans several thousand years ago.
Very limited variation in the DNA sequence on the human Y-chromosome around the world is consistent with a recent origin of mankind, thousands not millions of years.
Many fossil bones ‘dated’ at many millions of years old are hardly mineralized, if at all.
This contradicts the widely believed old age of the earth. See, for example, Dinosaur bones just how old are they really? Tubes of marine worms, ‘dated’ at 550 million years old, that are soft and flexible and apparently composed of the original organic compounds hold the record (original paper).
Dinosaur blood cells, blood vessels, proteins (hemoglobin, osteocalcin, collagen, histones) and DNA are not consistent with their supposed more than 65-million-year age, but make more sense if the remains are thousands of years old (at most).
Lack of 50:50 racemization of amino acids in fossils ‘dated’ at millions of years old, whereas complete racemization would occur in thousands of years.
Living fossils—jellyfish, graptolites, coelacanth, stromatolites, Wollemi pine and hundreds more. That many hundreds of species could remain so unchanged, for even up to billions of years in the case of stromatolites, speaks against the millions and billions of years being real.
Discontinuous fossil sequences. E.g. Coelacanth, Wollemi pine and various ‘index’ fossils, which are present in supposedly ancient strata, missing in strata representing many millions of years since, but still living today.
Such discontinuities speak against the interpretation of the rock formations as vast geological ages—how could Coelacanths have avoided being fossilized for 65 million years, for example? See The ‘Lazarus effect’: rodent ‘resurrection’!
The ages of the world’s oldest living organisms, trees, are consistent with an age of the earth of thousands of years. http://www.creation.com
Loading…
lawson
Just throwing this out there but if Noah was white and brought his family with him, how did black people survive I didn’t see any oars on the ark.
Loading…
Zoe
Geological evidence for a young age of the earth
Radical folding at Eastern Beach, near Auckland in New Zealand, indicates that the sediments were soft and pliable when folded, inconsistent with a long time for their formation. Such folding can be seen world-wide and is consistent with a young age of the earth.
Scarcity of plant fossils in many formations containing abundant animal / herbivore fossils. E.g., the Morrison Formation (Jurassic) in Montana. See Origins 21(1):51–56, 1994. Also the Coconino sandstone in the Grand Canyon has many track-ways (animals), but is almost devoid of plants. Implication: these rocks are not ecosystems of an ‘era’ buried in situ over eons of time as evolutionists claim. The evidence is more consistent with catastrophic transport then burial during the massive global Flood of Noah’s day. This eliminates supposed evidence for millions of years.
13.Thick, tightly bent strata without sign of melting or fracturing. E.g. the Kaibab upwarp in Grand Canyon indicates rapid folding before the sediments had time to solidify (the sand grains were not elongated under stress as would be expected if the rock had hardened). This wipes out hundreds of millions of years of time and is consistent with extremely rapid formation during the biblical Flood. See Warped earth (written by a geophysicist).
14.Polystrate fossils—tree trunks in coal (Araucaria spp. king billy pines, celery top pines, in southern hemisphere coal). There are also polystrate tree trunks in the Yellowstone fossilized forests and Joggins, Nova Scotia and in many other places. Polystrate fossilized lycopod trunks occur in northern hemisphere coal, again indicating rapid burial / formation of the organic material that became coal.
Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, coal forms quickly; in weeks for brown coal to months for black coal. It does not need millions of years. Furthermore, long time periods could be an impediment to coal formation because of the increased likelihood of the permineralization of the wood, which would hinder coalification.
Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, oil forms quickly; it does not need millions of years, consistent with an age of thousands of years.
17.Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, opals form quickly, in a matter of weeks, not millions of years, as had been claimed.
18.Evidence for rapid, catastrophic formation of coal beds speaks against the hundreds of millions of years normally claimed for this, including Z-shaped seams that point to a single depositional event producing these layers.
Evidence for rapid petrifaction of wood speaks against the need for long periods of time and is consistent with an age of thousands of years.
