God's beautiful creation

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Whether he has or not, I don't know., but you can't deny that with 30 years of exploring and studying fossils carry plenty of weight. If we are laymen or even less in the theory of evolution, then it make sense to consider his opinions seriously.

Not in the slightest. Just because a man goes around looking at fossils, does not mean he is more qualified then anyone else is. If he started as a regular physician, a doctor, then he is not more qualified then an archaeologist, or paleontologist, or a biologist in talking about evolution. What you are doing is committing the fallacy of appealing to authority.

 

[River Jordan]

Scientists based their findings on evidence, but from there, their conclusion can vary. Scientists have no definitive conclusion about thow old the earth is, some say 100,000 years but others may say more. How then can evolutionists claim that fossils are 100 million years or billions?

Who are these scientists you're referring to?

Even technical or sophisticated instruments have their limitations. I don't pretend to understand them, but I will go back to what I said earlier:

If Dr Weber spent 30 years studying evolution and examining fossils in person, and conclude that he doesn't believe in evolution, then he must have a very valid point.

I know about a specialist doctor named Weber (or something like that); his interest in evolution runs deep. His education and vocation laid a good foundation for him to study evolution, he spent 30 years examining fossils in three continents (america, europe and australia). With his study of evolution and exploration, he was able to come up with a few salient questions to see if evolution is valid. One was to see if there is any change in measurement of skulls of fossils, be it amphibians or fish. He found there is no change for different species. Evolutionists claim dinosaur' fossils are very very very old but near their bones, Dr Weber found certain floral fossils which were much younger -- which means dinosaurs and floral species exist together, thus contradicting what the evolutionists claimed.

Did you read the articles I linked for you?

 

[River Jordan]

science has never confirm evolution is true or correct, it is just a theory.

Wrong. Evolution is a fact. We see evolution taking place in real time, in lab experiments and in wild populations. The Theory of Evolution is an explanation for how evolution takes place.

 

[AV1611VET]

Wrong. Evolution is a fact. We see evolution taking place in real time, in lab experiments and in wild populations. The Theory of Evolution is an explanation for how evolution takes place.

Evolution works to a point.

Then it hits a brick wall it cannot cross.

One set up by God, who is the God of boundaries.

Psalm 104:9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Evolution works to a point.

Then it hits a brick wall it cannot cross.

One set up by God, who is the God of boundaries.

Psalm 104:9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

Which is not something you can show.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Whether he has or not, I don't know., but you can't deny that with 30 years of exploring and studying fossils carry plenty of weight, Dr Werner's opinions do carry weight.

Studying with what methodology? Poking around in the dirt or looking a replica fossils? Actual science has methodology. What is his?

If we are laymen or even less in the theory of evolution, then it make sense to consider his opinions seriously.

No, it doesn't. Particularly since he seems to be nothing more than an ideologically motivated layman.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which is not something you can show.

Evolutionists can't either.

Unless, of course, they fill in more missing links than Carter has liver pills.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Evolutionists can't either.

Unless, of course, they fill in more missing links than Carter has liver pills.

The transition from water dwelling fish to land dwelling reptiles is an impossibility then?

 

[River Jordan]

Evolution works to a point.

Then it hits a brick wall it cannot cross.

One set up by God, who is the God of boundaries.

There's nothing in scripture about God imposing limits on evolution and it's certainly not from science either, which means it's just something you made up.

Psalm 104:9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

You're taking Psalms literally? I guess that means you believe the earth is literally resting on pillars and doesn't move then, eh?

 

[AV1611VET]

The transition from water dwelling fish to land dwelling reptiles is an impossibility then?

Transition?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Transition?

Change, evolution, transition.

You're saying that water dwelling creatures couldn't become land dwelling creatures, am I correct or incorrect in that?

 

[AV1611VET]

There's nothing in scripture about God imposing limits on evolution and it's certainly not from science either, which means it's just something you made up.

You don't see limits to evolution in the Bible?

One of the biggest limitations to macroevolution in the Bible is time.

Or actually, the lack thereof.

But even if God did create the universe in 13,700,000,000 BC, He still placed a limitation on evolution.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You don't see limits to evolution in the Bible?

One of the biggest limitations to macroevolution in the Bible is time.

Or actually, the lack thereof.

But even if God did create the universe in 13,700,000,000 BC, He still placed a limitation on evolution.

Which is only a claim you can make and can't back up, with scripture or otherwise.

 

[River Jordan]

You don't see limits to evolution in the Bible?

No.

One of the biggest limitations to macroevolution in the Bible is time.

Or actually, the lack thereof.

That's one interpretation among many.

But even if God did create the universe in 13,700,000,000 BC, He still placed a limitation on evolution.

That's nowhere in scripture nor does it come from science. It's just something you made up.

 

[AV1611VET]

No.


That's one interpretation among many.

You don't see time as a limitation to macroevolution in the Bible, yet you claim that my claim that time is a limitation to macroevolution in the Bible is "one interpretation among many."

Please stop acting like you know what I'm saying, when you admit you don't see it?

That's nowhere in scripture nor does it come from science. It's just something you made up.

Just curious ... have you read the Bible?

 

[River Jordan]

You don't see time as a limitation to macroevolution in the Bible, yet you claim that my claim that time is a limitation to macroevolution in the Bible is "one interpretation among many."

Please stop acting like you know what I'm saying, when you admit you don't see it?

Just curious ... have you read the Bible?

Okay, walk me through your thinking on this.

 

[AV1611VET]

Okay, walk me through your thinking on this.

Ya ... right.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Okay, walk me through your thinking on this.

His 'limitation' is that AV claims that the world was only created 6000 years ago, and thus, evolution could not have occurred.

 

[Shemjaza]

Some photos look fake especially the last 2.

These photos show some lifeforms . But where is the proof that they show evolution?

Because you say so?

You asked for specific evidence, then refused to acknowledge it.

Ask yourself, would you have actually accepted the evidence what ever it looked like?

 

[River Jordan]

His 'limitation' is that AV claims that the world was only created 6000 years ago, and thus, evolution could not have occurred.

That's what I figured too, but apparently (as indicated above) he'll never say. I guess he just wants to complain about being misunderstood while refusing to clarify.

Kinda weird IMO.