Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I Love Jesus and I Accept Evolution

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    The real question is, why isn't there angiosperm pollen everywhere, like today, all the way down the geologic column?
    Nope. This is the question you want to focus on to avoid the challenge.

    If YEC were true, we would definitely expect that.
    Nope.

    Physics. Remember?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Yorzhik View Post
      ]I'm not doing that. I have examples of you doing that. Remember when I was asking you how much DNA was useful? You wouldn't answer because there was data showing a lot more than a few percent was useful, but as more of the genome is useful, the sillier mutation+NS looks... better to ignore that one like you did.
      Much of the human genome is still made of viral parts. Whether those parts are "useful" depends greatly on point of view and lots of data we don't have. What it does tell us is that the human genome looks like the product of a long period of evolution, not a perfect thing that's been damaged for a few thousand years.

      Why? What flood model would predict that kind of dispersal?
      If there were a global flood most of the plant species alive today would be dead. So, magical hyperevolution is your "solution", I guess?

      How do you think a worldwide flood wouldn't change life on earth massively?
      It made hundreds of thousands of plant species appear out of nowhere? That's one miraculous flood.
      “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.



      - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
        It made hundreds of thousands of plant species appear out of nowhere? That's one miraculous flood.
        Or it simply uprooted and buried most plant life that was already there... About 1500-1600 year's worth... Most of it gets turned to oil and coal, but the rest was fossilized.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
          Much of the human genome is still made of viral parts. Whether those parts are "useful" depends greatly on point of view and lots of data we don't have. What it does tell us is that the human genome looks like the product of a long period of evolution, not a perfect thing that's been damaged for a few thousand years.

          If there were a global flood most of the plant species alive today would be dead. So, magical hyperevolution is your "solution", I guess?


          It made hundreds of thousands of plant species appear out of nowhere? That's one miraculous flood.
          You sure do love your straw man arguments against our position, don't you?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
            Or it simply uprooted and buried most plant life that was already there... About 1500-1600 year's worth... Most of it gets turned to oil and coal, but the rest was fossilized.
            None of the coal plants are the same as the plants of today!

            This isn't a straw man, it's reality. Those are totally different species of plants, virtually none of which are even still around, save tree ferns.

            Coal Age plants:
            Giant Horsetails
            Seed Ferns
            Lepidodendron
            Archaeopteris


            https://www.fossilguy.com/sites/ambridge/index.htm

            Gone.

            What don't we see? Oaks, Palm trees, Maple Trees, Mangrove trees. No angiosperms at all.
            “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.



            - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Yorzhik View Post
              You didn't even address the comment. The comment wasn't whether one could more easily mutate a simpler system or a more complex system to death. The comment was whether it was easier to build a system via mutation+NS that was simpler or more complex.
              Building the system isn't covered by evolution, that's the origin of life. Which for all we know could be supernatural or perhaps it's more physically feasible than you think.

              At least you should question, or have a modicum of curiosity, as to how random mutation+natural system can accomplish that.
              Of course I'm curious about that.

              But instead of looking into it, biologists like you repeat the dogma of similar looks and similar function. While biologists like Michael Behe and Stephen Meyer look at the molecules and show you how it can't be done.
              Since my earlier response got eaten by the forum monster. I'll just say that irreducible complexity fails because it doesn't account for the fact that components of a system may have different evolutionary functions along the way.


              Intuition should tell you that building these HOX genes has to be somewhat specific. Aren't you curious how this is a problem for RM+NS? Common descentists don't ever address this.
              Simply wrong. It's always a bad idea to say "Scientists never ask, insert question" because someone has. In this case lots of someones.
              https://academic.oup.com/bfg/article/15/5/333/1741867
              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17379523

              There's a few explanations. Broken copy systems, or us not understanding enough about HOX genes to see how that kind of design change can help function. Perhaps something else. Why do you think that's a problem for the YEC model?
              Because fish should be less complex than humans right? Yet they have more HOX genes than we do. You could chalk it up to a random mutation but all ray finned fish have the same number of HOX genes, so if it's that you're left asserting that all ray finned fish share a common ancestor. And I'm assuming you don't want to do that.

              How does one get a limestone or sandstone layer that isn't laid down by water?
              You don't get formations like this high angle cross bedding in water. It's a sand dune. And when you have land living animals leaving footprints behind in them, in the middle of what you would call a global flood, I think you have a big problem.

              https://ncse.ngo/top-5-creationist-c...s-flood-part-1
              “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.



              - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
                None of the coal plants
                As far as I was aware (and maybe I'm, just ignorant, but...) coal is coal, no matter what it's made from...

                And on top of that (no pun intended), we know that liquefaction can sort layers of sediment, which explains why the fossils and remains are sorted the way they are.

                https://kgov.com/liquefaction

                are the same as the plants of today!

