Creation vs. Evolution

[Stuu]

In ancient Greece you would be called a follower of Tyche, goddess of luck. In Rome you would be considered a follower of Fortuna. In Japan you would be followers of the 7 Lucky Gods. Goddess Lakshmi means "Good Luck" to Hindus.

If I was of a mind to pay dues to a god it would be Bacchus / Dionysus. The Judeo-christian god doesn't understand humanity nearly as well as Bacchus.

Thus Homo sapiens sapiens is no more "sapiens" than our superstitious ancestors.

There was a doubling of the size of our immediate ancestor's brain, that of homo erectus, about 2 million to 700,000 years ago. There was a further large increase in our own species from 500,000 to 100,000 years ago.

But you are right I think. Superstition has never left us.

And now we have the internet, and the size of brain required to watch videos of cats and get into arguments with strangers!

Stuart

 

[TheDuke]

Although it is a belief, creationism is fact. Without God there are no answers

Could it be that you're just asking the wrong questions? :devil:

 

[TheDuke]

I love the hypocrisy of this discussion.

The cruel gods of Dumb Luck, who's key doctrine is "survival of the fittest" want to judge the God who died for the world to save and to heal it.

Yeah, so do I.

In one post you take the stance that your god is responsible for all evil and suffering of men. (I hope you know many christians would disagree...)
Then you feel so elated to be your god's slave because he "died" for the benefit of men. Ironically resulting in absolutely no change at all, except that now there's also a hell to go to.

And obviously you top it off with some silly equivocation.


Wow, and yet you sleep well at night, I cannot begin to imagine the scale and magnitude of the psychological mess you must endure daily.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Hey Michael...*

Alwight said this to you "Glen Morton used to be a YEC, he is still a Christian but his explanation of his own situation and his YEC demon are worth reading about if you haven't already done so."


Glen Morton provides a good example of why we as Christians need to take God's Word as absolute truth....rather than secular and atheist opinions. Here is a little story you may find interesting on Morton*Glen Morton used to be a YEC, he is still a Christian but his explanation of his own situation and his YEC demon are worth reading about if you haven't already done so.

https://www.icr.org/article/3132/


Also...to provide balance John Sanford used to be an atheist professor of genetics who says he breathed evolutionism. He slowly came to realize his belief in millions of years was not consistent with the evidence. This is a good read (Darwinian Evolution is Impossible) about him, if you haven't already done so.
http://creation.mobi/geneticist-evolution-impossible

Merry Christmas to Michael and Alwight

Dear 6days,

Now I feel settled in. We are on a young Earth. Morton's Demon doesn't hold a candle to John Sanford's testimony. Thank you so much, 6days. I was just ready to throw in the towel. You always save me in the end!! Thanks so very much!!

Much Love From God And Me,

Michael

 

[iouae]

If I was of a mind to pay dues to a god it would be Bacchus / Dionysus. The Judeo-christian god doesn't understand humanity nearly as well as Bacchus.


There was a doubling of the size of our immediate ancestor's brain, that of homo erectus, about 2 million to 700,000 years ago. There was a further large increase in our own species from 500,000 to 100,000 years ago.

But you are right I think. Superstition has never left us.

And now we have the internet, and the size of brain required to watch videos of cats and get into arguments with strangers!

Stuart

I too served Bacchus faithfully all my adult life, and found my daily devotions utterly enjoyable.

Then I lost interest and now have an annual tipple at communion.

Bacchus claims its human sacrifices around this time of year when folks believe against all the odds that they are still competent to operate heavy machinery on the road.

 

[iouae]

Yeah, so do I.

In one post you take the stance that your god is responsible for all evil and suffering of men. (I hope you know many christians would disagree...)
Then you feel so elated to be your god's slave because he "died" for the benefit of men. Ironically resulting in absolutely no change at all, except that now there's also a hell to go to.

And obviously you top it off with some silly equivocation.


Wow, and yet you sleep well at night, I cannot begin to imagine the scale and magnitude of the psychological mess you must endure daily.

I love your posts. They are like the troubled sea churning up mud, hoping some of it will stick to something.

What does your god of Dumb Luck offer you? Survival of the fittest? Are you the fittest? I hope so.

Our God cares about the poor and weak and humble whom Jesus came to heal and save. The proud and arrogant, not so much.

And if you cannot see the change which Christianity brought to the world and even to the great US of A, then you truly need to get out of your cabin more.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Hi Michael

Sorry I have been a little slow getting back to the forum since I got wrapped up in researching Global Warming. That is why I never saw your posts till now.

If you could direct me to your website where I could download your book, that would be great.

You do sound like you have had an interesting life Michael.
Well I hope the next few days till the end of the year are as busy or quiet as you like it. Best wishes.

Dear iouae,

You're amazing!! I'm glad that you're giving me a fair chance!! Yes, it has been a life like probably no one has ever had. I've been tested worse than Job. I'm torn a lot, but I'm strong. I've sunk below the bottom and still, now am doing better than ever. Every subsequent test is harder than the previous one.

