Let's Discuss Scientific Objections to Evolution

[David1701]

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

There is no evidence for that and the Bible does not say the flood of Noah was global.

That doesn't say it was global, either.   Which makes sense; there's no sign of a global flood.

The whole earth = global.

There are fossils, laid down rapidly, in sedimentary layers, all over the earth.  How much more evidence of a global flood do you need?

[David1701]

27 minutes ago, theElect777 said:

There's more Scriptural backing for the "Gap Theory of Lucifer's Flood" than there are for the Pre-Trib Rapture Theory.   In fact, the "Gap Theory" goes into great detail and it literally aligns with Genesis 1:2.   The Pre-Trib Rapture NEVER specifies at what point the Rapture itself takes place.   Preacher have manipulated that LIE for over 150+ years now!

I'm not into Dispensationalism at all - neither breaking up Gen. 1:2, contrary to Hebrew grammar, nor pre-trib rapture.

[one.opinion]

On 8/17/2020 at 8:24 AM, David1701 said:

There is no evidence for evolution, only secular interpretations of that evidence, brought about by a desire to keep God out of the picture and start with a paradigm of "materialism only".

If there is no evidence for evolution, why does YEC scientist Todd Wood claim there is?

When seeking information about the physical realm, it makes sense to start with physical explanations. Darwin did not develop his theory to "keep God out of the picture" and some of the strongest early proponents were also Christian - like Asa Gray and Charles Kinsley.

On 8/17/2020 at 8:24 AM, David1701 said:

You're just not getting it, are you?  As I've already said, the interpretations are always going to be based on presuppositions, as applied to the evidence. 

Alright, let's put your statement to the test. Astronomers observe galaxies billions of light years away. Without any presupposition, what does this tell you about the age of the universe?

On 8/17/2020 at 8:24 AM, David1701 said:

You, and some other compromising Christians

I'm going to have to insist that you drop the ad hominems and discourse in a reasonable tone if you want me to continue responding.

On 8/17/2020 at 8:24 AM, David1701 said:

Quote

Are you certain this could only mean in the procreative sense? I think it is more likely that Adam was the first to receive the Imago Dei, which was passed on to humanity through him.

Where is your biblical evidence for this?

Your initial claim was that the Bible says that all humans are descended from Adam. I assume you are referring to Romans 5, but there could be other references you have in mind, as well. Let's look at your references.

On 8/17/2020 at 8:24 AM, David1701 said:

The fossil evidence mostly supports a global flood (and its aftermath).

Can you back up this assertion with evidence?

 

[David1701]

Just now, one.opinion said:

If there is no evidence for evolution, why does YEC scientist Todd Wood claim there is?

 

I don't know.  Why don't you ask him?  Perhaps he conflates evolutionary interpretations with evidence.

Quote

Alright, let's put your statement to the test. Astronomers observe galaxies billions of light years away. Without any presupposition, what does this tell you about the age of the universe?

<sigh>

Without any presupposition, it tells you precisely NOTHING.  This is the point that you keep on missing.  You HAVE TO make presuppositions, in order for data to be interpreted.

Quote

I'm going to have to insist that you drop the ad hominems and discourse in a reasonable tone if you want me to continue responding.

I'm already probably being softer with you than I ought to be, since you are contradicting God's word and are a professing Christian.

Quote

 

Your initial claim was that the Bible says that all humans are descended from Adam. I assume you are referring to Romans 5, but there could be other references you have in mind, as well. Let's look at your references.

Can you back up this assertion with evidence?

 

Adam was the first man.

1 Cor. 15:45 (VW) And so it is written, The first man Adam became a living soul; the last Adam a life-giving Spirit.

[one.opinion]

4 minutes ago, David1701 said:

I don't know.  Why don't you ask him?

Here is the easy answer, if one were to be frank. The YEC scientist that NEEDS to be familiar with evolutionary claims is honest enough to admit that the claims are supported by evidence.

 

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

Without any presupposition, it tells you precisely NOTHING.  This is the point that you keep on missing.  You HAVE TO make presuppositions, in order for data to be interpreted.

That is completely untrue. You have data - the speed of light and the distance. It is an easy calculation to determine the time needed to reach our eyes. This requires absolutely no presupposition.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

I'm already probably being softer with you than I ought to be, since you are contradicting God's word and are a professing Christian.

I find it important to occasionally remind people that our theological takeaway points from Genesis 1-3 are virtually identical. I know you don't like that, but whether you like it or not, it is still true. By extension, since we have agreement on the important points, the things we disagree on are of lesser (if any) importance theologically.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

Adam was the first man.

1 Cor. 15:45 (VW) And so it is written, The first man Adam became a living soul; the last Adam a life-giving Spirit.

You may remember that I stated earlier, Adam and Eve were the first recipient of Imago Dei - issue solved.

