Jump to content
IGNORED

The Fossil Record God Left For Us, Not to Darwinists


Salty

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,695
  • Content Per Day:  0.45
  • Reputation:   583
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/11/1968

On 10/29/2016 at 9:47 PM, Enoch2021 said:

Sure, by Ipse Dixit Fiat...without any Coherent Warrant, Whatsoever.

 

Sure, and your SUPPORTING Evidence for your "Just-So" Story is... _______ per adventure?

 

1.  Sure, and your SUPPORTING Evidence for your "Just-So" Story is... _______ per adventure?

2.  What on Earth is "Modern life-forms" ??

3.  This is a Formal Logical Fallacy (Denying The Antecedent):

If P, then Q.
Not P.
Therefore, not Q.
 
If they are buried together (P) then they both existed together (Q)
They're not buried together (Not P)
Therefore, they didn't exist together. (Therefore, not Q)   :blink:
 
 

1.  Sure, and your SUPPORTING Evidence for your "Just-So" Story is... _______ per adventure?

2.  We must be reading two different Bibles:

(Genesis 1:11-23) "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.  {12} And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.  {13} And the evening and the morning were the third day.  {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.  {20} And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.  {21} And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.  {22} And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.  {23} And the evening and the morning were the fifth day."

Are you saying the "First Life" --- Grass was 'smaller-life forms ??

Many Generations?? :huh:  Aren't the 'Larger Animals' merely 1 Day removed from the Grass, according to Genesis?

 

Are 'metozoans' and 'bacteria'... GRASSES ??

 

OR, all lived @ the Same Time and there was a World-Wide Flood. 

 

 

Great "Just-So" Story... Ergo: and your SUPPORTING Evidence for your "Just-So" Story is... _______ per adventure?

 

Do you know WHY, 'Fossils' are Non-Sequitur to Scientific Inquiry?

 

Ahh, we found the Source of your "Just-So" Stories:  geology/geologists.

geology isn't "SCIENCE".  Ya see, to be "SCIENCE", you MUST follow The Scientific Method:

Step 1: Observe a Phenomenon
Step 2: Lit Review
Step 3: Hypothesis
Step 4: TEST/EXPERIMENT
Step 5: Analyze Data
Step 6: Valid/Invalid Hypothesis
Step 7: Report Results

They can't even get to the First Step of the Scientific Method; Ergo, can't even construct Formal Scientific Hypotheses.

Can you have "SCIENCE" without Viable Scientific Hypotheses ??  This is like Water without Hydrogen!!  Crocheting is more "Scientific" than 'geology'.

To refute, Please post ONE Formal Scientific Hypothesis EVER postulated from this "so-called" discipline....?

 

regards

 

 

Wikipedia : The Cambrian Explosion 

the diversity of life began to resemble that of today.[10] Many of the present phyla appeared during this period,[11][12] with the exception of Bryozoa, which made its earliest known appearance in the Lower Ordovician.[13]

 

Scientists have their timeframes incorrect, but even they concede the sudden appearance of life that resembles modern life-forms, during the Cambrian Eplosion.

 

This is fantastic proof of creationism.   These evolutionists speculate that life rapidly evolved from primitive forms to explain the Cambrian Explosion. But the evidence itself points to creationism to explain the sudden appearance of most present phyla.   

 

Science has amazing similarities to the Genesis story.  Even DNA points to one single female from which all mankind comes (obviously Eve). Then later one single male from which all mankind comes (obviously Noah)

 

Recently they found all the earliest mammal types at a Turkish location before they spread out to the world.  This fits in with the Flood story where the Ark landed in Turkey.

 

Al the evidence of science points to a literal Genesis, not to evolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

2 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

Wikipedia : The Cambrian Explosion 

the diversity of life began to resemble that of today.[10] Many of the present phyla appeared during this period,[11][12] with the exception of Bryozoa, which made its earliest known appearance in the Lower Ordovician.[13]

 

Wikipedia, eh? :rolleyes:

Please provide Scientific Evidence: i.e., Show the Formal Scientific Hypotheses then Experiments that VALIDATES each of their Claims...? Highlight the "Independent Variable" in each Experiment (TEST)...?

Ya see, 'Looking' @ nouns and conjuring up a story that "Just-So" happens to align with your paradigm/narrative isn't "SCIENCE"; it's Meta-Physical Propaganda filled Fairytale "Just-So" Story telling.