Clastic dykes and pipes (intrusion of sediment through overlying sedimentary rock) show that the overlying rock strata were still soft when they formed. This drastically compresses the time scale for the deposition of the penetrated rock strata. See, Walker, T., Fluidisation pipes: Evidence of large-scale watery catastrophe, Journal of Creation (TJ) 14(3):8–9, 2000.
21.Para(pseudo)conformities—where one rock stratum sits on top of another rock stratum but with supposedly millions of years of geological time missing, yet the contact plane lacks any significant erosion; that is, it is a ‘flat gap’. E.g. Coconino sandstone / Hermit shale in the Grand Canyon (supposedly a 10 million year gap in time). The thick Schnebly Hill Formation (sandstone) lies between the Coconino and Hermit in central Arizona. See Austin, S.A., Grand Canyon, monument to catastrophe, ICR, Santee, CA, USA, 1994 and Snelling, A., The case of the ‘missing’ geologic time, Creation 14(3):31–35, 1992.
22.The presence of ephemeral markings (raindrop marks, ripple marks, animal tracks) at the boundaries of paraconformities show that the upper rock layer has been deposited immediately after the lower one, eliminating many millions of years of ‘gap’ time. See references in Para(pseudo)conformities.
Inter-tonguing of adjacent strata that are supposedly separated by millions of years also eliminates many millions of years of supposed geologic time. The case of the ‘missing’ geologic time; Mississippian and Cambrian strata interbedding: 200 million years hiatus in question, CRSQ 23(4):160–167.
The lack of bioturbation (worm holes, root growth) at paraconformities (flat gaps) reinforces the lack of time involved where evolutionary geologists insert many millions of years to force the rocks to conform with the ‘given’ timescale of billions of years.
The almost complete lack of clearly recognizable soil layers anywhere in the geologic column. Geologists do claim to have found lots of ‘fossil’ soils (paleosols), but these are quite different to soils today, lacking the features that characterize soil horizons; features that are used in classifying different soils. Every one that has been investigated thoroughly proves to lack the characteristics of proper soil. If ‘deep time’ were correct, with hundreds of millions of years of abundant life on the earth, there should have been ample opportunities many times over for soil formation. See Klevberg, P. and Bandy, R., CRSQ 39:252–68; CRSQ 40:99–116, 2003; Walker, T., Paleosols: digging deeper buries ‘challenge’ to Flood geology, Journal of Creation 17(3):28–34, 2003.
Limited extent of unconformities (unconformity: a surface of erosion that separates younger strata from older rocks). Surfaces erode quickly (e.g. Badlands, South Dakota), but there are very limited unconformities. There is the ‘great unconformity’ at the base of the Grand Canyon, but otherwise there are supposedly ~300 million years of strata deposited on top without any significant unconformity. This is again consistent with a much shorter time of deposition of these strata. See Para(pseudo)conformities.
The amount of salt in the world’s oldest lake contradicts its supposed age and suggests an age more consistent with its formation after Noah’s Flood, which is consistent with a young age of the earth.
The discovery that underwater landslides (‘turbidity currents’) travelling at some 50 km/h can create huge areas of sediment in a matter of hours (Press, F., and Siever, R., Earth, 4th ed., Freeman & Co., NY, USA, 1986). Sediments thought to have formed slowly over eons of time are now becoming recognized as having formed extremely rapidly. See for example, A classic tillite reclassified as a submarine debris flow (Technical).
Flume tank research with sediment of different particle sizes show that layered rock strata that were thought to have formed over huge periods of time in lake beds actually formed very quickly. Even the precise layer thicknesses of rocks were duplicated after they were ground into their sedimentary particles and run through the flume. See Experiments in stratification of heterogeneous sand mixtures, Sedimentation Experiments: Nature finally catches up! and Sandy Stripes Do many layers mean many years?
