Interesting...

[MorningGlory]

Mods - need to check out ads for www.Gay-Bible.com advertising "Homsexuality Forgiven".

[MeCajunboy]

He's trying to disprove all of modern cosmology with the date of a rock.

It's pretty cool though.

Me too! Isn't it neat How "Non-believers" are always stumbling on new "discoveries" and believers are patiently awaiting the "Old" one!

Sounds like the beginning of a "New "old" topic!

Blessings

Cajunboy

[Joshua-777]

I

[Joshua-777]

My question for you, how would this world look do you think if we where created? what evidence would be there?

Now that is a good question.

Let's assume the physics is the same, and the Earth is the same, or we could be here for hours :0)

Off the top of my head, I'd expect to see the following:

Geology:

All the rocks dated to the same time by all the methods that we now use.

Al the fossils to be of creatures that are still alive.

The fossils to be mixed up, instead of in layers according to increasing complexity.

There to be no chalk or limestone.

How accurate are the dates, and if the rocks where in water for a long period of time, would that change the date?

what would be burried first? if a flood did happen, see animals would oviously be first burried before the flood, after the flood dinosaurs would be burried due to heavier weight,

if the flood did happen, would they truly be all mixed up? see first question.

chalk and limestone, I will study into that some more before I can make an opinion.

Astronomy:

All stars to be of the same age.

The age of the Earth to be the same as all the stars.

No planets around other stars

No comets/asteroid belts to provide material to hit Earth

How accurate is the age of the stars already present same with the earth?

no planets around other stars isn't valid

comets/asteroid belts would provide material to hit earth, if ya pay attention to the wrath of God, or revelation.

Biology:

Our bodies to contain only the DNA necessary for procreation, with only the 2% ?? that gets used at the moment.

Our bodies to not have unnecessary organs - coccyx, appendix, that cause death and pain, and have no purpose.

(Further expand that to all animals wih vestigial organs - like bllnd fish with eyes)

No Hen's Teeth.

The eyes of all land/air animals to be the same basic design (after all, there can only be one efficient version).

Our body parts to start failing at the same time, rather than from 5 years onwards (eyes first).

To have one set of teeth rather than 2 sets. (or even better, replace them as they fall out).

Our embryo not to grow 3 sets of kidneys, and discard the first two.

Our cells with an in-built chemical factory, rather than one with separate DNA(mitochondria).

Our hair not to fall out, and for it not to grow from our noses and ears in later life. (I hate that!)

Our bodies not to have useless autonomic behaviour (Hair standing on end when we feel cold)

No deadly diseases specific to humans that kill them before puberty.

No cancer (really bad cell design)

The female pelvis to be bigger, to allow easier childbirth.

That's for starters...

all good points, none though do not discredit a creator. I am really tired, so I'm going to get back to this later, lack of sleep.

[Jorge S]

There to be no chalk or limestone.

On chalk:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/chalk.asp

[Jorge S]

On chalk:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/chalk.asp

Yes, I've read it. It's childhood fantasy science. It wishes it were this way, but makes ridiculous assumptions in order to arrive at the conclusion it wants. Just look at the mathematics, let alone the biology. A modern day sea 'bloom' might lay down a tiny fraction of a millimetre in a year. AiG wants to lay down 100 metres in a few days. They're way off target anyway, because the chalk layer is actually two thousand metres thick in places. It's based on old science, too. There has been a revolution in study of the chalk in the last 30 years, and AiG doesn't even know about, even less explain, any of the new stuff discovered. The AiG explanation ignores the marl layers (Ooh, please go away, you're inconvenient!), and especially the volcanic ones. For his figures to be true, you would need volcanoes to explode, spread their ashes around the entire planet, then subside, in less than a fraction of one second. Have you ever seen a volcano like that? The AiG answer doesn't explain the fossils either - how can they be laid in the order they are, with the extinct varieties at the bottom, the surviving ones at the top? Why do the shapes of the echinoids, for example, show evolutionary traits, from old, to new as you go up the geological column? Why do the giant ammonites, abundant in multiple layers, suddenly finish with a layer of ammonites that have had their shells pierced by 2 large incisors? How come that the fossils of a creature with two large incisors that match the ammonite holes are found in the same place? Why do the flints arrange themselves in layers? In a flood, they would mix, being much heavier than the soft silts. Why are there only marine fossils - if a gigantic flood caused this, there should be land animals swept away. Why do fossil beaches surround the chalk deposits? Why wouldn't they mix, in this fabled flood?

Please try harder next time. To underestand geology, try reading a beginner's geology text book, not a religious tract. The geo text book can explain all of this stuff, very easily.

