Science sometimes proves Bible right but never wrong

[Deamiter]

Ones we have record of the approximate timeline they died.

This can be done with secular methods and records.

Trace back and add the years of the patriarchs in the Bible all the way back to Adam and their ages at death.

This would rule out The whole stupoid theory of Cave men being anything other than an intelligent ape.

So... how did they get from 8 people at the flood to the hundreds of thousands necessary to build the pyramids in just 1000 years? Note that if you calculate population rates assuming every woman has 1 child a year and that nobody EVER dies, you don't get enough to account for just Egypt.

This doesn't even begin to touch the Chinese civilization that existed at the same time.

A 6000 year-old earth just doesn't make sense. Clearly either Adam was the first Semite (not the first human) or the geneologies are not factually accurate (though the Hebrew people valued meaning over our modernist newspaper-like reporting).

 

[Carey]

The usual creationist nonsense. Is it nice in that comfortable fantasy land you live in?

you make like this scientific site I don't totally agree with. www.creationevidence.org.

But if you can dig up a stitch of evidence of cross species evolution or mutation please give me a reference.

I also challenge you to find any contradiction in the Infalible Bible.

 

[Dannager]

But if you can dig up a stitch of evidence of cross species evolution or mutation please give me a reference.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mutations.html

That's a good deal more than a stitch.

 

[Carey]

So... how did they get from 8 people at the flood to the hundreds of thousands necessary to build the pyramids in just 1000 years? Note that if you calculate population rates assuming every woman has 1 child a year and that nobody EVER dies, you don't get enough to account for just Egypt.

This doesn't even begin to touch the Chinese civilization that existed at the same time.

A 6000 year-old earth just doesn't make sense. Clearly either Adam was the first Semite (not the first human) or the geneologies are not factually accurate (though the Hebrew people valued meaning over our modernist newspaper-like reporting).

Have you ever done the old take a penny and double it .
Then double the total every day for a month??

This is simple 2 x 2 =4 x2 x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2 etc.
well understand noah , his sons and their wives could have a child a year for many many many years. and their children could also.

As for the different races. Noahs 3 sons had wives and 2 of which i believe to be descended from cane.

Noah and his sond were descended from Cains brothers not Cain. adam and Eve went on to have many more Children.

Cains dna was altered when God cast him out of the Garden of Eden producing the other races that have not enjoyed the promises of Abrahams descendents in Genesis 17 . If you look at the ( race ) that is ruling
Israel today (land of cannan)

You will see the common denominator with Israel and the most powerful and prosperous nations on earth.
That are in the endtimes going to be punished as they move further from Gods word and commandments.

Genesis 17 : 6 I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you.

7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."

 

[Carey]

I think someone could have used a little more force-feeding in school.
Don't insult shernren's intelligence, Carey. He may be young(er than you), but he's certainly old enough to think for himself. And spell properly.

Lack of time on the planet to collect knowlege is not a lack of intelligence.

So to say someone lacks info does not say they lack intelligence.

If it was taken as an insult please forgive me.

 

[Carey]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mutations.html

That's a good deal more than a stitch.

From your link.

.0 Species Definitions
A discussion of speciation requires a definition of what constitutes a species. This is a topic of considerable debate within the biological community. Three recent reviews in the Journal of Phycology give some idea of the scope of the debate (Castenholz 1992, Manhart and McCourt 1992, Wood and Leatham 1992). There are a variety of different species concept currently in use by biologists. These include folk, biological, morphological, genetic, paleontological, evolutionary, phylogenetic and biosystematic definitions. In the interest of brevity, I'll only discuss four of these -- folk, biological, morphological and phylogenetic. A good review of species definitions is given in Stuessy 1990.
2.1 The Folk Concept of Species

Naturalists around the world have found that the individual plants and animals they see can be mentally grouped into a number of taxa, in which the individuals are basically alike. In societies that are close to nature, each taxon is given a name. These sorts of folk taxonomies have two features in common. One aspect is the idea of reproductive compatability and continuity within a species. Dogs beget dogs, they never beget cats! This has a firm grounding in folk knowledge. The second notion is that there is a discontinuity of variation between species. In other words, you can tell species apart by looking at them (Cronquist 1988).
2.2 The Biological Species Concept

Over the last few decades the theoretically preeminent species definition has been the biological species concept (BSC).


