Ask the Lorax

[None]

About nature stuff. Or anything really. I'll try my best to help you find the answer.

Why do all of my flowers pale to even the wildflowers on the roadsides(the ones that survive anyway)...

[Guest Biblicist]

We have a Jack Russell

If you can manage a JR, you can manage anything. I've many stories about them. Our neighbor had two. One ran through the electric fence and got flattened by a car, the other bit every kid in the neighborhood. They took him to a dog whisperer-type person. Bit him too!

Oh man!

We have our Jack trained not to leave our yard, we raised him from birth, the pup of a stray we took in.

My cousin had a Jack, he went in the lake for a dip, ran through the electric fence and got all the way to the neighbors with a Doberman before it dried out. At that point he got shocked by the larger, stronger electric fence. Idiot!

It helps to walk them frequently, if not daily.

I have managed agressive dogs. One was a Rottie who was completely unsocialized. I rehabilitate dogs, and get them adopted out. We used to work with a foster group but they are too demanding.

OH Lorax, I am so sorry I have hijacked your thread. We can continue this conversation in "Bib's Room" if you prefer.

[onetiggerroo]

Just a gentle reminder.... waiting patiently...

Oh, but The LORD had something to do with it

Yep, He created the universe, without which there would be no bananas.

...the banana didn't just happen by chance

Good point. The original banana didn't just appear there. The original banana was also a product of evolution. Like all bananas, it existed to help banana plants reproduce. It does this by being eaten. Like Myco said, wild bananas were filled with seeds. An animal would eat the banana and, as a side effect, spread the seeds. The seeds grew into more banana plants of the same kind. Bananas came to be because they helped their plants survive.

Evolution isn't a chance process. It is based on natural selection, which is the opposite of chance. Natural selection consistently favors traits that help animals survive. Because they spread seeds, bananas were selected.

And what created the seeds? How did the seeds know that they would be spread? And who selected the seeds in the first place?

Hi Lorax...

I came back this morning and see that you haven't answered my questions...so, here is just a little tidbit of information for ya...

Bananas were known only by hearsay in the Mediterranean region in the 3rd Century B.C., and are believed to have been first carried to Europe in the 10th Century A.D.

So can you give me something to show when the banana first was cultivated, prior to the 3rd Century BC, to prove your point?

Now, back to the seed issue. The BIBLE tells us this:

Genesis 1:11 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.

Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

So every fruit bearing tree would yield seed, the seed would be within itself, it would be after its own kind. The BIBLE says it would be for our consumption.

The banana was created by our LORD, for our consumption. Interesting!

[The Lorax]

So can you give me something to show when the banana first was cultivated, prior to the 3rd Century BC, to prove your point?

From "Banana History - The history of banana as food."

"

Sweet bananas are mutants

These historical bananas were not the sweet yellow banana we know today, but the red and green cooking variety, now usually referred to as plantains to distinguish them from the sweet type.

The yellow sweet banana is a mutant strain of the cooking banana, discovered in 1836 by Jamaican Jean Francois Poujot, who found one of the banana trees on his plantation was bearing yellow fruit rather than green or red. Upon tasting the new discovery, he found it to be sweet in its raw state, without the need for cooking. He quickly began cultivating this sweet variety.

Soon they were being imported from the Caribbean to New Orleans, Boston, and New York, and were considered such an exotic treat, they were eaten on a plate using a knife and fork. Sweet bananas were all the rage at the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, selling for a hefty ten cents each."

Kinda like I said, a favorable mutation arose that made bananas more desirable. This accounts for one of the mutations, but there was no doubt a series of them. I didn't find as much information on the banana as I had hoped, but I'll try to find more.

Now, back to the seed issue. The BIBLE tells us this:

Genesis 1:11 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.

Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

So every fruit bearing tree would yield seed, the seed would be within itself, it would be after its own kind. The BIBLE says it would be for our consumption.

The banana was created by our LORD, for our consumption. Interesting!

I agree. I just believe He arranged for it to happen from the outset, when He created the universe. What a subtle, ingenious form of creation....kind of like planting a tree in time itself. As time drew on, fruit-bearing trees evolved. But how could such a mind-bending concept be explained to the first people who read the Bible?

[The Lorax]

orax – you say the ToE does not include “abiogenesis” but is that entirely true? The question goes begging – what “evolution” is being taught in the public school systems – is it the ToE or a mix of the ToE and “metaphysical naturalism”? Remember when you first came on this board you asked me what I meant by the term "Darwinism" and I answered, “a mixing and blurring of the ToE (science) with metaphysical naturalism passed off as science”. If you can answer the questions presented to you we can progress to the next level. This is your thread and it is your choice - let me know and if you wish to continue I will respond as my time allows. If you do not want to answer the questions I will understand and bow out.