 

Quote

Scientists have their timeframes incorrect, but even they concede the sudden appearance of life that resembles modern life-forms, during the Cambrian Eplosion.

1. They're NOT  "Scientists".  The entire lot are "Just-So" Story tellers with initials behind their names.  To be "Scientists", they have to follow the Scientific Method:

Step 1: Observe a Phenomenon
Step 2: Lit Review
Step 3: Hypothesis
Step 4: TEST/EXPERIMENT
Step 5: Analyze Data
Step 6: Valid/Invalid Hypothesis
Step 7: Report Results

Please post ONE Formal Scientific Hypothesis in the Entire History of Geology (or any of these: paleontology, anthropology, archaeology, evolutionary biology (lol), theoretical physics 'non-experimental' ---astrophysics, astronomy, and cosmology....?

The first six pretenders can't even get to the First Step of the Scientific Method ("SCIENCE").  The three final masqueraders can't formulate Scientific Hypotheses because they lack VIABLE **Independent Variables**; Ergo...CAN'T ISOLATE, TEST, then VALIDATE their Dependent Variables (*Predictions*)...Step 3 Hypothesis (*"SCIENCE"*). Hard STOP!!

Crocheting is more "SCIENTIFIC" than these CLOWNS...COMBINED !!!!

 

Quote

This is fantastic proof of creationism.

No, these are:

1.  The AKJV

2.  Scientific LAW: Information/"CODE"/Software (DNA) is ONLY ever ever ever sourced by Intelligent Agency, Without Exception!

 
That is...whenever we find INFORMATION existing and trace it back to it's source...it invariably leads to an Intelligent Agent EVERY SINGLE TIME!!

Null Hypothesis in Support: Nature/Natural Phenomena causation CAN NOT create Algorithmic Cybernetic CODING and de-CODING Schemes --- (INFORMATION).

 If you can't Falsify the "NULL" then it's high time to Reckon with The Creator.

 

3.  Laws of Thermodynamics: 

 
1st Law of Thermodynamics (1LOT): The total amount of mass-energy in the universe is constant. (Matter/Energy CAN NOT be created or destroyed).
2nd Law of Thermodynamics (2LOT): The amount of energy available for work is running out, the Universe is moving inexorably to "Maximum Entropy" or Heat Death.

If the total amount of mass-energy is constant, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe will end—the ‘heat death’ of the universe; Ergo...it had a BEGINNING ---and not the 'big bang' Pseudo-Science Trainwreck.
 
"How big was the original phase-space volume W that the Creator had to aim for in order to provide a universe compatible with the second law of thermodynamics and with what we now observe? ....
This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 
one part in 10^10123."
Prof. Roger Penrose: The Emperor’s New Mind; p 343, 1989

 

4.  Chemistry/Biochemistry: 

Functional DNA/RNA/Proteins NEVER spontaneously form "naturally", outside already existing cells, from Sugars, Bases, Phosphates, and Aminos, respectively.
It's Physically and Chemically IMPOSSIBLE.
That's just the Hardware!

To refute, Please show ONE Functional 30 mer- RNA or Protein (most are 250 AA or larger) that formed spontaneously "Outside" a Cell/Living Organism, CITE SOURCE! The smallest "Functional" DNA (Genome) is a little over 100,000 Nucleotides... so that ain't happenin !

Conclusion from the Grand Poobah's of OOL Research...

"We conclude that the direct synthesis of the nucleosides or nucleotides from prebiotic precursors in reasonable yield and unaccompanied by larger amounts of related molecules could not be achieved by presently known chemical reactions."
Gerald F. Joyce, and Leslie E. Orgel, "Prospects for Understanding the Origin of the RNA World," p. 18 The RNA World, R.F. Gesteland and J.F. Atkins, eds. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1993.

 

5.  Quantum Mechanics:

 
The 1000's of Repeated (without Exception !!) Experiments of Quantum Mechanics VALIDATE that the "Necessary Condition" for REALITY (Mass/Energy) EXISTING, is an OBSERVER/"Knower"/Existence of the "Which-Path" Information
 
a. Observe a Phenomenon: Photons/elementary particles/atoms/molecules exhibit both "Wave-Like" and a Particle behavior--(Not @ the same time).

b. Hypothesis: If the "which-path Information" is KNOWN or can be KNOWN then we will observe "No Interference" (Wave-Function Collapse: Matter Existing); Conversely, If the "which-path Information" is NOT Known and never can be KNOWN then we will observe "Interference" (Wave Function Intact: No Matter).

c. Experiment: Which one of the Thousands Without Exception would you like??
 
