If Evolution were true...

[Hespera]

No, it doesn't mean there is no God. What does this have to do with the O.P. question?


What do you mean by "undisputed transitional forms?" I could show you plenty of transitionals, thet are accepted as such by the vast majority of paleontologists. Would they qualify? Also, are you aware that the best evidence for common descent have nothing to do with the fossil record? The twin-nested hierarchy (morphology and genetic)comes to mind.

In general it means if a creationist disputes it then it is in dispute and thus not valid.

I think our poster just got the idea from a creo site, and doesnt really understand the topic, and probably is not just going for the cheap trick as above.

But we can see.

 

[driewerf]

A jillion fossils -- the earth, if scanned by aliens from space, should appear to be one big graveyard.

Well, here you have "jillions" an "jillions" of fossil coccoliths.

 

[AV1611VET]

All this means is if the universe were different, we wouldn't be here.

As I'm sure you know, this is called the Anthropic Principle.

And it insures us we can exist naturally as humans, made in the image and likeness of God.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, here you have "jillions" an "jillions" of fossil coccoliths.

This is true -- I use that now as a data point, when mentioning God cleaning up the Flood mess afterward.

 

[Split Rock]

Well, here you have "jillions" an "jillions" of fossil coccoliths.

Sorry, but this represents God's "clean up" from his failed attempt to eliminate sin on earth. Apparently, he doesn't like coccolithophores, so he killed billions of them during The Flood.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry, but this represents God's "clean up" from his failed attempt to eliminate sin on earth.

I beg your pardon?

'Failed attempt to eliminate sin on earth' ???

Oh, that's right, you don't believe in the sin nature.

Nevermind -- no comment.

 

[driewerf]

This is true -- I use that now as a data point, when mentioning God cleaning up the Flood mess afterward.

AV1611VET, you are, as far as I know, the only christian who claims that god cleaned after the Flood. Other biblical literalists point at as many features as possible that prove the Flood, espeacially "flood-geologists". I mean your brethren of AnswersinGenesis or drdino.com claim that they see many remains of the Flood. Does this mean
- AiG en drdino.com are wrong (and may be even not really christian)?
-you are wrong (*)?
-god cleaned up, but in an unperfect way
-any other possibility I didn't think about.

 

[driewerf]

I beg your pardon?

'Failed attempt to eliminate sin on earth' ???

Oh, that's right, you don't believe in the sin nature.

Nevermind -- no comment.

Well, adlit there is still "sin" on this planet. So, you have to accept your god failed at the whiping out of the sin.

 

[AV1611VET]

Other biblical literalists point at as many features as possible that prove the Flood, espeacially "flood-geologists".

Mind if I side with you guys on this?

Does it really bother you that much that I agree with you?

After all, in my opinion, you guys aren't wrong all the time.

I have no comment as to what my brothers and sisters in Christ put forth as evidence of the Flood.

Suffice it to say, the Bible said it -- that settles it.

Not, the Bible said it -- evidence settles it.

 

[Hespera]

i wonder why sometimes it is that god cleaned up all the evidence, sometimes that there are data points.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, adlit there is still "sin" on this planet. So, you have to accept your god failed at the whiping out of the sin.

Either that, or His goal wasn't to 'wipe out sin'.

That particular goal is reserved for Jesus Christ and the Millennial Reign, as detailed in Daniel.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

 

[AV1611VET]

he admits there is no evidence of "the flood"; it is because god cleaned up the mess.

Hespera, I'm going to ask you nicely to stop propagating this.

At one time, I believed there was no evidence whatsoever of the Flood; but I have changed my stance on that.

Telling people I'm [still] admitting there is no evidence is only going to confuse them.

 

[Gawron]

Posted by AV1611Vet:

"I'm going to ask you nicely to stop propagating this"


Good luck with that.

 

[Philothei]

Mod hat on


Okay Ladies and Gents!!!


Please cut out the derogatory personal attacks and go back on the topic quoted bellow.
No more "she said he said" type of posts please... If you have a problem with a poster just do not answer their posts / if you are flamed report them...or put them on ignore. After this mod hat we will be actioning posts...
We are all civilized folks here let's show some civility!

Okay, don't get me wrong. I firmly believe that evolution is a fact.

But for the creationists out there who don't believe that evolution is a fact, I have a question for you.

IF evolution was true, what would we see that we DON'T see in the world around us?

Mod hat off​

 

[Split Rock]

Either that, or His goal wasn't to 'wipe out sin'.

That particular goal is reserved for Jesus Christ and the Millennial Reign, as detailed in Daniel.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

So then was The Flood kind of a "temporary patch" deal?

 

[AirPo]

At one time, I believed there was no evidence whatsoever of the Flood; but I have changed my stance on that.

 

[Skaloop]

Why are no other animals intelligent enough to build complex structures (skyscrapers), have complex language, and exhibit human-like skills?

Because they didn't develop that trait. But why even ask the question with humans as the focus?

Why aren't any other animals able to pick up heavy objects with their proboscises (trunks) the way elephants can?

Why don't any other animals have long necks like a giraffe?

Why can't other animals run as fast as a cheetah?

Why aren't other animals as big as a blue whale?

Every species has unique traits. Humans aren't any more unique than anything else.

 

[Hespera]

y JustMeSee

Why are no other animals intelligent enough to build complex structures (skyscrapers), have complex language, and exhibit human-like skill
​

Because they didn't develop that trait. But why even ask the question with humans as the focus?

Why aren't any other animals able to pick up heavy objects with their proboscises (trunks) the way elephants can?

Why don't any other animals have long necks like a giraffe?

Why can't other animals run as fast as a cheetah?

Why aren't other animals as big as a blue whale?

Every species has unique traits. Humans aren't any more unique than anything else.

Intelligence is not necessarily an advantage. A snapping turtle is as smart as it needs to be.

A big brain wont even fit in the shell!

Imagine the boredom of being a smart turtle or a smart clam. Their intelligence is just right for what they do.

A human brain uses a huge amount of energy, about 25% of the body's budget!

And it also requires many years of nurturing. A helpless baby, a difficult birth, and a low reproductive rate.

A possums only lives three years. But they are everywhere, and they have been around for 40 million years or so.

If they had to go to possum school till they were 20 years old they'd all die before kindergarten and that would be the end of them.

 

[Gawron]

In school Opossum's should only be taught one thing. To stay out of the road.

 

[keith99]

For the sake of the discussion (I am a skeptic):

Why are there no other animals as highly developed as humans?
Humans pretty much have control of most of the land.
Why are no other animals intelligent enough to build complex structures (skyscrapers), have complex language, and exhibit human-like skills?

You are treating Evolution as if it is a drive to a specific goal. Humans have filled the niche for highly developed intelect. The expectation is we would squash any competitor. (One could argue this in fact did happen in past).