Well, if you will go to my signature line on the bottom of my posts, you will find what you're looking for. See where it says:

www.jesusreturningverysoon.com

Go there and you will see Jesus {like my Avatar}. On the left of the pic are the words "Book Copy." Click on that and then click on "SKU-text2.pdf" My book will come up. The first two pages are blank {for autographs and readers' notes}. The third page is my Title Page which says, "What Your Eyes Have Not Seen." That is the name of my book. It is roughly 88 pages long, double-spaced, and God told me to write it using simple language so that most could understand it. I did my best. It wasn't easy writing it in simple words, because that takes more time and is longer. Anyway, using your 'up and down arrow cursor keys', you can flip through the pages of my book to read it on your computer screen, or you can download it to your computer and print it out if you like on standard paper. See what you think. You know that I offered to send you an autographed book, which I gave to others at my book signing day at Barnes & Noble. I'd like to send you the Proof Pages, to be honest. You deserve them because you will understand them, because you are such a thorough study person. I will pay for the book and the postage. No problem. I will PM you.

May God Bless You In Abundance And Wisdom!!

Michael

 

[6days]

Well, I got to the part where it says that only 600 dinosaur species have ever been named, and I sadly saw that it was horribly misinformed. There are over 900 named species, and many more not named as of yet.

Yes... you are sadly misinformed. The article was 1992 and used correct figures. He also said that of the 600 there was likely about 100 on the ark.*

Your figure of 900 inflated up to 1400 at one time and has been dropping. As you know, calling something a different species by looking at bones is subjective
*Bones can sing any tune you like almost.

New Analyses Of Dinosaur Growth May Wipe Out One-third Of Species
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091031002314.htm

Or

Here's the problem - 1,400 dinosaur species were named, yes, but it turns out way less than that were actually discovered. Many of the "new" species turned out to be duplicates of previous finds, were later judged too inconclusive to identify as a new species, or were actually not dinosaur remains at all. So the real question is how many of those 665 dinosaurs did the 23 authors correctly identify. It's a pretty unimpressive percentage: just 274 of those names, about 41 percent, are still in use today.
http://io9.gizmodo.com/5648539/the-...mers-just-dont-seem-to-know-what-theyre-doing

Duke.... trying to inflate the number of animals doesn't help you... there still was lots of room on the ark. And....the ark represents salvation. There still is room on the ark for you.

 

[Interplanner]

The flaw in evolution, that Darwin was aware of, was that many creatures had features that were "far too wondrous" to have happened by mutation processes. But evolution was not about making scientific sense anyway. It was the wealthy English classes way of escaping the shame of human trafficking and of blasting the poor with white sugar diets, and of fighting back, ideologically, against the 'scandalous' US Constitution.

The Constitution positioned a Creator as the basis for human rights for all. The racism inherent in evolution (right from the title page of OS) is why the residue of racism existed in America, but it was being eliminated. This is why the Left's claims of racism today run so late and so far off the mark. The Left needs to protect anti-religion as the answer to everything the Constitution created, which they see as a failure. Except Islam. The Left is still on a euphoric blind date with it.

[This paragraph is the theme of my newest short novel DELUGE OF SUSPICIONS at Amazon.com].

 

[alwight]

Dear alwight,

With all the chimps out there or apes, not any of them are in their own process of changing. It makes no sense that there would be some still in the process of evolving, right. The same with other animals. They didn't just change in 'the olden days.' Many should be in the process of evolving still. We should see that happening. I guess I cannot explain it to you well enough and you will not change your mind anyway. We agree on a lot of things, but sometimes not.

Much Love & Best Wishes,

Michael

The fact is Michael that individual creatures, human or chimp, simply do not evolve, you have simply got it all wrong. Species evolve not individuals.
The individuals' own DNA is fixed at conception, it can't adapt, individuals don't morph, so don't believe any such YEC nonsense because it just isn't true.
Darwinian evolution actually explains that adaptions or mutations may occur in the offspring, that over many generations and natural selection can amount to real change, if there is a benefit to be had.

You can't explain it to me because I can tell that you simply don't know the first thing about it. All of life is continuously in the process of gradually evolving, which I can assure you does not involve any individuals "morphing".

 

[Greg Jennings]

If I was of a mind to pay dues to a god it would be Bacchus / Dionysus.

Bottoms up

 

[Greg Jennings]

Yes... you are sadly misinformed. The article was 1992 and used correct figures. He also said that of the 600 there was likely about 100 on the ark.*

Your figure of 900 inflated up to 1400 at one time and has been dropping. As you know, calling something a different species by looking at bones is subjective
*Bones can sing any tune you like almost.

New Analyses Of Dinosaur Growth May Wipe Out One-third Of Species
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091031002314.htm

Or

Here's the problem - 1,400 dinosaur species were named, yes, but it turns out way less than that were actually discovered. Many of the "new" species turned out to be duplicates of previous finds, were later judged too inconclusive to identify as a new species, or were actually not dinosaur remains at all. So the real question is how many of those 665 dinosaurs did the 23 authors correctly identify. It's a pretty unimpressive percentage: just 274 of those names, about 41 percent, are still in use today.
http://io9.gizmodo.com/5648539/the-...mers-just-dont-seem-to-know-what-theyre-doing

Duke.... trying to inflate the number of animals doesn't help you... there still was lots of room on the ark. And....the ark represents salvation. There still is room on the ark for you.