                This isn't a straw man, it's reality. Those are totally different species of plants, virtually none of which are even still around, save tree ferns.

                Coal Age plants:
                Giant Horsetails
                Seed Ferns
                Lepidodendron
                Archaepteris

                Gone.

                What don't we see? Oaks, Palm trees, Maple Trees, Mangrove trees. No angiosperms at all.
                You still don't get it, do you.

                What forms coal, AO?

                Pressure.

                What happens when you have enough water to cover the mountains on top of sediment that has plants buried in it? You get LOTS AND LOTS of pressure.

                The coal and oil we find today is evidence of a global flood. It is not evidence of millions of years.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                  As far as I was aware (and maybe I'm, just ignorant, but...) coal is coal, no matter what it's made from...
                  That's the entire point of this discussion!

                  Why does one part of the geologic column have entirely different plants than the other parts (plus the plants alive today)?

                  You can't explain it and you're trying very hard to dodge at this point.

                  You still don't get it, do you.
                  I think you missed the point a long time ago. :P

                  What forms coal, AO?

                  Pressure.
                  You didn't bother looking at my reference did you?

                  What happens when you have enough water to cover the mountains on top of sediment that has plants buried in it? You get LOTS AND LOTS of pressure.

                  The coal and oil we find today is evidence of a global flood. It is not evidence of millions of years.
                  Sure it is. Millions of years, and sea level change. Because we don't find one big coal seam all around the world, there are lots of coal seams with oceanic and other aquatic layers in between. Plus the plant fragments in those coal seams are largely of plants that don't exist today. That, my friend, is evidence of millions of years.



                  *mic drop*
                  “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.



                  - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
                    Why does one part of the geologic column have entirely different plants than the other parts (plus the plants alive today)?

                    You can't explain it and you're trying very hard to dodge at this point.
                    Um... I just did... Maybe you missed it:

                    Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                    we know that liquefaction can sort layers of sediment, which explains why the fossils and remains are sorted the way they are.

                    https://kgov.com/liquefaction
                    You didn't bother looking at my reference did you?
                    There was a reference???

                    *checks*

                    Oh. That wasn't there when I made my post (evidenced by the fact that it's not in my quote of your post). Did you edit it in after you posted?

                    Sure it is. Millions of years, and sea level change.
                    It simply cannot be evidence of anything other than a flood.

                    Because we don't find one big coal seam all around the world, there are lots of coal seams with oceanic and other aquatic layers in between.
                    There you go with your fallacious arguments again.

                    This time it's question begging.

                    Why would it have to be "one big coal seam all around the world" if it were a global flood?

                    Plus the plant fragments in those coal seams are largely of plants that don't exist today.
                    So what? A global flood would definitely cause millions of species to go extinct.

                    So what's the problem?



                    Now that I think about it for a moment, it seems you're using an argument from silence.

                    Namely, that since we don't see any fossils of modern plants in the sediment layers, therefore they must have arisen later.

                    Yet, fallacy aside, that assumes that the plants that made up the coal were all species that have gone extinct, and that none of the plants that made up coal were any of the modern species. As far as I'm aware, that is an unprovable assumption. How do you know that modern plants were not simply turned into the coal or oil that we find along with the extinct species.

                    That, my friend, is evidence of millions of years.
                    Well, no, it's not, it's a conclusion based on an unprovable assumption.



                    *mic drop*
                    I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with anything...?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                      There was a reference???

                      *checks*

                      Oh. That wasn't there when I made my post (evidenced by the fact that it's not in my quote of your post). Did you edit it in after you posted?
                      Yeah sorry about that, I should use advanced posting more often.

                      It simply cannot be evidence of anything other than a flood.
                      Wow you're really willing to entertain alternative hypotheses and have an open mind aren't you?

                      Why would it have to be "one big coal seam all around the world" if it were a global flood?
                      If all the plants on earth died and were buried all at once, and as you said above only a global flood can make coal seams well then there should only be one big seam, everywhere.

                      So what? A global flood would definitely cause millions of species to go extinct.
                      The problem isn't the extinction, it's why is there no evidence of species alive today in all those supposed "flood" layers from only a few thousand years ago?


                      Now that I think about it for a moment, it seems you're using an argument from silence.

                      Namely, that since we don't see any fossils of modern plants in the sediment layers, therefore they must have arisen later.
                      Considering the plants in question are literally everywhere today, and yet we find no trace of them in coal seams, or surrounding rock.

                      One could argue, say that the US revolutionary army had an air force. But in the absence of any evidence of that, I have no reason to believe that assertion.