Observed examples of rapid canyon formation; for example, Providence Canyon in southwest Georgia, Burlingame Canyon near Walla Walla, Washington, and Lower Loowit Canyon near Mount St Helens. The rapidity of the formation of these canyons, which look similar to other canyons that supposedly took many millions of years to form, brings into question the supposed age of the canyons that no one saw form.
Observed examples of rapid island formation and maturation, such as Surtsey, which confound the notion that such islands take long periods of time to form. See also, Tuluman—A Test of Time.
Rate of erosion of coastlines, horizontally. E.g. Beachy Head, UK, loses a metre of coast to the sea every six years.
33.Rate of erosion of continents vertically is not consistent with the assumed old age of the earth. See Creation 22(2):18–21.
Existence of significant flat plateaux that are ‘dated’ at many millions of years old (‘elevated paleoplains’). An example is Kangaroo Island (Australia). C.R. Twidale, a famous Australian physical geographer wrote: “the survival of these paleoforms is in some degree an embarrassment to all the commonly accepted models of landscape development.” Twidale, C.R. On the survival of paleoforms, American Journal of Science 5(276):77–95, 1976 (quote on p. 81). See Austin, S.A., Did landscapes evolve? Impact 118, April 1983.
The recent and almost simultaneous origin of all the high mountain ranges around the world—including the Himalayas, the Alps, the Andes, and the Rockies—which have undergone most of the uplift to their present elevations beginning ‘five million’ years ago, whereas mountain building processes have supposedly been around for up to billions of years. See Baumgardner, J., Recent uplift of today’s mountains. Impact 381, March 2005.
Water gaps. These are gorges cut through mountain ranges where rivers run. They occur worldwide and are part of what evolutionary geologists call ‘discordant drainage systems’. They are ‘discordant’ because they don’t fit the deep time belief system. The evidence fits them forming rapidly in a much younger age framework where the gorges were cut in the recessive stage / dispersive phase of the global Flood of Noah’s day. See Oard, M., Do rivers erode through mountains? Water gaps are strong evidence for the Genesis Flood, Creation 29(3):18–23, 2007.
Niagara Falls
Erosion rates at places like Niagara Falls are consistent with a time frame of several thousand years since Noah’s Flood.
Erosion at Niagara Falls and other such places is consistent with just a few thousand years since the biblical Flood. However, much of the Niagara Gorge likely formed very rapidly with the catastrophic drainage of glacial Lake Agassiz; see: Climate change, Niagara and catastrophe.
River delta growth rate is consistent with thousands of years since the biblical Flood, not vast periods of time. The argument goes back to Mark Twain. E.g. 1. Mississippi—Creation Research Quarterly (CRSQ) 9:96–114, 1992; CRSQ 14:77; CRSQ 25:121–123. E.g. 2 Tigris–Euphrates: CRSQ 14:87, 1977.
Underfit streams. River valleys are too large for the streams they contain. Dury speaks of the “continent-wide distribution of underfit streams”. Using channel meander characteristics, Dury concluded that past streams frequently had 20–60 times their current discharge. This means that the river valleys would have been carved very quickly, not slowly over eons of time. See Austin, S.A., Did landscapes evolve? Impact 118, 1983.
Amount of salt in the sea. Even ignoring the effect of the biblical Flood and assuming zero starting salinity and all rates of input and removal so as to maximize the time taken to accumulate all the salt, the maximum age of the oceans, 62 million years, is less than 1/50 of the age evolutionists claim for the oceans. This suggests that the age of the earth is radically less also.
The amount of sediment on the sea floors at current rates of land erosion would accumulate in just 12 million years; a blink of the eye compared to the supposed age of much of the ocean floor of up to 3 billion years. Furthermore, long-age geologists reckon that higher erosion rates applied in the past, which shortens the time frame. From a biblical point of view, at the end of Noah’s Flood lots of sediment would have been added to the sea with the water coming off the unconsolidated land, making the amount of sediment perfectly consistent with a history of thousands of years.