Hello, 6. You responded to Duke, but I believe you responded to my post and accidentally inserted his name in the quote.


Your links were interesting. Indeed it does seem that there are far fewer than the 1400 names species you mention. It seems there are about 300 verified dinosaur genera. Many genera contain only one species, but many also contain tens of species. And, according to the USGS, scientists estimate that over 700 genera have yet to be discovered:http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dinosaurs/types.html

We've only been looking for dinosaur fossils for less than two centuries. We have so much more to find.

But 6, let's pretend that the only species in existence were those 20 or so that I listed for you. If your ark was truly 450x75x75 feet, then just the ones I listed put together are far far too massive to fit on it, never mind putting other dinosaur species and all of the other creatures in existence on as well, and never mind trying to feed all of those animals (even if somehow God allowed them all to eat straw, there simply could not be enough straw).

D. Hallorum, a species of diplodocus (a type of dinosaur I listed for you) was 108 feet at full length. A brachiosaurus was 85 feet long. A Spinosaurus egypticus was 50 feet long. And the list goes on. Even if they were juveniles who were just 1/4 of their full size, how in the world do you suggest all of these creatures could fit onto an ark of just 450x75x75? It's simple math, 6. The volume of the creatures far exceeds the volume of the ark

 

[Stuu]

The flaw in evolution, that Darwin was aware of, was that many creatures had features that were "far too wondrous" to have happened by mutation processes.

Reference please, for evidence of Darwin being 'aware of' this 'flaw'.

Stuart

 

[Jose Fly]

It's quite funny to listen to sissies moan about their perfect existence, giving no thanks to God, yet so quick to point to all those "terrible pathogens" and blame God. What hypocrisy to refuse to give credit for the 99% blessings yet be so quick to point to the things "which haunt OUR [my foot] existence".

So that's a "Yes, I believe in a God that deliberately and intentionally created pathogens to cause untold death and suffering among men, women, and children".

I'll just let that speak for itself.

 

[Jose Fly]

Creationism and evolutionism are beliefs about the past. Evolutionism is a belief that has never contributed and medical advancement nor new technology in our world. Evolutionism has actually hindered the progress of science at times with false beliefs in things such as useless organs and junk DNA.

Still propagating those lies. Sad.

 

[iouae]

So that's a "Yes, I believe in a God that deliberately and intentionally created pathogens to cause untold death and suffering among men, women, and children".

I'll just let that speak for itself.

So you think pathogens play no role in nature?
Why do you think pathogens evolved.

And I have to laugh at Darwin's objection to a wasp killing caterpillars so cruelly. But we all rejoice that there are natural means of pest control so that the world is not overrun by pests.

Think through your theory, and design a world with natural feedback systems to control populations.

And why do you object to pathogens, when the fittest and fastest and meanest manages to catch its prey and limit populations that way.

To me it just sounds like a half-baked objection to the way God designed nature to work. Jose Fly knows better.

 

[alwight]

And why do you object to pathogens, when the fittest and fastest and meanest manages to catch its prey and limit populations that way.

Aren't you somewhat missing the point?
In an entirely natural environment pathogens would be exactly what you would expect to exist, along with parasites, poisons and everything else.

 

[Jose Fly]

So you think pathogens play no role in nature?

Of course they play a role. Many however have a role that basically amounts to "Replicate myself at the host's expense".

Why do you think pathogens evolved.

Available niche space.

Think through your theory, and design a world with natural feedback systems to control populations.

So the best way God could come up with to control populations was to intentionally create pathogens to cause terrible suffering? He couldn't do something like...limit fecundity?

To me it just sounds like a half-baked objection to the way God designed nature to work. Jose Fly knows better.

If a human intentionally propagates a pathogen and introduces it into the population with the express intent of killing and harming people, we call that person a bio-terrorist.

What do we call a God that does the same thing?

 

[Stuu]

So you think pathogens play no role in nature?

Do you think they play a specific role in your god's plan?

Stuart

 

[iouae]

Of course they play a role. Many however have a role that basically amounts to "Replicate myself at the host's expense".



Available niche space.



So the best way God could come up with to control populations was to intentionally create pathogens to cause terrible suffering? He couldn't do something like...limit fecundity?



If a human intentionally propagates a pathogen and introduces it into the population with the express intent of killing and harming people, we call that person a bio-terrorist.

What do we call a God that does the same thing?

Let's choose a pathogen like ebola.

God said don't eat bush meat like bats, apes and blood.

Disobey God and ebola happens.

Why not blame God for a nail sticking out of a plank which you step on?

And you seem to miss the irony of blaming God, when your god preaches survival of the fittest and natural selection as its prime doctrines.