The fossil record shows there never was evolution.

[6days]

Question for you 6days....why do you remove the post number tag when you reply? .....
Are you deliberately removing that from your replies? If so, why?

Not sure what you are talking about, but I suspect its something to do with using a mobile.

 

[Jonahdog]

There are two sides to the story, and as usual Jose, you story isn't consistent with the evidence. The managing editor had full discretion on articles that were published. The article was peer reviewed by 3 biologists.

But Sternberg has never provided the names of those 3 biologists.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You can't be serious.

I am much more serious about creation than you are about evolution.

That you see that as "pointless" says a lot about you.

The part that makes the questions "pointless" is you asking them without expending any thought on what the answer might be.

No, I asked the question as part of an effort to understand what you were saying. You obviously couldn't answer because you were making all this up as you went along, so you just linked to a comparative paper and said "Here....except for all that evolution stuff", which was bizarre since the evolution part was the entire point of the paper!

I spoke about the similarity and disparity in chromosomes that prevent two kinds from having a common ancestor.
You acted as if you have no knowledge about chromosomes at all.
I pointed you to a paper that shows that evolutionists know about the similarity and disparity in chromosomes between different kinds.
The fact that the paper was mostly a fairy tale about when the chromosomes diverged proves that evolutionists are merely making it up as they go along.

You've been making this up as you go along, you have no idea what you're talking about

You are projecting the standard evolutionary scientist method onto me as if I am doing the same thing they are doing.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Do you think every fossil was put in place by the flood and its aftermath, or was something else involved? If yes, how does an asteroid strike dig up enough dirt to blanket the globe to more than a kilometer deep in sediment?

We went over this in a one-on-one a while back.

There were multiple asteroid strikes of "extinction level".

There is enough evidence of these asteroid strikes that evolutionists talk about the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs.

Here is a list of ten asteroids that hit the earth at the time of the flood:
1. Vredefort Crater
2. Sudbury Basin
3. Acraman Crater
4. Woodleigh Crater
5. Manicouagan Crater
6. Morokweng Crater
7. Kara Crater
8. Chicxulub Crater
9. Popigai Crater
10. Chesapeake Bay Crater

 

[genuineoriginal]

You have no basis for making this claim. You are twisting the Biblical account to fit with your ideas- an odd approach if you claim to take the Bible literally.

If you look at the use of the word מַבּוּל mabbûwl in the Bible, it is used only for the worldwide flood, so you can't claim it doesn't mean the same as tsunami.

This is even worse. The Bible describes the entire earth being covered with water, and for a fairly long time. Nothing got "washed out to sea"- there wasn't any "sea". And nothing was "buried on land".

The earth was covered with water, but it was not a static pooling of water, it was a violent washing of wave after wave.

What do you expect to be the effects of these ten asteroids striking the earth at the beginning of the flood?
1. Vredefort Crater
2. Sudbury Basin
3. Acraman Crater
4. Woodleigh Crater
5. Manicouagan Crater
6. Morokweng Crater
7. Kara Crater
8. Chicxulub Crater
9. Popigai Crater
10. Chesapeake Bay Crater

 

[Sonnet]

We went over this in a one-on-one a while back.

There were multiple asteroid strikes of "extinction level".

There is enough evidence of these asteroid strikes that evolutionists talk about the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs.

Here is a list of ten asteroids that hit the earth at the time of the flood:
1. Vredefort Crater
2. Sudbury Basin
3. Acraman Crater
4. Woodleigh Crater
5. Manicouagan Crater
6. Morokweng Crater
7. Kara Crater
8. Chicxulub Crater
9. Popigai Crater
10. Chesapeake Bay Crater

So the inference of numerous asteroids hitting the earth at that time is suggested as an explanation as to why the fountains of the deep broke up?

 

[Stripe]

By the classical circular argument that if one animal seems to originate from another, then they must, by Biblical definition, be the same "kind".

:AMR:

How is that circular?

I believe its impossible to find a Biblical definition of a "kind". Study Hebrew or Greek all you will, it will not help either.

Strange. I came up with one just be reading the English that Darwinists and Christians alike have no problem using. :idunno:

I have said it before, and will indulge in quoting myself.

