Wait. Perhaps I misspoke. If you can post a link that refutes modern science, you’d be a Creationist hero. Who am I to deny your glory? Bring it.
-
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.
Chance or Design (Evolution or Creation)
- Thread starter Hobie
- Start date
Wait. Perhaps I misspoke. If you can post a link that refutes modern science, you’d be a Creationist hero. Who am I to deny your glory? Bring it.
That’s it?
Wow. Ok...uh...how do I put this....that link you provided not only doesn’t address a single fact from the link I posted, it doesn’t even acknowledge them. So...maybe it’s best if you stop posting in these types of threads. You can’t even acknowledge facts.
6days
New member
As I said...you choose to accept circular interpretations without understanding the evidence, and without understanding the assumptions that have gone into the conclusions.Guyver said:
Of of course the facts are consistent with the biblical model. There are many articles written about the carpets from Christian PhD scientists. For example ”An alternative explanation contends that the collection of fossils is the result of catastrophic water transported by episodic flooding events during the Ice Age.2, 3, 4
The pits are famous for their rich collection of Pleistocene Epoch or Ice Age fauna initially excavated by the University of California, Berkeley and the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History between 1906 and 1915. Over 230 types of vertebrate animals are found in the La Brea pits, including saber-toothed cats, mastodons, bears, wolves, camels, birds, insects, and even a few human bones and artifacts.2These fossil remains are surrounded by naturally formed asphalt that seeped into the pits from underground oil reservoirs...... " https://www.icr.org/article/la-brea-tar-pits-mystery
I don't know you so it is quite possibly I am wrong... But my impression from what I have read of yours so far has that you have been given a lot of bad information, which you accept and repeat. You seem to argue against biblical creation, without understanding what it is that you are really arguing against. For example... Did you understand how genetic load is consistent with a perfect creation that has been subjected to several thousand years of corruption / mutations? Do you understand how genetic load is inconsistent with common ancestry beliefs and why evolutionists call it a paradox?Guyver said:
Barbarian, if you happen to be listening, would you mind offering your opinion on the physical evidence found in the La Brea Tar Pits? Specifically, I’d like to know your thoughts on the La Brea Woman, and the evidence for modern humans coexisting with the Pleistocene megafauna.
I need more time to study your post before commenting. I’m in the middle of something now. I would like youto specify the facts inconsistent with the biblical model and define biblical model.
Do you mean the Creation Story of Genesis as the biblical model?
"That's it?" he says...
It's an entire book.
It addresses almost everything we have discussed in this thread.
So unless you were somehow able, in 20 minutes, go through the entire book, I'm not entirely sure how you could say "it doesn't address a single fact from the link I posted."
Try reading the book, first.
I mean, if I had a copy, I might read it now just because of pure boredom. But at this moment, I don’t need to read the book because the facts of the topic at hand are simple. There is ample evidence demonstrating that the world is older than 6000 years. Until that point is argued by your side, there’s nothing to talk about. I already provided two links with facts showing evidence, and offered a third in the reference to the La Brea Woman. Her remains are demonstrably older than six thousand years, and the accompanying evidence demonstrates this.
You would have to demonstrate that what I have just said is false, or misinterpreted in order to even have anything to discuss.
Facts are facts. If you’d like to explain how you think I am misinterpreting those facts, be my guess. Asking me to read a book written by an engineer is not going to cut it.
You were given a link to the ENTIRE BOOK. It's all online, for anyone to read.
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Preface.html
I don't really know what you're talking about. I'm guessing that you may be criticizing radio carbon dating in a round about way.
OK....but the La Brea Tar Pits were not made by a flood, so that doesn't fit here.
OK....so you're accepting the facts and offering an alternative opinion. That's fine. That's the way it should be done. Basically, the article makes some statements about them, and offers the Biblical flood as the cause. It then agrees with the idea of Young Earth. So, you've offered an article from Young Earth Creationists as a refutation to my point.
I said earlier that I'm not expert in Biological Science. To be honest, I find it tedious and boring....yet I admit that it is complicated and requires high level of thought. So, I respect it. To answer the question....no, I am not that familiar with the topic....but isn't the notion of genetic load dependent upon the same kind of assumptions that you find so unscientific in common ancestry? It's a hypothetical or assumed ideal that fitness is compared to.
And your links are useless as well. :up:
Asks for a source refuting the "settled science" of his old Earth religion. Gets it. Shifts the goalposts back to "tar."
Ok. In that case I’ll just offer my opinion on why the tar pits show an old Earth with different species that exist at different places and at different times, just as the species which exist today represent that fact.
Then, I will discuss why it is proper to consider that the Earth is older than six thousand years. At the same time, believe whatever you want. If you want to believe the Earth is flat, or it’s six thousand years old, that’s your business and if fine if you believe it.
I just think it’s really primitive type thinking. I also think that if you’re religious beliefs don’t make you a good person, then your religion sucks and I don’t care what you say because I wouldn’t want to be like you.
Anyway, the tar pits show The Pleistocene megafauna and humans coexisting in a certain place at a certain time. These animals are different from the animals that exist today but the humans are the same. So, whatever it was that wiped out the Pleistocene megafauna (most likely the last ice age) did not wipe out the modern humans. It also shows that there were no dinosaurs existing at this time.
That is the beginning of my opinion on this matter.
You mean you want to have a discussion? On a forum?? Outlandish!
Now all we need is to make the discussion a sensible one. Starting out with the fallacies of begging the question and poisoning the well wasn't the way to achieve that.
:yawn:
Can we go back to trading links?
Uh. OK. :idunno:
Because you say so?
Yep. And I’m about as smart as the guy you linked.
But, even if I were not very smart, what the facts show is what I said. There are no dinosaurs there because there were no dinosaurs there. Thousands upon thousands of other animals were shown there but not one dinosaur.
6days
New member
Genetic load is agreed upon by all geneticists. They of course have various estimates as to the number of mutations added to our genome every generation. Because it is not consistent with common ancestry beliefs, they brush the data away with hypothetical, and unrealistic 'solutions'.
Geneticist Crow estimated we have a decrease of 1-2% in viability every generation... that we are less genetically fit than 'our stone age ancestors'.
See...that is literally crazy. I’m sorry, but there are about 7 billion people on this planet. Hello? When the Bible was written there was like 100 million people on the entire planet?
We have thrived to a maximum.
So? This is explained in the HPT.
Here, if you like watching videos better, here is Bryan Nickel's series which goes through the Hydroplate theory.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpl6E8stJTiIi8wdLgYj1eXpp-4o1UUkZ
Part three is where Bryan describes how liquefaction sorts layers of sediment, even rearranging them, which is one of the reasons for what you have put forth.
I told you, the book (which is online for everyone to read) easily explains what you think is problematic for the creationist side.