Iron-manganese nodules (IMN) on the sea floors. The measured rates of growth of these nodules indicates an age of only thousands of years. Lalomov, A.V., 2006. Mineral deposits as an example of geological rates. CRSQ 44(1):64–66.
The age of placer deposits (concentrations of heavy metals such as tin in modern sediments and consolidated sedimentary rocks). The measured rates of deposition indicate an age of thousands of years, not the assumed millions. See Lalomov, A.V., and Tabolitch, S.E., 2000. Age determination of coastal submarine placer, Val’cumey, northern Siberia. Journal of Creation (TJ) 14(3):83–90.
Pressure in oil / gas wells indicate the recent origin of the oil and gas. If they were many millions of years old we would expect the pressures to equilibrate, even in low permeability rocks. “Experts in petroleum prospecting note the impossibility of creating an effective model given long and slow oil generation over millions of years (Petukhov, 2004). In their opinion, if models demand the standard multimillion-years geochronological scale, the best exploration strategy is to drill wells on a random grid.” —Lalomov, A.V., 2007. Mineral deposits as an example of geological rates. CRSQ 44(1):64–66.
Direct evidence that oil is forming today in the Guaymas Basin and in Bass Strait is consistent with a young earth (although not necessary for a young earth).
Rapid reversals in paleomagnetism undermine use of paleomagnetism in long ages dating of rocks and speak of rapid processes, compressing the long-age time scale enormously.
The pattern of magnetization in the magnetic stripes where magma is welling up at the mid-ocean trenches argues against the belief that reversals take many thousands of years and rather indicates rapid sea-floor spreading as well as rapid magnetic reversals, consistent with a young earth (Humphreys, D.R., Has the Earth’s magnetic field ever flipped? Creation Research Quarterly 25(3):130–137, 1988).
Magnetic reversal pattern mid-ocean ridges
Along the mid-ocean ridges, the detailed pattern of magnetic polarisation, with islands of differing polarity, speaks of rapid changes in direction of Earth’s magnetic field because of the rate of cooling of the lava. This is consistent with a young Earth.
Measured rates of stalactite and stalagmite growth in limestone caves are consistent with a young age of several thousand years. See also articles on limestone cave formation.
The decay of the earth’s magnetic field. Exponential decay is evident from measurements and is consistent with theory of free decay since creation, suggesting an age of the earth of only thousands of years. For further evidence that it follows exponential decay with a time constant of 1611 years (±10) see: Humphreys, R., Earth’s magnetic field is decaying steadily—with a little rhythm, CRSQ 47(3):193–201; 2011.
Excess heat flow from the earth is consistent with a young age rather than billions of years, even taking into account heat from radioactive decay. See Woodmorappe, J., 1999. Lord Kelvin revisited on the young age of the earth, Journal of Creation (TJ) 13(1):14, 1999. http://www.creation
Loading…
Zoe
Radiometric dating and the age of the earth
Carbon-14 in coal suggests ages of thousands of years and clearly contradict ages of millions of years.
Carbon-14 in oil again suggests ages of thousands, not millions, of years.
Carbon-14 in fossil wood also indicates ages of thousands, not millions, of years.
Carbon-14 in diamonds suggests ages of thousands, not billions, of years.
Note that attempts to explain away carbon-14 in diamonds, coal, etc., such as by neutrons from uranium decay converting nitrogen to C-14 do not work. See: Objections.
Incongruent radioisotope dates using the same technique argue against trusting the dating methods that give millions of years.
Incongruent radioisotope dates using different techniques argue against trusting the dating methods that give millions of years (or billions of years for the age of the earth).
Demonstrably non-radiogenic ‘isochrons’ of radioactive and non-radioactive elements undermine the assumptions behind isochron ‘dating’ that gives billions of years. ‘False’ isochrons are common.
Different faces of the same zircon crystal and different zircons from the same rock giving different ‘ages’ undermine all ‘dates’ obtained from zircons.
Evidence of a period of rapid radioactive decay in the recent past (lead and helium concentrations and diffusion rates in zircons) point to a young earth explanation.