We'll ignore your ideas and stick with what we've got. :up:

We went over this in a one-on-one a while back.

There were multiple asteroid strikes of "extinction level".

There is enough evidence of these asteroid strikes that evolutionists talk about the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs.

Here is a list of ten asteroids that hit the earth at the time of the flood:
1. Vredefort Crater
2. Sudbury Basin
3. Acraman Crater
4. Woodleigh Crater
5. Manicouagan Crater
6. Morokweng Crater
7. Kara Crater
8. Chicxulub Crater
9. Popigai Crater
10. Chesapeake Bay Crater

Did you have an answer for my question?

How does an asteroid strike dig up enough dirt to blanket the globe to more than a kilometer deep in sediment?

 

[genuineoriginal]

So the inference of numerous asteroids hitting the earth at that time is suggested as an explanation as to why the fountains of the deep broke up?

The impact of each asteroid caused earthquakes and tsunamis, in addition to throwing a lot of dirt and water into the atmosphere.

 

[Jonahdog]

If you look at the use of the word מַבּוּל mabbûwl in the Bible, it is used only for the worldwide flood, so you can't claim it doesn't mean the same as tsunami.


The earth was covered with water, but it was not a static pooling of water, it was a violent washing of wave after wave.

What do you expect to be the effects of these ten asteroids striking the earth at the beginning of the flood?
1. Vredefort Crater
2. Sudbury Basin
3. Acraman Crater
4. Woodleigh Crater
5. Manicouagan Crater
6. Morokweng Crater
7. Kara Crater
8. Chicxulub Crater
9. Popigai Crater
10. Chesapeake Bay Crater

They all hit just before the Flood? Over what time frame, how long ago and why all in that same short time frame?

 

[Stripe]

The impact of each asteroid caused earthquakes and tsunamis, in addition to throwing a lot of dirt and water into the atmosphere.

There is a lot more sedimentary rock than that on Earth. A few asteroids would account for a negligible amount.

 

[Jose Fly]

Waaa waaa....the evolutionists cried...and, the Smithsonian caved.

Grow up 6days. It'd be pretty disappointing to see you devolve into another Stripe.

There are two sides to the story, and as usual Jose, you story isn't consistent with the evidence. The managing editor had full discretion on articles that were published.

The board is lying then? It's common practice for an editor to take an article that is both controversial and well outside the subject matter of a journal, personally pick only 3 reviewers that he never names, and publish the article all without ever informing the board of any of it?

In your view, that's standard procedure?

The article was peer reviewed by 3 biologists.

And they are......?

What I'm saying is that when you are unable to refute what was really said, you create a strawman.

Then you're lying. February 29, 2016, 6days regarding "genetic information": "But essentially, it can't be measured at present since we don't fully understand the overlaying layers of complexity in our DNA, and how its read".

If you're just going to blatantly lie like that, I'll just let it speak for itself.

Jose..... do you recall at one time you seemed to have a mantra that nobody would define the word 'kind'. We kept telling you it had been defined. Then.... one day, magically almost, you posted 3 slightly different definitions that had previously been offered.

So.... the question is why do you continue asking questions that have been answered. I think Stripe has also mentioned that a few times.

The fact that you consistently have to resort to such ridiculous dishonesty in order to advocate creationism says quite a bit about you and creationism.

At least when I asked Stripe how he determined that there was a "dog kind" he admitted he guessed. You can't even get that far.

 

[Stripe]

Then you're lying.

Nope. We never denied saying the things that you dredged up in an attempt to derail the conversation.

Darwinists are only here to insulate their precious religion from scrutiny; they have no interest in a rational discussion. Evolutionists are delighted when the conversation is an in-depth investigation over whether one side lied or another.

Evidence and data? They run for the hills.

 

[Jonahdog]

Nope. We never denied saying the things that you dredged up in an attempt to derail the conversation.

Darwinists are only here to insulate their precious religion from scrutiny; they have no interest in a rational discussion. Evolutionists are delighted when the conversation is an in-depth investigation over whether one side lied or another.

Evidence and data? They run for the hills.

Oh, Stripey, everyone knows that you have little interest in any facts which bring into question your particular irrational beliefs.
But that's OK, you provide a certain amount of amusement.

