What's your single biggest objection to evolution?

lasthero said:

There are a lot of funny little coincidences like that.

It just so happens that birds have DNA for teeth and humans have DNA for tails and whales have DNA for legs, and these features occasional show up as atavistic traits.

Click to expand...

Yep, Hand2 for development and SonicHedgehog for regulation. And don't forget manatee fingernails. Thus for no Creationist has come up with anything more than an ad hoc response.

lasthero said:

It just so happens that humans have a fused chromosome in the exact right spot where we'd expect one to be if we evolved from a common ancestor with chimpanzees.

Click to expand...

No! That's design[sup]TM[/sup], just like the 200,000 orthologous ERVs!

I was talking to a coworker last night and he's not even that much into the Crevo debate, but even he could see the transparent bogusness, mendacity and cognitive dissonance required to be a Creationist.

Originally Posted by Aman777

Chapter and verse, please.

Click to expand...

Dear WC, Genesis 1:6-8 tells us the first firmament or boundary of the first world, which God called Heaven, was made the 2nd Day. Genesis 2:4 tells us other HeavenS were made on the THIRD Day. One plus at least 2 equals a Multiverse instead of a Universe. Parallel universes. [VIDEO]

Originally Posted by Aman777

No. Genesis 1:9-13 states:

"And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day."

Click to expand...

Sorry, but you didn't read the description which Genesis 2:4 adds to the events of the THIRD Day. Here they are:

Gen 2:4¶These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

The earth was made the THIRD Day. Genesis 1:9-10 IOW, this verse is taking us BACK to the events of the THIRD Day to a time AFTER the first Earth was made but BEFORE the plants GREW. Thanks for posting the Scripture which confirms this:

And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after His kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after His kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the

third

Click to expand...

day."

Nothing about the Big Bang. Instead, it's a just-so story about how the Earth's dry land emerged from the sea, and how the land got its vegetation.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but you must have missed this:

"in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavenS", (Plural). God made the firmament or first Heaven on the 2nd Day and other HeavenS on the THIRD Day. This identifies the time when our SECOND Heaven, the world of today, the Cosmos which resulted from the Big Bang had it's beginning, as I posted.

BTW, God speaks of the THIRD Heaven in ll Corinthians 12:2.

Originally Posted by Aman777

Incorrect. Genesis 1:14-19 states:

"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."

I.e., the Sun, Moon, and stars all formed together at the same time on the Fourth Day. This is simply factually incorrect, not least because every star has its own age.

Click to expand...

False, since Scripture does NOT say what you said. The Big Bang was on the THIRD Day, but God didn't have the heavenly bodies put forth their light until the FOURTH Day. This is important since it's one of the more recent discoveries of Science. The first Stars did NOT put forth their light at the time of the Big Bang and it took millions of years BEFORE the stars were completely formed and put forth their light. It's PROOF of God for He has revealed Himself with this scientific Truth which ONLY God could have possibly known 3k years ago, when it was written.

Genesis is also doubly wrong here, because it says the Sun, Moon, and stars arose after flowering plants and the Earth. Which is nonsense, since the Sun is 4.26 billion years older than flowering plants, and the stars are billions of years older still. Genesis got the order, regardless of any other scale issues.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but you are confusing the first world, the world of Adam, with the present world. There were NO other HeavenS until the THIRD Day. Adam's world was made the 2nd Day, and it had flowering plants BEFORE the first Stars of our Cosmos put forth their light.

Originally Posted by Aman777

Except for plants, which Genesis incorrectly states arose before the stars.

Click to expand...

No it doesn't as I showed you Scripturally above.

Aman:>>He shows us HOW to make Humans out of the descendants of Apes, and many more things.

Betcha missed this one didn't you? It totally destroys the False ToE.


Originally Posted by Aman777

Genesis got every detail wrong, so there's nothing to explain. Flowering plants don't precede stars, Gen1:9-13 doesn't mention the Big Bang (you'd have a better time pushing for Gen1:1), etc.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry you are so misinformed about what Genesis clearly states. Have you been born again Spiritually? God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

EternalDragon said:

It just so happens that those are one assumption...

