Fossil Challenge for Evolutionists

[pitabread]

The first man lived thousands of years apart from the second man or woman?
So persons lived thousands of years ago back at the beginning?

No, that's not at all what Mitochondrial Eve or Y-Chromosomal Adam represent.

They represent specific genetic bottlenecks at different points in time. In both cases, there still would have been other individuals making up a larger collective population.

(This is why you might want to be careful taking any scientific information from someone who has "SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE" in their profile. )

 

[AV1611VET]

I haven't come across any Christians on this thread until now...unless I missed one or two.

Mostly atheists and a couple of agnostics that sound like atheists and leave no squiggle room.

How long have you been saved; and is your husband saved?

 

[GodsGrace101]

This isn't about atheism vs Christianity though. What you said was that Christianity "offers more answers than science does".

If you really meant to contrast atheism vs Christianity, then that has nothing to do with science.

Christianity says that God created all things..
those seen
and those unseen

It's interesting that back in 325 AD some guys that wrote that had some inkling that there were things that we could not see.

Christianity offers an answer for evil.
On this forum I'm told that evil doesn't exist.
Which is interesting because hospitals are full of sick people and tsunamis kill thousands --- but evil doesn't exist.

Christianity lets me understand the "system" that has been set up by someone/thing that functions with math and other laws. Did math happen by mistake too?

Why don't our atoms just each go their own separate way? Why do they stay together to form me...or this keyboard? Did that happen by accident too? how many years do you suppose that took to come about? Were atoms always staying together or did they have to evolve to do that?

Science can't create an organism even knowing what it would take. Mix and mingle but nothing of value happens.

And yet, billions of years ago,,,just be chance...all the right chemicals got together and created life.
And who can only know where those CHEMICALS came from!

 

[GodsGrace101]

How long have you been saved; and is your husband saved?

Strange question.
40 plus years
no

 

[GodsGrace101]

No, that's not at all what Mitochondrial Eve or Y-Chromosomal Adam represent.

They represent specific genetic bottlenecks at different points in time. In both cases, there still would have been other individuals making up a larger collective population.

(This is why you might want to be careful taking any scientific information from someone who has "SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE" in their profile. )

What about Lucy?
Where did Lucy come from?
Who were her parents?
Did she have children?
With whom?

 

[GodsGrace101]

There are certainly some scientists on the fringe that reject common ancestry. But those scientists represent a small minority of the overall scientific community. There is also no evidence of any trend of increases rejecting of evolution/common ancestry among scientists.

The latter appears to be a myth propagated by creationist and ID organizations.



Biological evolution isn't pure chance though. Complexity is also not a barrier for evolution. Recursive processes like evolution can result in incredible complexity.

As for natural selection, that is an observable phenomenon in nature.

Are there any scientists that deny gravity is real?

 

[Speedwell]

I haven't come across any Christians on this thread until now...unless I missed one or two.

Mostly atheists and a couple of agnostics that sound like atheists and leave no squiggle room.

You've come across me. I recently changed my profile to "other religion" because I am ashamed of what Christianity in this country has become. After prayer and consultation with spiritual advisers I realized how discreditable and cowardly this is, but have decided to leave it the way it is in this forum because of the offense it gives creationists that a person could claim to be a Christian who doesn't believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis.

 

[Speedwell]

Are there any scientists that deny gravity is real?

No, but there are a variety of minority opinions about the theory of gravitation.

 

[GodsGrace101]

You've come across me. I recently changed my profile to "other religion" because I am ashamed of what Christianity in this country has become. After prayer and consultation with spiritual advisers I realized how discreditable and cowardly this is, but have decided to leave it the way it is in this forum because of the offense it gives creationists that a person could claim to be a Christian who doesn't believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis.

I agree with you. I think Christianity is in a pitiful state. If you've seen any of my posts in theology you'd understand.

Many Christians don't believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis. Catholics, for instance.
Genesis has many problem withing it. Who did Adam's children marry? Catholicism and Protestantism believe they married each other because the gene pool was pure back then. However, we can't know this so we should't speculate. The first chapters of Genesis were to show us the beginning and where sin comes from,,how it entered into a perfect world that God said was good. Some problems still exists, but, as I've been told on the thread,,,because there are problems one doesn't just throw God out ....
Just like I've been told not to throw out science because I don't understand it very weill. I wouldn't say I don't understand, I'd say I'm not a scientist but I do understand concepts...

The pressure you felt could be because of where you live. I live in Italy...Christianity is dying in Europe.
Why? Because of what kids learn in school...they're apparently too smart to believe in God.

In the old days scientists were Christian...there was no problem...what changed? I don't know....