 

[chair]

If you look at the use of the word מַבּוּל mabbûwl in the Bible, it is used only for the worldwide flood, so you can't claim it doesn't mean the same as tsunami.

It is true that the word only appears in that story. That doesn't mean it was a tsunami.

The earth was covered with water, but it was not a static pooling of water, it was a violent washing of wave after wave.

So you claim- but you have no evidence for it. The text does not say that at all. How did the ark survive all those waves? The story of the dove and the olive branch doesn't work with a tsunami either.

What do you expect to be the effects of these ten asteroids striking the earth at the beginning of the flood?
1. Vredefort Crater
2. Sudbury Basin
3. Acraman Crater
4. Woodleigh Crater
5. Manicouagan Crater
6. Morokweng Crater
7. Kara Crater
8. Chicxulub Crater
9. Popigai Crater
10. Chesapeake Bay Crater

Your idea that all on the above are related to the flood is pure speculation. Geologists date these to way before the flood.

 

[genuineoriginal]

They all hit just before the Flood? Over what time frame, how long ago and why all in that same short time frame?

The ten, and probably more, hit the earth and caused the flood.
The time frame is the day the flood started and no later than 40 days after the day the flood started, based on the rainfall during the flood.
As for why the short time frame . . .

Genesis 7:21-23 21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. 23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.​

 

[genuineoriginal]

There is a lot more sedimentary rock than that on Earth. A few asteroids would account for a negligible amount.

I named ten that scientists have found the evidence that these hit the earth.
I never said that was all the asteroids that hit.

 

[genuineoriginal]

It is true that the word only appears in that story. That doesn't mean it was a tsunami.

So you claim- but you have no evidence for it. The text does not say that at all. How did the ark survive all those waves?

The ark was built to withstand the rain and the tsunamis created by the asteroid shower.

The story of the dove and the olive branch doesn't work with a tsunami either.

The dove and olive branch was a year after the asteroid shower.

Your idea that all on the above are related to the flood is pure speculation. Geologists date these to way before the flood.

That is proof that the asteroid impacts are related to the flood.
Since the earth is only 6,000 years old, the geologists are off in the dates (they claim millions of years).
If the asteroids hit prior to the flood, the evidence would have been washed away by the flood.
If the asteroids hit after the flood, then the evidence would have been declared to be recent instead of millions of years old.
Since the geologists have dated the asteroid impacts to the dates of the dinosaur fossils that were buried in the flood, then the asteroids hit the earth at the same time as the dinosaurs were buried in the flood and became fossils.

It is quite simple when you look at it with the correct paradigm (young earth and global flood instead of millions of years of evolution).

 

[Caino]

The evolution of life has been characterized by sudden mutations. Gradual transitional fossils will never be found for the simple reason that they never existed. However the kinds that they mutated into are concealed within the fossil records and sedimentary rocks of an old earth.

Were it not for the Hebrews largely exaggerated history, the findings of science would be common sense for the people here trying to save religious face.

 

[Stripe]

I named ten that scientists have found the evidence that these hit the earth.
I never said that was all the asteroids that hit.

I doubt that even a thousand such strikes would provide anything near 1 percent.

 

[6days]

Grow up 6days. It'd be pretty disappointing to see you devolve into another Stripe.

Devolve? Is that what natural selection does...devolve organisms?

The board is lying then?

They certainly caved in to pressure.

It's common practice for an editor to take an article that is both controversial and well outside the subject matter of a journal, personally pick only 3 reviewers that he never names, and publish the article all without ever informing the board of any of it?

Nobody said it is common practice for a secular journal to publish an article from a known Intelligent Design scientist. The common practice is to not even look at such articles. And, There actually was a 4th reviewer...Sternberg himself is an evolutionary biologist with 2 PhD's.... and he was not a ID believer.

Then you're lying. February 29, 2016, 6days regarding "genetic information": "But essentially, it can't be measured at present since we don't fully understand the overlaying layers of complexity in our DNA, and how its read".

Much more was said on the topic than that one quote. I said that entire books have been written on the topic answering the question. I also answered you with a question.... I asked you if the human genome contains more genetic information than that of the whisk fern. I believe you dodged that question.

Jose...If I haven't given you book titles, or links before on how to measure genetic information, or genetic variation...Please ask.