LOL you see science trying to change what a species is called to attempt to make their THEORY fit...LOL

Thye have even came up with a THORETICAL species definition...hahahahahahaha

Here is where this scripture is appropriate.

20Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith.
Grace be with you.

I was not laughing at you only the ridiculous Theoretical theories of these wonderful minds wasting their time.
Theorizing things that will never produce any real sound eveidence to back.

2 Timothy 2;23Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 25Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

 

[chaoschristian]

You are young and have not had enough time to research all the bull you are force fed in school.

Next, we'll see him say that rmwilliams needs to read more or that kerrmetric should study up on his physics.

Carey:

You keep using those two passages of scripture over and over and over again, as if repeating a mistake enough times will somehow make it right.

It won't.

You have yet to put forth a sound argument as to why those passages ought to necessarily mean what you say they mean and support the way you are using (abusing) them.

So, let's see it. Or at least let's see something beyond the nonsense you wrote in counter to my counter to you.

 

[Carey]

Next, we'll see him say that rmwilliams needs to read more or that kerrmetric should study up on his physics.

Carey:

You keep using those two passages of scripture over and over and over again, as if repeating a mistake enough times will somehow make it right.

It won't.

You have yet to put forth a sound argument as to why those passages ought to necessarily mean what you say they mean and support the way you are using (abusing) them.

So, let's see it. Or at least let's see something beyond the nonsense you wrote in counter to my counter to you.

Well because they are talking about false knowlege.
which of course cannot come from God .
1 timothy 6

And how to handel people who want to argue with false knowlege as backing their point. 2 timothy 2

I let the word of God do the talking for me.

I am only a man who is spreading the knowlege God has given me about his word. As I have studied and prayed.

God bless,
Carey

 

[Deamiter]

Have you ever done the old take a penny and double it .
Then double the total every day for a month??

This is simple 2 x 2 =4 x2 x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2 etc.
well understand noah , his sons and their wives could have a child a year for many many many years. and their children could also.

As for the different races. Noahs 3 sons had wives and 2 of which i believe to be descended from cane.

Noah and his sond were descended from Cains brothers not Cain. adam and Eve went on to have many more Children.

Cains dna was altered when God cast him out of the Garden of Eden producing the other races that have not enjoyed the promises of Abrahams descendents in Genesis 17 . If you look at the ( race ) that is ruling
Israel today (land of cannan)

You will see the common denominator with Israel and the most powerful and prosperous nations on earth.
That are in the endtimes going to be punished as they move further from Gods word and commandments.

Genesis 17 : 6 I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you.

7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."

I have indeed done the calculations as I said. In fact, even assuming that nobody EVER died and that every woman was pregnant all the time from the age of 13 on, you could not account for the number of people in Egypt at the time of the pyramids.

Have you done such a calculation or are you simply assuming that it would work because you are sure you could not be wrong?

If you're interested I could repeat it for you. Just give me the date (or a range of dates) that you believe the flood happened and I will show you the result AND show all my work. I'll even graph it for you so you don't have to interpret a set of numbers.

 

[Deamiter]

Carey, how would YOU define 'species'? The scientific community has for decades considered a distinct species to be a population that does not interbreed (through choice or genetic barrier) with other populations. I guess I'm just wondering if you have a better definition that scientists could work with.

You claim there are barriers between species. Well it's been documented that when populations are separated long enough they can actually become unABLE (not just unwilling) to interbreed. Their genetic diversity increases and they are considered unique species.

What you seem to be asking for is an example of an existing species to change into another existing species. This would violate the theory of evolution so you're really hacking away at a straw man.

 

[Mallon]

Lack of time on the planet to collect knowlege is not a lack of intelligence.

Nor does length of time spent on the planet denote intelligence. Evidently. You may do better to refute the argument than the man.

 

[random_guy]

Have you ever done the old take a penny and double it .
Then double the total every day for a month??

This is simple 2 x 2 =4 x2 x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2 etc.
well understand noah , his sons and their wives could have a child a year for many many many years. and their children could also.

But population growth doesn't occur that way. If it did, according to the population of bacteria with a 25 minute division rate, the Earth is only a few days old. If you truly believe growth occurs on how you believe it, why don't you draw a graph of the population of then and extend it to now to see if it matches the current Earth population. I doubt you'll have enough room.