1.  Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226. 
The authors PUMMEL Naive Realism and take Local-Causality to the Woodshed (again)... 

"The presence of path information anywhere in the universe is sufficient to prohibit any possibility of interference. It is irrelevant whether a future observer might decide to acquire it. The mere possibility is enough."


[**Ergo, The LACK of 'which-path Information' anywhere in the Universe is sufficient enough to prohibit any possibility of Wave Function Collapse. i.e. Formation of Matter!!]

 
"No NAIVE REALISTIC picture is compatible with our results because whether a quantum could be seen as showing particle- or wave-like behavior would depend on a causally disconnected choice. It is therefore suggestive to abandon such pictures altogether."
 
 
2.  Kim, Y-H. et al. (2000). A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser; Physical Review Letters 84, pp. 1–5. 
The authors show not only that "Knowledge" of 'which-path' Information solely collapses "The Wave Function" but can accurately predict future actions of "wave-like" and particle behavior after the Signal Photon has registered and before it's twin Idler has arrived; i.e., QM phenomena transcend Time and Space. SEE also: Walborn SP et al 2002, Scarcelli G et al 2005.
 
In conclusion, this Experiment Validates:
 
a.  Knowledge (Knowing) the "which-path information" alone causes Wave Function Collapse.
b.  Decoherence (physical interaction with the measuring devices) DOES NOT cause Wave Function Collapse.
c.  QM Phenomena transcend Time and Space. i.e., Time and Space have NO MEANING in Quantum Mechanics.
 
Validated and 'Repeated' again by ( ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE )...
 
(1.) Time:  "The other arrangement is such that the choice event Ce happens ∼450 μs after the events Is in the reference frame of the source, which is more than 5 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE HIGHER for the amount of delay compared with the previously reported quantum eraser experiment (28)." 
[ (28) Kim, Y-H. et al. (2000). A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser; Physical Review Letters 84, pp. 1–5.]
Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226.
 
(2.) Space: "Our work demonstrates and confirms that whether the correlations between two entangled photons reveal welcher-weg [Which-Way] information or an interference pattern of one (system) photon depends on the choice of measurement on the other (environment) photon, even when all of the events on the two sides that can be space-like separated are space-like separated. The fact that it is possible to decide whether a wave or particle feature manifests itself long after—and even space-like separated from—the measurement teaches us that we should not have any naive realistic picture for interpreting quantum phenomena." .... 
"This is achieved by independent active choices, which are space-like separated from the interference. Our setup employs hybrid path-polarization entangled photon pairs, which are distributed over an optical fiber link of 55 m in one experiment, or over a free-space link of 144 km in another."
Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557028/
 
 
i.e., 'Time and Space' are UTTERLTY MEANINGLESS in Quantum Mechanics!!  And since all PHYSICAL LAWS are Quantum Mechanical Laws; ERGO... EinsHteinian's Mytho-matheMagical Fairytales (sr and gr) and 'Nature Worshiping' Materialists/Naive Realists (aka: Atheists) positions are so Incomprehensibly Absurd...they make Phlogiston and 13th Century Alchemy look 'Cutting Edge' !!!  
 
 
In conclusion...
 
 
 

In order for " MATTER " to Exist, there MUST BE  A 

" KNOWER " .... FIRST !!!

 
 
 
"The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment."--- 
Bernard d'Espagnat (Particle Physicist): The Quantum Theory and Reality; Scientific American, 1979, p. 151.
Got another 65 or so...but they would be Painfully Redundant in lieu of the above.

 

Quote

These evolutionists speculate that...

You just Identified their Entire Paradigm 'speculate', SEE: "Just-So" Story tellers above.   

And what is evolution?  Please post the 'Scientific Theory' of evolution...?

 

Quote

Science has amazing similarities to the Genesis story.

"Science" is nothing more than "A Method" of Inquiry:  The Scientific Method (SEE: above).  

"Science" has as much in common with Genesis as what I had for breakfast this morning has with the Tensile Strength of the I-Beams in the Willis Tower.