[Guest theElect777]

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

Can you back up this assertion with evidence?

There's an area in Northern Colorado, elevation 6500 feet above sea level, where to this very day has multiple sand layers and within this area can be discovered/found fossilized crustacean shells.   Theory by local Scientists claim this area was once ocean and that the Rocky Mountain Range line is not the original mountain line.  In another area, not far from this location and 3,000 feet higher, is a known location for dinosaur bones.

 

If we go by Science' version of the "Bang" leading to Laws of Physics, and the Theory of smaller objects formatting around larger objects (Sol [Sun] and the planets/moons), and then specifically the multi changes of atmosphere/climate change/volcanic activity/etc Earth has been submerged multiple times.   That does not mean ocean/sand, but erupting lava creating landmass from beneath.   And it's within this idealism that Science believes this area once was a lush Rain Forest that became an ocean that is now Rocky Mountain Range Line.

 

Obviously, just like the Geologist describing the Grand Canyon, I believe in 2 major Biblical Floods.   Both Floods created and carved out what we can visibly see today.   The first Flood would have been liken to pouring 500 trillion gallons at full force onto an ant hill, the second similar in force, but less water with more of a sweeping force throughout the continents.   That's just my own idealism.

Edited August 18, 2020 by theElect777

[one.opinion]

9 minutes ago, theElect777 said:

If we go by Science' version of the "Bang" leading to Laws of Physics, and the Theory of smaller objects formatting around larger objects (Sol [Sun] and the planets/moons), and then specifically the multi changes of atmosphere/climate change/volcanic activity/etc Earth has been submerged multiple times.   That does not mean ocean/sand, but erupting lava creating landmass from beneath.   And it's within this idealism that Science believes this area once was a lush Rain Forest that became an ocean that is now Rocky Mountain Range Line.

I'm a Molecular Biologist and not a Geologist, but this fits my understanding. Do you have evidence counter to this explanation?

10 minutes ago, theElect777 said:

Obviously, just like the Geologist describing the Grand Canyon, I believe in 2 major Biblical Floods.   Both Floods created and carved out what we can visibly see today. 

Imagine so much hydrological pressure that a canyon is deeply etched into solid rock. Do you think shear cliffs on both sides would result? Do you think this force of water would dig a straight channel, or a highly meandering one like the Colorado River does through the Grand Canyon (see below)?

You might find a book written by Christian geologists to be quite interesting - http://grandcanyonancientearth.com/

 

[David1701]

39 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Here is the easy answer, if one were to be frank. The YEC scientist that NEEDS to be familiar with evolutionary claims is honest enough to admit that the claims are supported by evidence.

 

Do you mean evidence, or evolutionary interpretations of the evidence?

Quote

That is completely untrue. You have data - the speed of light and the distance. It is an easy calculation to determine the time needed to reach our eyes. This requires absolutely no presupposition.

You are presupposing that the speed of light has always been constant.  This is not difficult to realise.

Quote

 

I find it important to occasionally remind people that our theological takeaway points from Genesis 1-3 are virtually identical. I know you don't like that, but whether you like it or not, it is still true. By extension, since we have agreement on the important points, the things we disagree on are of lesser (if any) importance theologically.

 

 

I disagree completely. 

That death came by sin is VITALLY important but you refuse to believe it.

It is very important that man was made directly from the dust of the earth and not evolved from lower creatures, over millions of years; but you refuse to believe it.

It is very important that Eve was made from one of Adam's ribs; but you refuse to believe it.

It is very important that creatures reproduce according to their kind; but you believe that they can change from one kind to another, given vast periods of time.

etc, etc.

Edited August 18, 2020 by David1701

[Guest theElect777]

52 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

I'm a Molecular Biologist and not a Geologist, but this fits my understanding. Do you have evidence counter to this explanation?

Imagine so much hydrological pressure that a canyon is deeply etched into solid rock. Do you think shear cliffs on both sides would result? Do you think this force of water would dig a straight channel, or a highly meandering one like the Colorado River does through the Grand Canyon (see below)?

You might find a book written by Christian geologists to be quite interesting - http://grandcanyonancientearth.com/

 

Scientifically, the only counter is the Word of God, because even though the Theory of the "Big Bang" is relatively young, the origins of the "Bang" has changed from a cause of Laws, energy, singularity, to it just happened, and from the Bang itself came the Laws, energy, Singularity, etc.

 

As far as the Colorado River itself within the Grand Canyon, a sweeping flood of forces unknown could Theoretically carved it out.   And if water sat for awhile, could have eroded more width and depth.

 

As a molecular biologist who finds the Evolution Theory to be truthful, what's your take on Angels reproducing children with human women and this is why we had Noah's Flood?   