This also completely ignores genetics where no bottlenecks occur in the populations of species, ignores that a certain number of animals from each population is needed to remain viable, and ignores that there's no global flood evidence. Nearly every single piece of independent evidence points against a global flood. But according to you, they are all wrong, and your interpretation is right.

 

[Dannager]

LOL you see science trying to change what a species is called to attempt to make their THEORY fit...LOL

Er...no. That's not what's happening at all.

Thye have even came up with a THORETICAL species definition...hahahahahahaha

You do know how theories work in science, right? Right? Because it would be incredible for you to be arguing the things you are arguing without knowing what the word "theory" actually means.

I was not laughing at you only the ridiculous Theoretical theories of these wonderful minds wasting their time.

You really don't seem to have any idea what you're talking about. Have you read up on evolutionary theory at all? Ever?

Theorizing things that will never produce any real sound eveidence to back.

Theories aren't created without evidence. You were shown evidence, and denied it. Stop lying to yourself. It's starting to make your arguments appear foolish.

By the way, I have removed all irrelevant references to Scripture from the quoted post.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

if anyone is following the thread that is actually interested in how and why the definition of species has been changing see:
Darwinism Evolving: Systems Dynamics and the Genealogy of Natural Selection
by David J. Depew

a literally must read on the topic.
http://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Evo...540835/ref=cm_cr-mr-title/104-9455949-7238337

 

[shernren]

Carey:

You keep using those two passages of scripture over and over and over again, as if repeating a mistake enough times will somehow make it right.

It won't.

But you see, by his logic, every passage of Scripture has a blindingly obvious Plain Interpretation[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]™[/FONT], and if anybody who claims to be a Christian does not adopt his interpretation then s/he must be deficient in the Holy Spirit[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]®[/FONT] department.

Therefore it suffices for him to post Scripture without posting any rational reason why he thinks they say what they say. If we agree with him, then he wins. If we disagree with him, we're heretics who have offended the Holy Spirit[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]®[/FONT] in some way or another. Heads he wins tails we lose.

 

[Assyrian]

Can you imagine a structure this large breaking through the atmosphere?? Now that is what I call the mother of All UFO'S...LOL

 

[rmwilliamsll]

But you see, by his logic, every passage of Scripture has a blindingly obvious Plain Interpretation™, and if anybody who claims to be a Christian does not adopt his interpretation then s/he must be deficient in the Holy Spirit® department.


what bothers me is that the claim is that this "blindingly obvious Plain Interpretation™"* is in fact not an interpretation but the text itself. they don't even bother claiming that it is "God's Own Interpretation™" which would still recognize that meaning is not text, not even for God. I've been trying for several weeks to get one YECist to understand the difference between text and meaning and that interpretation=meaning for someone, but other than dad who afterwards said it might have been a mistake, no one yet has posted that they get it.

notes:
*, i'll put this into my clipboard buffer and see how many times i can work it into my postings here today, before it falls out of the buffer.

 

[Jadis40]

So... how did they get from 8 people at the flood to the hundreds of thousands necessary to build the pyramids in just 1000 years? Note that if you calculate population rates assuming every woman has 1 child a year and that nobody EVER dies, you don't get enough to account for just Egypt.

This doesn't even begin to touch the Chinese civilization that existed at the same time.

A 6000 year-old earth just doesn't make sense. Clearly either Adam was the first Semite (not the first human) or the geneologies are not factually accurate (though the Hebrew people valued meaning over our modernist newspaper-like reporting).

Exactly. I hold a B.S. degree in history, so I've studied these things. The historical timeline put forth by the YEC position doesn't even begin to line up with the historical record. A record, I might point out, begins long before 4000 BC, and has been confirmed by archaeological digs at sites throughout Europe and the Americas, the Middle East and the Orient, in an uninterrupted span since the 10th millennium BC at least, when the last Ice Age was coming to an end. So, that leads to another point. If there was a global flood, then these sites, which have been dated in the same method that are used by Biblical archaeologists use, I may point out, should have theoretically been obliterated, but they weren't.

So, here's an honest question: if the earth is in fact only 6000 years old, and there was a global flood, when did it happen? Seems the people living at what ever time you put forth weren't aware of it happening.

If you want more details, I'd refer you to these pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5th_millennium_BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_millennium_BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rd_millennium_BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_millennium_BC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_millennium_BC