So you've admitted your definition of Darwinism ropes in abiogenesis and atheism (via metaphysical naturalism) as well. But atheism isn't a part of the theory of evolution. Neither is abiogenesis. In order for this discussion to advance, you'll need to stick to evolution Changing the topic at will would make for an inconsistent debate.

Does the ToE, as taught in American public schools include “life origins”, i.e., does the ToE curriculum “tack on abiogenesis hypotheses”? Are our children in public schools being taught that an unguided process combined the right chemicals to form the first living cell (“another spontaneous generation hypothesis”), which in turn evolved into me and you – “molecules to man” evolution? Of course, there can be no doubt that “unguided abiogenesis” is being taught under the flagship of “biology's Theory of Evolution”. There is no reason to debate this question because we both went to public universities and we experienced this Darwinian worldview firsthand.

Let me provide a passage from a science textbook compiled by Wynn and Wiggins that describes the abiogenesis currently accepted by Darwinists. Is this your understanding of “origins”? Is the following statement science or metaphysical naturalism passed off as science?

Aristotle believed that decaying material could be transformed by the "spontaneous action of Nature" into living animals. His hypothesis was ultimately rejected, but... Aristotle's hypothesis has been replaced by another spontaneous generation hypothesis, one that requires billions of years to go from the molecules of the universe to cells, and then, via random mutation/natural selection, from cells to the variety of organisms living today. This version, which postulates chance happenings eventually leading to the phenomenon of life, is biology's Theory of Evolution (1997, p. 105).

Does the “Theory of Evolution” presented by Charles Darwin include the concept of “molecules to man” evolution? I think not. Why then is molecules to man evolution (including abiogenesis) included under "biology's Theory of Evolution"? Do you personally believe that "chance happenings" led "to the phenomenon of life"?

Is your complaint here with the inherent truth of evolutionary theory, or with the quality of public education in the United States? If the former, you'd need to address the theory of evolution itself, not a paragraph pulled from an anonymous schoolbook. (Page 105 in what book?)

You should really read this chilling chapter by the great physicist Richard Feynman about textbook adoption proceedings. It will make you think twice about using public schoolbooks (much less, a single nameless one) as the basis for an argument about science.

[The Lorax]

Why do all of my flowers pale to even the wildflowers on the roadsides(the ones that survive anyway)...

Oh dear. Well I'm no gardener, so I can only guess what the problem is. How's the soil?

[None]

You did say anything about nature. Nevermind, though, and thanks for replying.

(it's probably just my purple thumbs)

[Scarletprayers]

You did say anything about nature. Nevermind, though, and thanks for replying.

(it's probably just my purple thumbs)

None, aren't they supposed to be green????

[onetiggerroo]

So can you give me something to show when the banana first was cultivated, prior to the 3rd Century BC, to prove your point?

From "Banana History - The history of banana as food."

"

Sweet bananas are mutants

These historical bananas were not the sweet yellow banana we know today, but the red and green cooking variety, now usually referred to as plantains to distinguish them from the sweet type.

The yellow sweet banana is a mutant strain of the cooking banana, discovered in 1836 by Jamaican Jean Francois Poujot, who found one of the banana trees on his plantation was bearing yellow fruit rather than green or red. Upon tasting the new discovery, he found it to be sweet in its raw state, without the need for cooking. He quickly began cultivating this sweet variety.

Soon they were being imported from the Caribbean to New Orleans, Boston, and New York, and were considered such an exotic treat, they were eaten on a plate using a knife and fork. Sweet bananas were all the rage at the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, selling for a hefty ten cents each."

Kinda like I said, a favorable mutation arose that made bananas more desirable. This accounts for one of the mutations, but there was no doubt a series of them. I didn't find as much information on the banana as I had hoped, but I'll try to find more.

Now, back to the seed issue. The BIBLE tells us this:

Genesis 1:11 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.

Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

So every fruit bearing tree would yield seed, the seed would be within itself, it would be after its own kind. The BIBLE says it would be for our consumption.

The banana was created by our LORD, for our consumption. Interesting!

I agree. I just believe He arranged for it to happen from the outset, when He created the universe. What a subtle, ingenious form of creation....kind of like planting a tree in time itself. As time drew on, fruit-bearing trees evolved. But how could such a mind-bending concept be explained to the first people who read the Bible?

Thanks! I believe that everything was created at the moment the LORD spoke it into exisitence. And yes, there are changes in fruit bearing trees, etc, just like we have changes within our bodies...we adjust to the enviornment around us...not evolution as some think, but the ALMIGHTY POWER OF THE LORD...that changes us, HE speaks it into existence. Thanks for being patient with me...I used to work in Math and Science Department while in College...I learned quite a bit from those Professors...most of which were Christians! You can imagine me asking lots of questions...

[None]

You did say anything about nature. Nevermind, though, and thanks for replying.

(it's probably just my purple thumbs)

None, aren't they supposed to be green????

Purple is the opposite of green(every plant i touch, dies).