Have you ever read the Diary of Buffalo Bill Cody from his Famous Western Show?   He claims one of the Native Americans in the show used to carry in his possessions the 5 foot thigh bone from a Giant that his ancestors claimed were killed here in the USA by a Flood.

 

Here is an article you might find interesting:  I would be interested in your thoughts as a biologist of these Giants.   Do you believe they existed?

 

Land of the Giants

Posted Friday, February 15, 2019, at 10:19 AM

I lived in southern California in 1975-1987. One night I watched a local TV report about the remains of giants discovered on Catalina island (just off the coast of L.A.) in the late 19th century. They were 7 to 9 feet tall, with red hair and had a double set of teeth. Their skulls were up to 6 times larger than a normal human skull.

In the 1800s, the remains of a similar giant was found on Santa Rosa Island, another coastal island near Santa Barbara. He also had a double row of teeth.

It is one of the many items of weirdness that has found a permanent home in my cranial data base.

Surprise, surprise -- these ancient giants are found in many places globally.

In 1833, near San Luis Obispo, California, soldiers were digging a gunpowder pit and discovered the skeleton of a man 12 feet tall, surrounded by stone axes, carved shells and blocks containing numerous unknown symbols. He had a double row of upper and lower teeth.

In 1883, near Mandan, North Dakota, a 100-acre cemetery was discovered filled with bones of a race of giant humans.

In 1888, in St. Paul, Minnesota, seven skeletons were discovered, 7 to 8 feet tall.

In 1891, near Crittenden, Arizona, a 12-foot giant skeleton was unearthed, along with a huge stone coffin which contained a carving indicating the man had six toes.

In 1898, two brothers, H. Flagler Cowden and Charles C. Cowden, were scientists doing an archeological dig in Death Valley. They uncovered the fossilized remains of a human-like female, 7.5 feet tall. Her canine teeth were twice as long as a modern human. They also found remains of prehistoric camels and an elephant-like creature with four tusks.

In 1911, an 8-foot mummy with red hair was discovered in Lovelock Cave, California.

In 1931, near lovelock, Nevada, several huge skeletons were found in the Humboldt lake bed. An 8.5 foot skeleton was wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similar to an Egyptian mummy. Another skeleton was almost 10 feet tall.

In 1932, the Supervisor of the Lincoln National Park in White Sands, New Mexico, found human tracks (which included human instep imprint) in gypsum rock, 22 inches long and 10 inches wide.

In 1947, a retired doctor from Ohio discovered several mummified bodies, 8 to 9 feet tall, in caverns in the desert region south of Death Valley. They were dressed in medium length jackets and trousers extending slightly below the knees. The texture of the material was made from an animal skin unknown today. Also discovered within the cavern complex were household utensils and stoves which apparently cooked by radio waves. According to an Associated Press account of this discovery, the doctor claimed that in one of the caverns "was the ritual hall of the ancient people, together with devices and markings similar to those now used by the Masonic Order."

In 1965, a perfectly preserved skeleton was found under a rock ledge along Holly Creek, Kentucky. It measured 8 feet, 9 inches in length, with long arms, huge hands and the skull was 30 inches in circumference..

This is just a small sampling of giants roaming the earth in ancient times.

Numerous Native American legends also speak of these giants and generally considered them hostile enemies. For example, the Sioux Indians told tales to Buffalo Bill Cody about how these ancient giants would run down the buffalo.

Skeletons of giant size, 7 to 10 feet, have also been found in Spain, France, Italy, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Israel and the Caucasus Mountain region.

Edited August 18, 2020 by theElect777

[The Barbarian]

There is no evidence for that and the Bible does not say the flood of Noah was global.

That doesn't say it was global, either.   Which makes sense; there's no sign of a global flood.

3 hours ago, David1701 said:

The whole earth = global.

It doesn't say "the whole earth."  It says the whole land (erets).  Which means "my land", "hereabouts", "this nation", and so on, but does not mean "the world."   The Hebrew word for "world" is "tebel", not "erets."

Strong's Concordance

tebel: world

Original Word: תֵּבֵל
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: tebel
Phonetic Spelling: (tay-bale')
Definition: world

Strong's Concordance

erets: earth, land

Original Word: אֶרֶץ
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: erets
Phonetic Spelling: (eh'-rets)
Definition: earth, land

3 hours ago, David1701 said:

There are fossils, laid down rapidly, in sedimentary layers, all over the earth.

Indeed.  and in between the layers are deserts and forests, and grasslands and so on.  Some of the fossils are in ancient desert dunes.   Others are in swamps.  Others are at the deltas of rivers.   How do you think all those deserts and forests had time to appear in the middle of a flood and then be covered by more "flood sediments?"

I've asked this many times, but no creationist ever has an answer for it.