And you go to great lengths to tell everyone all about how many people you ignore.
:think:
Last edited:
-
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
And you go to great lengths to tell everyone all about how many people you ignore.
:think:
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
By definition, for you to set people on "Ignore" is for you to be "not here to listen" to what they say. You've just admitted that you are "just trolling".
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
I, for my part, have never used the "Ignore" function.
I'm curious as to why, exactly, you are "willing to ignore [me] now". I'm listening.
I'm curious as to why, exactly, you "don't like to use the ignore function". I'm listening.
Unlike you, The Barbarian seems, heartily, to like to "use the ignore function"; the way he tells it, one might think The Barbarian is actually proud to advertise the fact that he has no recourse but to stop his ears and run away from embarrassing criticism which he has no hope of countering.
As I taught you earlier, any time a population falls below a certain point, variability drops and the population tends to go extinct because of genetic failure.
I showed you that, also. I pointed out that speciation tended to happen in smaller, isolated populations with less genetic variability. The "founder effect" was commented on by a number of scientists who noticed the phenomenon. Darwin's finches, for example, evolved from a few migrants from S. America. Would you like to see the evidence for that?
The Grants, on Daphne Major, documented that even smaller populations can increase fitness by mutation and natural selection. As you also learned, a small population of lizards colonizing a very different environment, evolved a number of adaptations that made them more fit for the environment, including a new digestive organ. Should I show you that, again?
On the other hand, it can go as it went with those lizards. The race is not always to the fit. But mostly, it is.
As you were taught, these are direct evidence against your Darwinism. Do we have to show you again?
Clearly, I didn't manage to teach you anything about honesty. Shame on you.
Right Divider
Body part
Irony... funny.... :french:
I noticed that you ignored direct evidence against your claim that there are no human skeletons older than 6000 years.
6days
New member
Let's discuss it..... Which "direct evidence" are you referring to and which dating methods?
Post #194, page 13 of this thread.
A Wiki link?
Yes....that’s right. But, you do understand that it’s not the wiki link itself that is the evidence, right? The wiki link contains reference to scientific study. It is the science and the evidence collected that shows your claim of the Earth being 6000 years old to be false.
So if I post a link that refutes all that for the nonsense it is, you'll go away, right?
No. I’ll then post a couple links, one to the La Brea Tar Pits, and the other to the La Brea Woman. That is another human skeleton older than 6000 years.
6days
New member
Tar pits can provide awesome evidence of the creation and flood model. The thing is you are choosing to accept secular interpretations, without really understanding the evidence, and the assumptions that goes into making conclusions.
Science often provides evidence of the shoddy logic that has gone into the secular conclusions. For example...We have seen radiometric dating results change by as much as 200 million years, because the fossil was inconsistent with evolutionary beliefs. We have seen claims that Neandertals more dim-witted, inarticulate, stooped over hairy creatures that were in capable of interbreeding with humans. Science has revealed their humanity and that most of us are descendants of Neandertals. There are many many examples of science, showing us that common ancestry is a false belief system... Not science.
Guyver... Why not be open to how science helps confirm the truth of scripture?
What truth of scripture are you referring to?
Not in the case of the worlds most famous tar pits...the aforementioned La Brea Tar Pits. Do you know why?
It’s because the La Brea Tar Pits Pits show the Pleistocene megafauna and humans living together, which science accepts but the Bible does not. The creation and flood model fails to explain these facts, and there’s one more thing. Do you know how many dinosaurs are found in the tar pits?
Zero. That’s because the fauna is distinct for its time period, as it is now, and as it was when dinosaurs existed.
What evidence is it you think I don’t understand?