Announcement

Collapse

Creation Science Rules

This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective.
Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed.
1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team
2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
See more
See less

Darwin was right but did not know it!

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Darwin was right but did not know it!

    Poor Old Charles Darwin gets vilified by all true and lukewarm Christians for apparently claiming everything evolved. He his held up as wonderful by every evolutionist and atheist in the world. But in fact his Origin of Species book frequently has him saying he has no idea of things can evolve.
    On the other hand Darwin did inadvertantly prove Earth is very young and the Flood was a worldwide catastrophe as recently as the Bible says!
    The evidence is staring at you on every overgrown footpath or abandoned vacant lot.
    However to accept and understand this proof you have to accept both Genesis 2:9 and 9:12 are true as they are the key.
    If you do accept those verses as truth just post 'Tell more!' and I will explain even though many of you will not like what I post.
    I am a very Fundamentalist Christian.

  • #2
    It's almost as if you think that there hasn't been any scientific investigation of the process of evolution since 1859 . . .

    There are plenty of good explanations for the process of evolution. Scientists today have a handle on genetics that Darwin could only dream of. And genetics continually supports evolution.
    “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


    • #3
      Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
      It's almost as if you think that there hasn't been any scientific investigation of the process of evolution since 1859 . . .

      There are plenty of good explanations for the process of evolution. Scientists today have a handle on genetics that Darwin could only dream of. And genetics continually supports evolution.
      Who was talking about genetics?

      I was talking about Darwin's research that proves Earth is young and these cannot have been any evolution.

      Best bit of genetics research is that which proves all humans date back to Eve.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
        It's almost as if you think that there hasn't been any scientific investigation of the process of evolution since 1859 . . .

        There are plenty of good explanations for the process of evolution. Scientists today have a handle on genetics that Darwin could only dream of. And genetics continually supports evolution.
        The false claim made again and again....
        All of my ancestors are human.
        Originally posted by Squeaky
        That explains why your an idiot.
        Originally posted by God's Truth
        Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
        Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
        (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

        1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
        (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

        Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
          There are plenty of good explanations for the process of evolution.
          Really? Please explain how random mutations and natural selection can generate the biosphere from a universal common ancestor.
          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


          • #6
            Originally posted by Stripe View Post

            Really? Please explain how random mutations and natural selection can generate the biosphere from a universal common ancestor.
            Stripy wants some random person on the internets to explain scientific issues that can be rather complex to him. Easier to go to a local university and learn something. But that would challenge his "beliefs"

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Right Divider View Post

              The false claim made again and again....
              You say that to everybody but you never make a cohesive argument.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by WYRose View Post
                \Darwin's research that proves Earth is young
                The earth is not young. Only religious extremist zealots buy into that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Trump Gurl View Post

                  You say that to everybody but you never make a cohesive argument.
                  Go back and READ. Myself and others have made plenty of "cohesive arguments" showing the problems with and impossibility of "evolution" (i.e., dead matter came to life on its own and all life is descended from that single common ancestor).
                  All of my ancestors are human.
                  Originally posted by Squeaky
                  That explains why your an idiot.
                  Originally posted by God's Truth
                  Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                  Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                  1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                  Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                    Easier to go to a local university and learn something.
                    I did, lots. Got a bunch of degrees in science, among other things.

                    And was taught that the defining characteristic of a valid scientific theory is reproducibility.

                    The theory of evolution as promoted by those who believe what Stripe said (random mutations and natural selection can generate the biosphere from a universal common ancestor) has not yet been proven in the lab or in the field.

                    The first scientist who does will win a Nobel Prize

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ok doser View Post

                      I did.
                      Me too. On one of the first days, the lecturer said: "The universe is billions of years old and the planet millions. We don't discuss any other ideas."

                      Jonahdog seems to think that this attitude is better than a rational, scientific discussion.

                      Typical Darwinist.
                      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


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ok doser View Post

                        I did, lots. Got a bunch of degrees in science, among other things.

                        And was taught that the defining characteristic of a valid scientific theory is reproducibility.

                        The theory of evolution as promoted by those who believe what Stripe said (random mutations and natural selection can generate the biosphere from a universal common ancestor) has not yet been proven in the lab or in the field.

                        The first scientist who does will win a Nobel Prize
                        And the Nobel awaits for the first person who shows that evolution is not an accurate description of how the world works. And/or that the universe is less than 10,000 years old.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Stripe View Post

                          Me too. On one of the first days, the lecturer said: "The universe is billions of years old and the planet millions. We don't discuss any other ideas."

                          Jonahdog seems to think that this attitude is better than a rational, scientific discussion.

                          Typical Darwinist.
                          Sounds like a good start to the course.
                          Well,that was a bit flippant of me. Although how much time does Stripe wish the lecturer to spend on alternate versions? And which one does he demand? just the Biblical one. Or should the professor also include Native American creation stories? Creation stories from different cultures?
                          What kind of class was this---geology perhaps? If you want to examine different creation stories then take an anthropology class maybe.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                            The Nobel awaits for the first person who shows that evolution is not an accurate description of how the world works. And/or that the universe is less than 10,000 years old.
                            No, it doesn't.

                            Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                            Sounds like a good start to the course.
                            Sounds like you hate science.

                            How much time does Stripe wish the lecturer to spend on alternate versions?
                            None. The course relied not at all on the age of the planet.

                            Which one does he demand?
                            None. As a scientist, I assess ideas based on the evidence, not prejudice.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Jonahdog
                              Im confused.
                              Nobody is surprised.
                              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

                              Working...
                              X