The amount of helium, a product of alpha-decay of radioactive elements, retained in zircons in granite is consistent with an age of 6,000±2000 years, not the supposed billions of years. See: Humphreys, D.R., Young helium diffusion age of zircons supports accelerated nuclear decay, Chapter 2 (pages 25–100) in: Vardiman, Snelling, and Chaffin (eds.), Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young Earth Creationist Research Initiative, Volume II, Institute for Creation Research and Creation Research Society, 2005.
Lead in zircons from deep drill cores vs. shallow ones. They are similar, but there should be less in the deep ones due to the higher heat causing higher diffusion rates over the usual long ages supposed. If the ages are thousands of years, there would not be expected to be much difference, which is the case (Gentry, R., et al., Differential lead retention in zircons: Implications for nuclear waste containment, Science 216(4543):296–298, 1982; DOI: 10.1126/science.216.4543.296).
Pleochroic halos produced in granite by concentrated specks of short half-life elements such as polonium suggest a period of rapid nuclear decay of the long half-life parent isotopes during the formation of the rocks and rapid formation of the rocks, both of which speak against the usual ideas of geological deep time and a vast age of the earth. See, Radiohalos: Startling evidence of catastrophic geologic processes, Creation 28(2):46–50, 2006.
Squashed pleochroic halos (radiohalos) formed from decay of polonium, a very short half-life element, in coalified wood from several geological eras suggest rapid formation of all the layers about the same time, in the same process, consistent with the biblical ‘young’ earth model rather than the millions of years claimed for these events.
Australia’s ‘Burning Mountain’ speaks against radiometric dating and the millions of years belief system (according to radiometric dating of the lava intrusion that set the coal alight, the coal in the burning mountain has been burning for ~40 million years, but clearly this is not feasible). http://www.creation,com
Loading…
Zoe
Human history is consistent with a young age of the earth
Human population growth. Less than 0.5% p.a. growth from six people 4,500 years ago would produce today’s population. Where are all the people? if we have been here much longer?
‘Stone age’ human skeletons and artefacts. There are not enough for 100,000 years of a human population of just one million, let alone more people (10 million?). See Where are all the people?
Length of recorded history. Origin of various civilizations, writing, etc., all about the same time several thousand years ago. See Evidence for a young world.
Languages. Similarities in languages claimed to be separated by many tens of thousands of years speaks against the supposed ages (e.g. compare some aboriginal languages in Australia with languages in south-eastern India and Sri Lanka). See The Tower of Babel account affirmed by linguistics.
Common cultural ‘myths’ speak of recent separation of peoples around the world. An example of this is the frequency of stories of an earth-destroying flood.
Origin of agriculture. Secular dating puts it at about 10,000 years and yet that same chronology says that modern man has supposedly been around for at least 200,000 years.
Surely someone would have worked out much sooner how to sow seeds of plants to produce food. See: Evidence for a young world. http://www.creation.com
Loading…
St George’s Dragon
It’s quite sad that in 2015 we can still be having a debate about whether evolution exists or whether the Earth is 6,000 years old.
All the evidence is there except for those who don’t want to believe it.
Loading…
Zoe
millertheanunnaki December 3, 2015 at 10:55 AM #
@ Zoe December 3, 2015 at 10:23 AM
“One of many objective, cogent, coherent proof’s, for the self-authenticating authority of God’s Word, IS* overwhelmingly supported by TRUE scientific evidence, as confirmed by the FOSSIL record, time and time again!!!”
The above, Miller is with specific reference TO, the Fossil record, as it relates to Creation on Earth, Miller.
“Why don’t you drop the phrase “scientific evidence” from your compendium of bull-shit tautological contradictions?”
‘Scientific Evidence’ Miller, is found IN* the Fossil record, that substantiates the Creation model!
“How can you talk about “scientific evidence” when you can argue that not only the Earth but also the Sun (and the rest of the billions of billions stars and planets making up the Universe were “created’ only 6,000 years ago?”