                      Yet, fallacy aside, that assumes that the plants that made up the coal were all species that have gone extinct, and that none of the plants that made up coal were any of the modern species. As far as I'm aware, that is an unprovable assumption. How do you know that modern plants were not simply turned into the coal or oil that we find along with the extinct species.
                      Because coal seams are full of fossilized leaves and other plant parts. It's not all nondescript lumps of black stuff. And we don't find modern angiosperm trees there, ever. Lots of ferns, seed ferns, calamites (giant horsetails) and lepidodendron (giant lycophytes). The only living relatives of the above plants are tiny, save the tree ferns. No oak trees, maple trees, palm trees etc.

                      Here are some examples: (A lepidodendron - scale tree and a fern)




                      I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with anything...?
                      It's a model showing how multiple layers (seams) of coal can be formed over millions of years as sea levels rise and fall.
                      “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.



                      - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
                        why is there no evidence of species alive today in all those supposed "flood" layers from only a few thousand years ago?
                        This is the basic observation of the fossil record that I've never seen a reasonable answer to. The most you'll get is "well what about this or that fossil that was misidentified or mis-dated?" None of which changes the plain observed fact that these fossil layers contain organisms that we don't have today, and do contain many that we don't have today.

                        The biological makeup of the Earth changed over time. It's an observed fact, whether or not it fits with somebody's religious beliefs, or what they think of the mechanism of evolution.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by chair View Post
                          The biological makeup of the Earth changed over time. It's an observed fact, whether or not it fits with somebody's religious beliefs, or what they think of the mechanism of evolution.
                          The biological makeup of the Earth has changed, evolution was not the mechanism.

                          The sooner you Darwinists stop asserting the truth of your theory, the sooner a rational discussion can take place.
                          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                          E≈mc2
                          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                          -Bob B.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                            Stay asleep

                            "Mortal man was never the property of the archdeceivers. Jesus did not die to ransom man from the clutch of the apostate rulers and fallen princes of the spheres. The Father in heaven never conceived of such crass injustice as damning a mortal soul because of the evil doing of his ancestors."UB

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Caino View Post
                              Stay asleep
                              Go away, troll.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                                As far as I was aware (and maybe I'm, just ignorant, but...) coal is coal, no matter what it's made from...

                                And on top of that (no pun intended), we know that liquefaction can sort layers of sediment, which explains why the fossils and remains are sorted the way they are.

                                https://kgov.com/liquefaction



                                You still don't get it, do you.

                                What forms coal, AO?

                                Pressure.

                                What happens when you have enough water to cover the mountains on top of sediment that has plants buried in it? You get LOTS AND LOTS of pressure.

                                The coal and oil we find today is evidence of a global flood. It is not evidence of millions of years.
                                Here's some information on that from a graduate of the Institute for Creation Research graduate school:

                                For years I struggled to understand how the geologic data I worked with everyday could be fit into a Biblical perspective.

                                This was where I first became exposed to the problems geology presented to the idea of a global flood. I would see extremely thick (30,000 feet) sedimentary layers. One could follow these beds from the surface down to those depths where they were covered by vast thicknesses of sediment. I would see buried mountains which had experienced thousands of feet of erosion, which required time. Yet the sediments in those mountains had to have been deposited by the flood, if it was true. I would see faults that were active early but not late and faults that were active late but not early. I would see karsts and sinkholes (limestone erosion) which occurred during the middle of the sedimentary column (supposedly during the middle of the flood) yet the flood waters would have been saturated in limestone and incapable of dissolving lime. It became clear that more time was needed than the global flood would allow.(See http://www.seg.org/publications/geoa...o6105r1336.pdf for an article showing an example of a deeply buried karst. For a better but bigger (3.4 meg) version of that paper see http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications..._pdf/NG4-1.PDF

                                One also finds erosional canyons buried in the earth. These canyons would require time to excavate, just like the time it takes to erode the Grand Canyon. This picture was downloaded from a site which is now gone from the web. It was http://ic.ucsc.edu/~casey/eart168/3D...Deltain3d1.gif

                                I worked hard over the next few years to solve these problems. I published 20+ items in the Creation Research Society Quarterly. I would listen to ICR, have discussions with people like Slusher, Gish, Austin, Barnes and also discuss things with some of their graduates that I had hired.
                                ...
                                In order to get closer to the data and know it better, with the hope of finding a solution, I changed subdivisions of my work in 1980. I left seismic processing and went into seismic interpretation where I would have to deal with more geologic data. My horror at what I was seeing only increased. There was a major problem; the data I was seeing at work, was not agreeing with what I had been taught as a Christian. Doubts about what I was writing and teaching began to grow. Unfortunately, my fellow young earth creationists were not willing to listen to the problems.
                                ...
                                But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

                                "From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ,"

                                That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.

                                And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.

                                http://www.oldearth.org/whyileft.htm

                                There are a lot of people like Glen Morton, but unfortunately not all of them were, like Morton, able to keep their faith in God; when they discovered that YE creationism was a false doctrine, many of them lost their faith entirely. This is the real damage done by YE creationism.
                                This message is hidden because ...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X