Let's Discuss Scientific Objections to Evolution

[The Barbarian]

16 minutes ago, theElect777 said:

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.

No possible way.   A sudden flood will not produce meanders like this.    Geologists know precisely how these form,and it's not from a sudden flood. Would you like to learn how they form?

 

 

[JohnR7]

4 hours ago, David1701 said:

It covered the whole earth.  Perhaps you don't understand what that means?

I understand what the word of God is saying. I have studied the Hebrew extensively.  There are two words for Earth: erets and adamah.   There is no conflict between Science and the Bible. They are a perfect match and they compliment each other to help us come to a better understanding of the Bible. God has give us artifacts and natural evidence like fossils to help us better understand what He has done. He wants us to know.  I have studied science and ancient history for over 50 years and I have studied the Bible for over 40 years.  Sometimes I spend up to 12 hours a day to read and study. A lot more than I did in college when I would maybe study for up to 5 hours a day. Most people will not understand Genesis until they get to Heaven and then everything will be explained to them there. 

[HAZARD]

5 hours ago, David1701 said:

This is Gap Theory nonsense and I won't indulge it.

Your not the only one who thinks its nonsense. Peter, in (2 Peter 3:3-7) taught that scoffers were totally ignorant of the flood that destroyed the social system and the earth "that then was" (lucifers flood). These scoffers all knew of Noah's flood and still know today. This proves that the truth of the flood that destroyed the original creation was hidden from them, while they knew about Noah's flood.

This doctrin is simple for most men to understand, so they reject it. Especially the churches for some reason. I have never heard a priest or pastor talk about these things until I found a book called, “God’s Plan For Man, by Finis Jennings Dake.”

2 Peter 3:5-7 expresses this clearly in plain human language, "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing (emerging) out of the water and in the water:

Whereby the world THAT THEN WAS, being overflowed with water, PERISHED:

But the heavens and the Earth, WHICH ARE NOW, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."

This is where people become confused and say the world "that then was," was the world before Noah's flood, but this cannot be because:

If the world that THAT THEN WAS" is that between Adam and the flood of Noah, then God created The heavens and the Earth WHICH ARE NOW" since the flood of Noah. Noah and his family lived prior to his flood and after it. The world "THAT THEN WAS PERISHED" and everything in it also perished. What change could Noah's flood make to the heavens? None, for floods on Earth can never cover the heavens. The earth, vegetation, the heavens, all remained the same after Noah's flood.

Peter, in (2 Peter 3:3-7) taught that scoffers were totally ignorant of the flood that destroyed the social system and the earth "that then was" (lucifers flood). These scoffers all knew of Noah's flood and still know today. This proves that the truth of the flood that destroyed the original creation was hidden from them, while they knew about Noah's flood.

What was it that the scoffers were ignorant of unless it was the destruction of the social system before Adam?

This is the doctrin of which men are still ignorant of, which they call "the gap theory." Peter said that the scoffers were willingly ignorant of this truth showing that it is a clear doctrin of Scripture if men would stop being ignorant of it. There are many Scriptures that make this doctrin clear; so "If any man wants to be ignorant, let him be ignorant," as Paul expressed in (1 Cor. 14:38).

Peter said these scoffers of the last days, the days we are in now, since Noah, would be ignorant of the fact that the heavens were of old; that the social system ruled by Lucifer on the old Earth perished by water; that the heavens and the Earth since the six days of restoration are kept in store to be purified again- the next time by fire; that the Lord is not slack concerning His promises of final restoration of the earth to its third perfect state; and that God was longsuffering to all men, not willing that any should perish, but all come to repentance. In Isa. 14:12-14 we have statements which cannot possibly of an earthly King. The passage is universally refering to the fall of Satan. We can quote it and note the facts.

[JohnR7]

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

Imagine so much hydrological pressure that a canyon is deeply etched into solid rock.

We do not have to imagine we can look at the Oroville Dam crisis to see how much water pressure it took to form the Grand Canyon. Gradualism has its place but it takes a lot of water pressure to move a lot of earth. Also plate tectonics is a major factor. We see in the Bible a day will come when the Mount of Olives will be transformed by an  Earthquake.  That is the day when Jesus feet will actually touch the ground and He will return to the Earth in the same way that He left.

 

"They were looking intently into the sky as He was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:10,11)

"And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south." (Zechariah 14:4)

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

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

Since the YOUNG EARTH CREATIONIST scientist says that "gobs and gobs of evidence" exist for evolution, I'm gonna guess he means evidence.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

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

To be technically correct, it is a presupposition - but not one based on evolution. I am also operating on the presupposition that the universe did not pop into being last Thursday (or 5 minutes ago) and that memories were implanted in my head.

At some point, one must admit that there are basic presuppositions that make sense and those that don't. The presupposition that the speed of light has been drastically different at some point in the past is a presupposition that is not backed by any sort of evidence.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

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

You are once again incorrect when telling me what I do or don't believe. Spiritual death did indeed come by sin.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

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.

Unsurprisingly, you are wrong about this, as well. I've stated numerous times in posts you have replied to that God could have miraculously created Adam and Eve in a very literal fashion. You are so bent on discrediting everything I say that you completely ignore things I say that you agree with. You are not arguing in good faith.

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

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.

And the trend continues.... I do believe creatures reproduce according to their kind. I've told you this, as well. "According to their kind" is hardly descriptive when there is obvious genetic variation from one generation to the next. I have challenged you to show me Biblical references that indicate that kinds cannot change and you have ignored them each time. I hardly think it is theologically important to disagree on something that the Bible never says.

You are trying SO hard to pretend that our core theological values are different, but you can't convince anyone other than yourself.

[JohnR7]

43 minutes ago, theElect777 said:

even though the Theory of the "Big Bang" is relatively young

Actually the "Big Bang" goes back at least 1,000 years in the oral tradition and could go all the way back to Abraham or Adam himself. I had a dream when I was around 8 years old. God took me out into the universe and showed me how the universe was expanding. Then He told me a time would come when the universe would shrink or contract. This was around 60 years ago so I am not sure what the exact words were he used. Contract is the word the conservative "Jewish" people use. Neil DeGrasse Tyson has a book about this called: "Astrophysics for people in a hurry" I have actually only read the first two or three chapters but the beginning of the Universe and life as we know it - is pretty amazing. When I was a child everything seemed so vast and huge beyond what I could imagine. Now it all seems to small. Everything is regulated by known laws of science. The laws all remain the same no matter where you go in the known universe or cosmos. 

[JohnR7]

2 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Since the YOUNG EARTH CREATIONIST scientist says that "gobs and gobs of evidence" exist for evolution, I'm gonna guess he means evidence.

They have done a wonderful job of gathering the evidence. That does not mean we can trust them to tell us what the evidence means. 

[one.opinion]

53 minutes ago, theElect777 said:

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?   

Something really odd happened in Genesis 6, but I sure would like to examine all of the genomes involved!

[one.opinion]

Just now, JohnR7 said:

They have done a wonderful job of gathering the evidence. That does not mean we can trust them to tell us what the evidence means. 

Sure, my point - several pages ago now - is that very frank YEC scientists admit there is evidence for evolution. That much is indisputable.

[JohnR7]

4 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

The presupposition that the speed of light has been drastically different at some point in the past is a presupposition that is not backed by any sort of evidence.

The speed of light is not consistent and they can not measure it accurately.