I CHALLENGE YOU, Miller, to quote me, here on BU, as having said,
“…and the rest of the billions of billions stars and planets making up the Universe were “created’ only 6,000 years ago?” I NEVER MADE SUCH A STATEMENT!!! Prove me wrong Miller!!!
It seems from the verbal diarrhea vomited across the pages of BU you, Zoe, (NO, IT IS YOU, Miller, that) have been masticated from a headless jackass swallowed by a constipated python into a massive ball of amoebic crap of the intellectual variety.
Loading…
Bush Tea
@ Lawson
One may be led to believe that Noah was white in truth yuh…by the fact that all the animals ended up dead broke after the flood 🙂
@ Miller
Cool yuhself Mills…. bushie is only a yardboy bringing a message….
BUT…
Unless you have a VERY GOOD appreciation of the laws of thermodynamics – and the implications thereof, you should heed Bushie’s advice and go across on the Maria Agard blog (where you are equally wrong, but at least yuh don’t look so bad because we all understand that you trying to defend yuh party…)
@ Dragon
What is it you are planning here now…? to rush in where angels fear to tread…? 🙂
What ‘evidence’ is this bozie?
@ Zoe
steupsss
You back with this cut-and-paste again…?
You had started to actually sound coherent …to the extent that Bushie had decided to let your errors pass…. but a little pressure from Miller and Vincent and you run back to your friend Wiki…. 🙂
You mean you can’t rebuke these two errand schoolchildren from outta your head…?
Loading…
lawson
BT what crap you know that one of the kangeroos had a full pouch, there was doe all over that ark and if anybody tells you different they be lion
Loading…
St George’s Dragon
@ BT
Read any real piece of science about the subject – and I mean mainstream science.
But then you are one of the “those who don’t want to believe it” people, so not much point.
By the way, your comment about the law of thermodynamics being in contradiction with evolution is just plain wrong.
Loading…
millertheanunnaki
@ Zoe December 3, 2015 at 2:32 PMI
“I CHALLENGE YOU, Miller, to quote me, here on BU, as having said,
…and the rest of the billions of billions stars and planets making up the Universe were “created’ only 6,000 years ago?” I NEVER MADE SUCH A STATEMENT!!! Prove me wrong Miller!!!”
Me the lowly soulless unbelieving Miller should try to prove you wrong? That’s like trying to prove that ac is more intelligent and therefore has the ear of Bushie’s BBE more so than the original brass bowl himself.
It’s not a quotation, Dear Zoe, it’s an imputation based on your “FAITH” in ‘Scientific Evidence’.
So when were these ‘billions of billions stars and planets’ made if not sometime during the 6 days your god took to create everything under the Sun and the millions of galaxies of stars and planets?
Are you challenging your god Yahweh now Zoe? Are you going against “His” very “Word”?
Didn’t all of your god’s creation take place within 6 days approx.?? 6,000 years ago?
“The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning–the first day.
6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.”
7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so.
8 God called the expanse “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning–the second day.
9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so.
10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so.
12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
13 And there was evening, and there was morning–the third day.
14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years,
15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so.
16 God made two great lights–the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.
17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth,
18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.
19 And there was evening, and there was morning–the fourth day.
20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.”
21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.”
23 And there was evening, and there was morning–the fifth day.
24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.
25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.
30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground–everything that has the breath of life in it–I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning–the sixth day.
Bush Tea (Bushie the schizo) should be proud of verse (para) 26 of the First Chapter of the Word of your Almighty god making specific reference to his Big Boss Engineers (BBEs) in the Sky?
To repeat and emphasize:
26 Then God (Main BBE) said, “Let us (All BBEs) make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
And those other life-forms not yet encountered in Space including the ‘Borg’.
Loading…
Vincent Haynes
@Bush Tea December 3, 2015 at 3:54 PM #
Bushy,Bushy…….as man ah been begging for them not to pelt licks in yuh…..yuh writing a barifle on this site and moreso on the one ’bout de Court case pending.