 

[AV1611VET]

Why don't our atoms just each go their own separate way?

Go in a room with pure hydrogen and light a match and you'll have more chance of surviving L'Aquila than you would the room.

Go in a room with pure oxygen and light a match and you'll get the same result.

Yet put the two together, and they form H2O, which would put the match out.

Colossians 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

 

[GodsGrace101]

No, but there are a variety of minority opinions about the theory of gravitation.

Ah ha.
But this is my point to @pitabread ...

Scientists agree on gravity because it's real.
They do not agree on evolution because it's not at that point yet....many disagree and are not convinced.

 

[AV1611VET]

Strange question.
40 plus years
no

Just being nosey ... sorry.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Go in a room with pure hydrogen and light a match and you'll have more chance of surviving L'Aquila than you would the room.

Go in a room with pure oxygen and light a match and you'll get the same result.

Yet put the two together, and they form H2O, which would put the match out.

Colossians 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

You won't get any argument from me!
God made everything just right...
including the distance of our planet from the sun.

(of course ole' split hooves got involved in everything too)

 

[Speedwell]

Ah ha.
But this is my point to @pitabread ...

Scientists agree on gravity because it's real.
They do not agree on evolution because it's not at that point yet....many disagree and are not convinced.

Not many.
Oh, they all agree on evolution; evolution is a fact. There are minor disagreements about the theory of evolution, that is, the scientific explanation of the fact of evolution--mostly as to whether Darwin's original mechanism of variation and selection is a complete explanation. That was my point.

 

[Speedwell]

In the old days scientists were Christian...there was no problem...what changed? I don't know....

What changed in this country is that Christianity is being increasingly tied to a disgusting and un-American right-wing political agenda.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not true. It becomes factual the time of Abraham.

Not even then. Since the Exodus is thought to have never have happened as portrayed in the Bible it becoming "factual" does not begin until later. In fact since most of it was written after the Babylonian exile (including the works of "Moses") it is probably a mixture of history and legend for anything before then.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Some would call Adam and Eve a myth.
God used different ways of saying the truth...
There was a first man and a first woman...
I don't know if their names were Adam and Eve.

It teaches us about sin...Atheists don't believe in sin.
I told someone on this thread that his tablet (which wasn't working well) in infected by the sin that entered into the world (evil). His response was that his tablet doesn't sin.

There's a fundamental misunderstanding between Christians and everyone else. Some like to ridicule Christianity, which is interesting, because it offers more answers than science does...

Not that I think there should be a war between the two,,but atheists are determined to prove there is no God.

I do wonder why at times.

There never was a time that there were only two individuals. Unless one goes back to when the first cell divided. But to call them "Adam and Eve" and try to blame to cells on a "fallen world" seems rather strange to me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Someone that is not willing to consider that God may exist has a totally different outlook on everything than a Christian does.

If you've noticed I've never used scripture on this thread (maybe once or twice for a specific reason)...this is because scripture is not accepted by non-believers.

However, this does not mean that everything we talk about is NOT covered by the N.T.,,in fact, everything is.

For instance, 1 Corinthians 2:14 states that a natural man (a man that does not acknowledge his spirit) does not accept the things of the spirit of God because they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually appraised.

Exact wording. Exact outcome when speaking to atheists and even agnostics at times.

Defensive verses appear in many religious texts. They only exist because those spreading religion often realize their stories have truck sized holes in them and that they need an excuse. That does not help your cause it is only a step in a circular argument.

And it is incorrect to claim that others are not willing to consider God. Many Christians and even many atheists consider God and realize that only a dishonest God would plant endless evidence that only supports the theory of evolution and none that supports the creation story. In fact they come to accepting the theory of evolution because they did "consider God".

 

[pitabread]

What about Lucy?
Where did Lucy come from?
Who were her parents?
Did she have children?
With whom?

Lucy is simply the name given to a particular fossil representing Australopithecus. You can read about it here: Lucy (Australopithecus) - Wikipedia

It is representative of the population of Australopithecus that would have lived at that particular time (est. ~3.2 million years ago).

 

[pitabread]

Ah ha.
But this is my point to @pitabread ...

Scientists agree on gravity because it's real.

Except scientists don't agree on gravity. One of the biggest challenges in physics is coming up with a unified quantum theory. The stumbling block is quantum gravity.

Currently there are a number of proposed theories, but no unified acceptance of any yet: Quantum gravity - Wikipedia

They do not agree on evolution because it's not at that point yet....many disagree and are not convinced.

Scientists by and large do agree on evolution (that it exists and that life appears to share common ancestry). And the only scientists that reject evolution do so because of perceived conflict with their personal religious beliefs.