It would be better stated as Known Scientific Laws/Principles are in accord with the the Creation account spoken of in Scripture.

 

Quote

Even DNA points to one single female from which all mankind comes (obviously Eve).

You could have just stopped with: "Even DNA" (SEE: above).

 

regards

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,695
  • Content Per Day:  0.45
  • Reputation:   583
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/11/1968

3 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

Wikipedia, eh? :rolleyes:

Please provide Scientific Evidence: i.e., Show the Formal Scientific Hypotheses then Experiments that VALIDATES each of their Claims...? Highlight the "Independent Variable" in each Experiment (TEST)...?

Ya see, 'Looking' @ nouns and conjuring up a story that "Just-So" happens to align with your paradigm/narrative isn't "SCIENCE"; it's Meta-Physical Propaganda filled Fairytale "Just-So" Story telling.

 

1. They're NOT  "Scientists".  The entire lot are "Just-So" Story tellers with initials behind their names.  To be "Scientists", they have to follow the Scientific Method:

Step 1: Observe a Phenomenon
Step 2: Lit Review
Step 3: Hypothesis
Step 4: TEST/EXPERIMENT
Step 5: Analyze Data
Step 6: Valid/Invalid Hypothesis
Step 7: Report Results

Please post ONE Formal Scientific Hypothesis in the Entire History of Geology (or any of these: paleontology, anthropology, archaeology, evolutionary biology (lol), theoretical physics 'non-experimental' ---astrophysics, astronomy, and cosmology....?

The first six pretenders can't even get to the First Step of the Scientific Method ("SCIENCE").  The three final masqueraders can't formulate Scientific Hypotheses because they lack VIABLE **Independent Variables**; Ergo...CAN'T ISOLATE, TEST, then VALIDATE their Dependent Variables (*Predictions*)...Step 3 Hypothesis (*"SCIENCE"*). Hard STOP!!

Crocheting is more "SCIENTIFIC" than these CLOWNS...COMBINED !!!!

 

No, these are:

1.  The AKJV

2.  Scientific LAW: Information/"CODE"/Software (DNA) is ONLY ever ever ever sourced by Intelligent Agency, Without Exception!

 
That is...whenever we find INFORMATION existing and trace it back to it's source...it invariably leads to an Intelligent Agent EVERY SINGLE TIME!!

Null Hypothesis in Support: Nature/Natural Phenomena causation CAN NOT create Algorithmic Cybernetic CODING and de-CODING Schemes --- (INFORMATION).

 If you can't Falsify the "NULL" then it's high time to Reckon with The Creator.

 

3.  Laws of Thermodynamics: 

 
1st Law of Thermodynamics (1LOT): The total amount of mass-energy in the universe is constant. (Matter/Energy CAN NOT be created or destroyed).
2nd Law of Thermodynamics (2LOT): The amount of energy available for work is running out, the Universe is moving inexorably to "Maximum Entropy" or Heat Death.

If the total amount of mass-energy is constant, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe will end—the ‘heat death’ of the universe; Ergo...it had a BEGINNING ---and not the 'big bang' Pseudo-Science Trainwreck.
 
"How big was the original phase-space volume W that the Creator had to aim for in order to provide a universe compatible with the second law of thermodynamics and with what we now observe? ....
This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 
one part in 10^10123."
Prof. Roger Penrose: The Emperor’s New Mind; p 343, 1989

 

4.  Chemistry/Biochemistry: 

Functional DNA/RNA/Proteins NEVER spontaneously form "naturally", outside already existing cells, from Sugars, Bases, Phosphates, and Aminos, respectively.
It's Physically and Chemically IMPOSSIBLE.
That's just the Hardware!

To refute, Please show ONE Functional 30 mer- RNA or Protein (most are 250 AA or larger) that formed spontaneously "Outside" a Cell/Living Organism, CITE SOURCE! The smallest "Functional" DNA (Genome) is a little over 100,000 Nucleotides... so that ain't happenin !

Conclusion from the Grand Poobah's of OOL Research...

"We conclude that the direct synthesis of the nucleosides or nucleotides from prebiotic precursors in reasonable yield and unaccompanied by larger amounts of related molecules could not be achieved by presently known chemical reactions."
Gerald F. Joyce, and Leslie E. Orgel, "Prospects for Understanding the Origin of the RNA World," p. 18 The RNA World, R.F. Gesteland and J.F. Atkins, eds. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 1993.