I would suggest you cool your brain a little bit and stop asking questions to the bush like Moses did as you will get funny answers…..trust me.
Loading…
Bush Tea
LOL
OK Lawson … good one there….
@ Dragon
By the way, your comment about the law of thermodynamics being in contradiction with evolution is just plain wrong.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
where exactly is that comment D?
…cause if Bushie said that, you would be correct….EVOLUTION is a natural phenomenon. Happens all the time. It is actually BRILLIANT ENGINEERING DESIGN that facilitates the adaptation of species to changing environments… Imagine if we could build a machine which could, by itself, adapt over time to different conditions when placed in completely different environments?
However…
Darwin’s “Theory of Evolution” that EVERYTHING that current exists as we know it – is here because of that process, is TOTAL shiite…
The second law of thermodynamics establishes the fact that the entropy of a natural process runs only in one sense, and that it is NOT reversible.
In other words, left to themselves, things ROT, decay, oxidise, and ‘return to dust’.
Can you identify ANYWHERE in nature, where, without EXTERNAL INTELLIGENT INPUTS, we have seen rust turn into pure materials; or virgin lands morph into cities; or morons evolve into wise men?
YET, we are asked to believe that a REVERSE of this process, over millions of years, saw basic single cell lifeforms ‘evolve’ into the complex systems we see all around us…
When you grasp the significance of entropy you will understand that, as Planck put it, “Every process occurring in nature proceeds in the sense in which the sum of the entropies of all bodies taking part in the process is increased.”
This means that they MUST have been some initial start point (when entropy was Zero or VERY LOW) and that there is clearly some END-point coming, when, without EXTERNAL IMPUTS to the system, the entropy will be too high for any effective thermodynamic energy to be extracted… In short, the concept of time has been defined and delineated by entropy which started with universal PURITY (low entropy) and operates a one-way street of INCREASING entropy (increasing systemic impurity) to eventual destruction.
How could this all-encompassing principle have been REVERSED to allow for evolution to refine a formless earth into the present engineering marvel that it is …. (despite the lotta brass bowls bout the place… 🙂 )
IN the beginning .
Is the bible clear on when there was a beginning ? then how does creationist theorize or formulate a conclusion without all of the necessary evidence, All that is known is that a “God” another unknown source and which cannot be proven
“created”
What kind of intelligent mind can follow such reasoning without empirical facts,
Loading…
Vincent Haynes
@Bush Tea December 3, 2015 at 6:19 PM #
Skippah…..A little knowledge can be dangerous…….yuh too hard ears.
Loading…
Bush Tea
@ Vincent
Knowledge is over-rated.
It really is no big thing. There are FAR more important things in life….which is why Zoe is so fixated with FAITH…. (pity he don’t focus more on LOVE… 🙂 )
Without ANY understanding of these complex concepts, it is VERY possible, by FAITH, for someone to KNOW that the theory of evolution is shiite… and that the actual designers and builders of our universe have a plan in hand…. one which is running precisely on schedule.
Loading…
Crusoe
Mankind came to Earth from another planet. Mankind is the ONLY animal that destroys the Earth and takes more than it needs.
Pray tell what is a BBE i have come to the conclusion it is a BIG BIRD ENGINEER LOL maybe i am wrong
bush tea
…cause if Bushie said that, you would be correct….EVOLUTION is a natural phenomenon. Happens all the time. It is actually BRILLIANT ENGINEERING DESIGN that facilitates the adaptation of species to changing environments… Imagine if we could build a machine which could, by itself, adapt over time to different conditions when placed in completely different environments?
Cornell University researchers have created a robot capable of self-awareness, learning and adapting — all keys to the intelligence and technology needed for robots to function in adverse and changing environments.
Loading…
The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.Cancel reply
have a closer look at the messianic countenances of Tony Blair or George Bush or Trump..in full verbal flight…
The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.