I don't want to study Geology, thanks. I often read articles on the matter for general information. My only interest is to know how the same data can be interpreted differently when viewed from the Creation perspective.

Closed-minded about the truth of the Bible? Yes I am. Aren't you about the purported gradualism that brought us here by evolution? Sure you are.

On different interpretations of matters you mentionned:

- The Geologic Column: does it exist? http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp

- Ten Misconceptions about the Geologic Column http://www.icr.org/article/242/114/

- Selected online Creationists articles sorted by discipline > http://www.trueorigin.org/camplist.asp

Sorry, Jorge, but even you with your closed mind, knows this is impossible.

...and exactly what did the Tyrannosaurus Rex eat after they embarked from the ark? ..and all the other carnivores?

There were no terrestrial carnivores in the pre-flood era. Compare Gen 1:30 and Gen 9:3.

Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to every creeper on the earth which has in it a living soul every green plant is for food; and it was so.

Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herb.

[kat8585]

You know what's so incredible is this:

That they(Creationists) can't see that there was intelligence behind Evotution(what they deem chance). They can't see that individuals along the course of Evolution WERE INTELLIGENT and picked what was needed to survive. It confounds me that this isn't readily apparent to some folks. I guess it isn't...... It pains me to see it like this.....

Hmmm. Wonder how it happened that what they needed to survive just happened to be there.....

[Jorge S]

You know what's so incredible is this:

That they(Creationists) can't see that there was intelligence behind Evotution(what they deem chance). They can't see that individuals along the course of Evolution WERE INTELLIGENT and picked what was needed to survive. It confounds me that this isn't readily apparent to some folks. I guess it isn't...... It pains me to see it like this.....

You should perhaps enlighten us with your definition of intelligence.

It looks you endow the naturalistic mechanisms of evolution with some metaphysical and purposeful qualities, and this certainly confounds me because evolutionists reject whatever has to do with non-testable phenomena.

Which means that you're are replacing the Creationist's God of the Bible, obviously unreal to you, with another unreal entity. No wonder you're feeling pain. That line of thinking constitutes in and of itself a decapitation of reason. Ouch!!!

[Jorge S]

You should study basic geology. Everyone should. It's interesting to know why what's underfoot is there, and how it got there.

No, thanks, I have already my own field to devote to. It is of course interesting and I have read about the evolution of thought in Geology as welll as some general theories and mechanisms but the evolutionary 'how it got there' gives me headaches.

No I'm not. At first I didn't understand it, even after I was taught it as fact. ...Once I fully understood the mechanisms, it all became clear. Close-minded? No, I have actually thought about it hard.

Same experience, different conclusions. I was taught evolution in my atheist early life and I am studying it now as a Christian adult. The more I read about it the less sense it makes.

Please stop! I need a frontal lobotomy first, to entirely remove my critical thinking facilities before I believe that stuff. I can SEE the geologic column (most of it anyway) where I live in the UK. Of course it doesn't exist in its entirety, in one place. That's the very nature of an old Earth - some of it gets eroded. This is really basic stuff. The guys who wrote that garbage would get an 'F' in geology 101.

Time to stitch your frontal lobe back. You should actually peruse the information with the 'open mind' you demand from others. The fact that peers in your field can draw different conclusions from the same evidence is revelatory. It took a Lyell to fight against clerical absolutism in science --as you may rejoice thinking. It may take another Lyell to fight against philosophic absolutism in science.

The latter is talking to, and about, Noah and his sons. No mention is made of other animals. Either the animals just decided to eat each other, or they never stopped. Given their biology, the latter seems so much more likely. It's the (awful) fate of most of sentient life on earth to be eaten alive by another creature. It is so, and forever has been.

The passage at the beginning of Gen 9 concerns the respect for human life, which would be demanded from both men or animals that took it (9:5.) This warning, when seen against Gen 1:30 which specifically denies the existence of terrestrial predators or birds of prey, implies that humans were at risk of becoming animal food because a carnivore behaviour was allowed for animals as well. It does not make sense to understand it otherwise as it would not make sense either that Noah and his family were to host dangerous animals for such a long time in the confinement of the ark. Gen. 6:21 instructs Noah to gather 'all food that is eaten' (e.g. herbs, grains, fruits) for himself and for the animals.

The fate of depredation was result of the fall, it wasn't always like that and it will not be forever:

Isa 11:6 - 9 Also the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the cub lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder's den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters cover the sea.

Isa 65:25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the food of the snake. They will not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, says Jehovah.

Rev 21:4 And God will wipe away all tears from their eyes. And there will be no more death, nor mourning, nor crying out, nor will there be any more pain; for the first things passed away.

Edited March 10, 2007 by Jorge S