 

5.  Quantum Mechanics:

 
The 1000's of Repeated (without Exception !!) Experiments of Quantum Mechanics VALIDATE that the "Necessary Condition" for REALITY (Mass/Energy) EXISTING, is an OBSERVER/"Knower"/Existence of the "Which-Path" Information
 
a. Observe a Phenomenon: Photons/elementary particles/atoms/molecules exhibit both "Wave-Like" and a Particle behavior--(Not @ the same time).

b. Hypothesis: If the "which-path Information" is KNOWN or can be KNOWN then we will observe "No Interference" (Wave-Function Collapse: Matter Existing); Conversely, If the "which-path Information" is NOT Known and never can be KNOWN then we will observe "Interference" (Wave Function Intact: No Matter).

c. Experiment: Which one of the Thousands Without Exception would you like??
 
1.  Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226. 
The authors PUMMEL Naive Realism and take Local-Causality to the Woodshed (again)... 

"The presence of path information anywhere in the universe is sufficient to prohibit any possibility of interference. It is irrelevant whether a future observer might decide to acquire it. The mere possibility is enough."


[**Ergo, The LACK of 'which-path Information' anywhere in the Universe is sufficient enough to prohibit any possibility of Wave Function Collapse. i.e. Formation of Matter!!]

 
"No NAIVE REALISTIC picture is compatible with our results because whether a quantum could be seen as showing particle- or wave-like behavior would depend on a causally disconnected choice. It is therefore suggestive to abandon such pictures altogether."
 
 
2.  Kim, Y-H. et al. (2000). A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser; Physical Review Letters 84, pp. 1–5. 
The authors show not only that "Knowledge" of 'which-path' Information solely collapses "The Wave Function" but can accurately predict future actions of "wave-like" and particle behavior after the Signal Photon has registered and before it's twin Idler has arrived; i.e., QM phenomena transcend Time and Space. SEE also: Walborn SP et al 2002, Scarcelli G et al 2005.
 
In conclusion, this Experiment Validates:
 
a.  Knowledge (Knowing) the "which-path information" alone causes Wave Function Collapse.
b.  Decoherence (physical interaction with the measuring devices) DOES NOT cause Wave Function Collapse.
c.  QM Phenomena transcend Time and Space. i.e., Time and Space have NO MEANING in Quantum Mechanics.
 
Validated and 'Repeated' again by ( ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE )...
 
(1.) Time:  "The other arrangement is such that the choice event Ce happens ∼450 μs after the events Is in the reference frame of the source, which is more than 5 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE HIGHER for the amount of delay compared with the previously reported quantum eraser experiment (28)." 
[ (28) Kim, Y-H. et al. (2000). A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser; Physical Review Letters 84, pp. 1–5.]
Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226.
 
(2.) Space: "Our work demonstrates and confirms that whether the correlations between two entangled photons reveal welcher-weg [Which-Way] information or an interference pattern of one (system) photon depends on the choice of measurement on the other (environment) photon, even when all of the events on the two sides that can be space-like separated are space-like separated. The fact that it is possible to decide whether a wave or particle feature manifests itself long after—and even space-like separated from—the measurement teaches us that we should not have any naive realistic picture for interpreting quantum phenomena." .... 
"This is achieved by independent active choices, which are space-like separated from the interference. Our setup employs hybrid path-polarization entangled photon pairs, which are distributed over an optical fiber link of 55 m in one experiment, or over a free-space link of 144 km in another."
Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557028/
 
 
i.e., 'Time and Space' are UTTERLTY MEANINGLESS in Quantum Mechanics!!  And since all PHYSICAL LAWS are Quantum Mechanical Laws; ERGO... EinsHteinian's Mytho-matheMagical Fairytales (sr and gr) and 'Nature Worshiping' Materialists/Naive Realists (aka: Atheists) positions are so Incomprehensibly Absurd...they make Phlogiston and 13th Century Alchemy look 'Cutting Edge' !!!  
 
 
In conclusion...
 
 
 

In order for " MATTER " to Exist, there MUST BE  A 

" KNOWER " .... FIRST !!!

 
 
 
"The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment."--- 
Bernard d'Espagnat (Particle Physicist): The Quantum Theory and Reality; Scientific American, 1979, p. 151.
Got another 65 or so...but they would be Painfully Redundant in lieu of the above.

 

You just Identified their Entire Paradigm 'speculate', SEE: "Just-So" Story tellers above.   

And what is evolution?  Please post the 'Scientific Theory' of evolution...?

 

"Science" is nothing more than "A Method" of Inquiry:  The Scientific Method (SEE: above).  

"Science" has as much in common with Genesis as what I had for breakfast this morning has with the Tensile Strength of the I-Beams in the Willis Tower.

It would be better stated as Known Scientific Laws/Principles are in accord with the the Creation account spoken of in Scripture.

 

You could have just stopped with: "Even DNA" (SEE: above).

 

regards

 

Lol I'm showing evidence all over how science validates creationism, yet you argue against me.  I dispute evolution, yet you argue against me. Not only that , your use of large colored caps shows that you are actually shouting at me (in forum speak). Can you somehow try and see some kind consensus somewhere. We are after all on the same side, both against evolution, both for the bible. I don't see the need to shout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

2 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

Lol I'm showing evidence all over how science validates creationism, yet you argue against me.  

You clearly don't know what "Science" is or isn't (even after I explained the basic fundamentals to you).  You have shown NO EVIDENCE for anything, whatsoever.  Just merely Parroted 'wiki's' 2nd hand reports of "Looking" @ Nouns and conjuring up a story that fits the narrative.

Do you even know what an ACTUAL Scientific Hypothesis is ??   Please post one regarding anything and briefly list the characteristics..? (btw: you need to know this to pass 5th Grade General Science)

 

Quote

I dispute evolution, yet you argue against me.

You dispute evolution...Incoherently.  psst...there is NO Official "Scientific Theory" of evolution; ERGO, that ='s Fairytale ---I doesn't and never did exist.

 

Quote

Not only that , your use of large colored caps shows that you are actually shouting at me (in forum speak).

Here we go into Clumsy Diversion Territory, eh?

I Highlight particular phrases and concepts to emphasize things I feel are important.  I am not "Hollering" or "Shouting" lol.   Please try and restrain yourself from Reifying (Fallacy) Format Style, Punctuation, ect.

 

Quote

Can you somehow try and see some kind consensus somewhere.

Well consensus is more of a Political "Science" motif... I have no such interests.

 

Quote

We are after all on the same side, both against evolution, both for the bible.

I'm not against something that doesn't exist --(evolution).  

'My Side' for the Holy Bible is...it stands on it's own.  You appear to need "man's word" without TESTS ---(What you think is "Science" but is in reality, Abject Fairytale story telling) to validate it; SEE: 'Cambrian Explosion'.  

The Ends...don't justify the Means.  If you're unsure of this concept, SEE: 1 Samuel 15

Now however, if you wish to post some ACTUAL "Scientific Evidence" --- those things that are TESTED in lieu of parroting "Just-So" Stories, that's another matter entirely and conforms to our admonishment to...

(1 Thessalonians 5:21) "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

 

Quote

I don't see the need to shout.

I'm not and rarely do.

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,695
  • Content Per Day:  0.45
  • Reputation:   583
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/11/1968

7 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

 

 

I'm not and rarely do.

 

regards

You were shouting at me. To use really large font, in color, and caps on, is the internet version of shouting.   I'm sure people have told you this before.  

 

And from this end, that is just what it feels like. I'm sure others feel the same way about  large font, CAPS ON, in color.      I suggest you stop that now that you know the impression it creates, unless you don't mind people feeling like you are shouting at them.      If you disagree with another's opinion it can be done with manners. I do the occasional CAPS ON for emphasis. I did lodge a complaint  about your post because I feel the forum should be diligent to monitor this.   You have been on here a long time and are still doing so, which is a bad reflection on the website.

 

Edited by ARGOSY
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,695
  • Content Per Day:  0.45
  • Reputation:   583
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/11/1968

6 minutes ago, ARGOSY said:

duplicate post

 

Edited by ARGOSY
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

4 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

You were shouting at me.   I'm sure people have told you this before.  

Ahhh no, I actually wasn't.  And to continue down this Refication (Fallacy) diversionary path is not only incoherent --- it's a Screaming "TELL" for the lack of a substantive position or argument.

 

Quote

To use really large font, in color, and caps on, is the internet version of shouting.

For the third time: Reification Fallacy.

 

Quote

I do the occasional CAPS ON for emphasis.

So since you only Shout 'occasionally'...then we should dismiss it??  :rolleyes: 

 

Quote

I did lodge a complaint  about your post because I feel the forum should be diligent to monitor this.   You have been on here a long time and are still doing so, which is a bad reflection on the website.

Translation: " White Flag ".  pssst...we already knew.

Then (LOL), you feebly attempt to manipulate the moderators with your incoherent 'Dog and Pony' show to come to your rescue and save your trainwreck position.  r-ya-kiddin me sir ??

Let's see if they take the incoherent bait.

 

Why don't you Petition the Board to remove the Text Formatting Tools  :brightidea:    (Caveat: that gives you one less "Rescue" operator for your arguments; so, be careful what you wish for).

 

Now back to cases, let's start here:  [Flowers in Calm Meadows] Do you even know what an ACTUAL Scientific Hypothesis is ??   Please post one regarding anything and briefly list the characteristics..? (btw: you need to know this to pass 5th Grade General Science) [Pixie Dust]

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  320
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  6,829
  • Content Per Day:  0.85
  • Reputation:   3,570
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/16/2002
  • Status:  Offline

On ‎30‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 10:18 AM, Enoch2021 said:

:blink:

And THEN, back to the same Nonsensical Buffoonery again.  I don't chase Fallacies, perhaps try this tactic with 'pre-schoolers'.

When you're ready to SUPPORT your claims "Coherently", you let us know.  mmm K?

 

regards

 

You do not believe or understand or most likely cannot debunk the differences between these two great floods, one, the pre-Adamite Lucifers flood, which completely destroyed the entire Earth and all therein, and the second, Noahs flood which did not completely destroy the entire earth, and where life survived, Noah, his wife, their sons and their wives, and two of each birds and animals, and the sun, moon and stars shone.

So you take the easy road and call it, Nonsenscical Bafoonery.

I don't have to validate anything. I just find and quote real Scriptures which show there were two great floods, which you cannot explain, so you completely ignore them;

Noahs flood which I will post as . 'N.F.' Lucifers flood, L.F.

L.F. Earth made waste (Gen. 1:2; Jer. 4:23-26; 2 Pet. 3:5-6).
N.F. Earth not made waste (Gen. 8:11-12, 22 ; Heb. 11:7 ; 1 Pet. 3:20).

L.F. Earth made empty (Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23).
N.F. Earth not made empty (Gen. 6:18-22 ; 8:16).

L.F. Earth made totally dark (Gen. 1:2-5 ; Jer. 4:23-26).
N.F. Not made totally dark (Gen. 8:6-22)

L.F. No light from heaven (Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26).
N.F. Light from heaven (Gen. 8:6-22).

L.F. No day and night (Gen. 1:2-5).
N.F. Day and night (Gen. 8:1-22).

L.F. All vegetation destroyed Gen. 1:2 ; 2:5-6 ; Jer. 4:23-26).
N.F. Vegetation not destroyed (Gen. 8:11, 21 ; 9:3, 20).

L.F. No continued abating of the waters off the earth (Gen. 1:6-12).
N.F. Continued abating of the waters from the earth by evaporation (Gen. 8:1-14).

L.F. Waters taken off the earth in one day (Gen. 1:10).
N.F. Months of waters abating off the earth (Gen. 8:1-14).

L.F. God supernaturally takes waters off the earth (Gen. 1:6-12).
N.F. Natural work of evaporation of the waters off the earth (Gen. 8:1-14).

L.F. No rebuke or miraculous work in fled away (Gen. 1:6-12 ; Ps. 104:7).
N.F. No rebuke or miraculous work is taking waters off the earth (Gen. 8:1-14).

L.F. The waters on earth in Gen. 1:2, hasted away when rebuked (Gen. 1:6-2 ; Ps. 104:9).
N.F. The bounds already eternally set for waters in Gen. 8:1-14).

L.F. All fish were totally destroyed in flood of Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26).
N.F. No fish were destroyed of created again after Noah's flood (Gen. 1:20-23 ; 6:18-22).

L.F. No Fowls left on the earth after (Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26).
N.F. Fowls were left after Noah's flood (Gen. 6:20 ; 8:7-17).

L.F. No animals left after (Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26 ; 2 Pet. 3:5-6).
N.F. Some of all animals kept alive (Gen. 6:20 ; 8:17 ; 9:2-4, 10-16).

L.F. No man left on earth in Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26 ; 2 Pet. 3:5-6).
N.F. Eight men and women left after Noah's flood (Gen. 6:18 ; 8:15-22 ; 9:1-16 ; 1 Pet. 3:20).

L.F. No social system left at all in Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26 ; 2 Pet. 3:5-6).
N.F. A social system left after Noah's flood (Gen. 8:15-22 ; 9:1-16 ; 1 Pet. 3:20).

L.F. No ark made to save men in Gen. 1:2 ; Jer. 4:23-26 ; 2 Pet. 3:5-6).
N.F. An ark made to save men and animals alive (Gen. 6:8-8 : 22 ; 9:1-16 ; Heb. 11:7).

L.F. Cause: fall of Lucifer, now Satan (Isa. 14:12-14; Jer. 4:23-26; Ezek. 28:11-17 ; Luke 10:18).
N.F. Cause: wickedness of men (Gen. 6:5-13) ; and fallen angels (Gen. 6:1-4; Jude 6-7 ; 2 Pet. 2:4).

L.F. Result: became necessary to make new life on earth (Gen. 1:3-2 : 25 ; Isa. 45:18 ; Eph. 3:11).

 


N.F. Results: no new creation made, for all men and animals were not destroyed (Gen. 6:18-8 : 22 ; 9:1-16).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  4,027
  • Content Per Day:  16.64
  • Reputation:   5,187
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/30/2023
  • Status:  Offline

11 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

You were shouting at me. To use really large font, in color, and caps on, is the internet version of shouting.  I'm sure people have told you this before.  

And from this end, that is just what it feels like. I'm sure others feel the same way about  large font, CAPS ON, in color.      I suggest you stop that now that you know the impression it creates, unless you don't mind people feeling like you are shouting at them.      If you disagree with another's opinion it can be done with manners. I do the occasional CAPS ON for emphasis. I did lodge a complaint  about your post because I feel the forum should be diligent to monitor this.   You have been on here a long time and are still doing so, which is a bad reflection on the website.

I don't think Enoch2021 is adept enough to make his point in a civilized manner.  That's why he will forever be on Ignore for me.

I'd like to better understand the difference you and Salty have based on his original post.

Edited by Saved.One.by.Grace
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,695
  • Content Per Day:  0.45
  • Reputation:   583
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/11/1968

10 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

I don't think Enoch2021 is adept enough to make his point in a civilized manner.  That's why he will forever be on Ignore for me.

I'd like to better understand the difference you and Salty have based on his original post.

I generally agree with salty about Genesis 1:1.  He also describes an earth of indefinite time period, a dark watery world without land. Then creation week started with light on the surface. Note the perspective ... written from God's perspective on the surface of this dark watery planet. That is the setting of Genesis 1:1 which precedes the light and the first day. So this earth was certainly around before creation week if one is a bible literalist like myself.  

 

Where I disagree with salty is the last sentence of his opening post.  He refers to this earlier creation, citing a gap in the fossil record between earlier fossils and later fossils. (the so-called Gap Theory of two creations).  I disagree there firstly because his scriptural backing is not clear enough to describe some earlier creation of life before creation week. Secondly the nature of the fossils in the Cambrian Explosion of life were highly similar to today's creatures. There is nothing that dissimilar about the earliest vertebrates to see them as a separate creation. Science generally agrees that all major MODERN CURRENT phyla (caps merely for emphasis ;)  )  appeared suddenly in the Cambrian Explosion. this event very much supports creation, and condemns evolution to an inexplicable fantasy of a theory. 

Since then there has been a consistent change in environments over time, but always some continuity in the fossil record. The only "gap" that exists in the fossil record is when fountains of lava burst forth in Siberia, and melted the ice caps at the end-Permian extinction. This caused major flooding and sedimentation, and then a sudden reversal of the flooding.  After this disaster the world was a lot dryer and many many species died off. Its not really a "gap" in the fossil record, more a huge disaster, with the new dominant surviving species and the extinctions caused by the new harsh environment after the End Permian extinction. 

So I don't see this gap in the fossil record referred to by Salty. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...