Click to expand...

No. They really aren't. The centromeres and telomeres in human chromosome 2 aren't "assumptions". They are observations. The presence of Hand2 and SonicHedgehog in whales isn't an "assumption". It's an observation. That manatees have fingernails as if they evolved from land-dwelling hoofed or toe possessing beings is not an "assumption. It's simply a fact. And all of these facts Creationists have no valid response.

EternalDragon said:

But there are honest and open sites out there where you can find the info and those open minded people can also write books as well, most of which have been best sellers.

Click to expand...

Michael Behe (who, by the way, accepts evolution, he just disagrees with atheism and is more of a progressive creationist) published Darwin's Black Box. It currently stands at:
Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution: Michael J. Behe: 9780743290319: Amazon.com: Books
#28,261 on Amazon.

Richard Dawkins published The Ancestor's Tale about 6 years later, but I think they are good for a comparison of ID vs. standard biological science.
The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution: Richard Dawkins: 9780618619160: Amazon.com: Books
#22,756 on Amazon. About 4,500 places ahead of Darwin's Black Box.

Aman777 said:

Dear Elendur, ONLY Humans post. Animals are not smart enough to post. ONLY the descendants of Adam who have inherited an intelligence like God's, post. Genesis 3:22

Click to expand...

So there you have demonstrated a difference in quantity, could you demonstrate a difference in quality?

Aman777 said:

Be nice. Most Evols assume that we evolved from the common ancestor of apes, but that is False since Humans was made long BEFORE the common ancestor of apes. Genesis 2:4-7

Click to expand...

1. Please provide the definition for the term "assume". I ask for that because there's been several cases of misuse or different definition. It has not thing to do with whether I'm nice or not.
2. Please provide the study which supports your claim that most who accept evolution assume that we evolved from a/the common ancestor of apes.
3. Don't use bible verses, I don't read them anyway. I value the bible as much (or less) as you value any one from this list:
Religious text - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aman777 said:

Of course. God tells us in Genesis that we live in a Multiverse.

Click to expand...

1. I don't believe that god wrote genesis (or anything for that matter).
2. I do believe that it (i.e. genesis) doesn't contain a term that's even close to "multiverse", feel free to demonstrate me wrong though.

Aman777 said:

He tells us the Big Bang of our Cosmos was on the 3rd Day.

Click to expand...

3. I do believe that it (i.e. genesis) doesn't contain a (/a combination of) term (-s) that's even close to "big bang", feel free to demonstrate me wrong though.

Aman777 said:

He correctly tells us the Stars did not light until the 4th Day.

Click to expand...

4. Someone trying to explain the origin of the universe who includes an explanation for something they can see. Not terribly impressive.

Aman777 said:

He tells us that all living creatures came forth from the water.

Click to expand...

5. Ummm... No. Working by this:
Genesis 1 KJV - In the beginning God created the heaven - Bible Gateway
Verse 20 and 24 both begin the same way. Except that you change water to earth.

Aman777 said:

He shows us HOW to make Humans out of the descendants of Apes, and many more things.

Click to expand...

6. Did you use the term show instead of tell to indicate a difference, or was it chance?
7. How do we make humans out of descendants of apes (which incidentally are apes as well)? You know, since we were told how to.

Aman777 said:

I will wait until you tell us HOW ancient men knew this and got it Scientifically CORRECT, and wrote this THOUSANDS of years before Science. You cannot since it is PROOF of God, since only God knew these scientific facts at the time. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

Click to expand...

Ah, yes, the old, "if you can't show me it wasn't god it was!".
Burden.
Of.
Proof.

Also, the interpretations were handily retrofitted to science, nothing you find interesting?

Elendur said:

So there you have demonstrated a difference in quantity, could you demonstrate a difference in quality?


1. Please provide the definition for the term "assume". I ask for that because there's been several cases of misuse or different definition. It has not thing to do with whether I'm nice or not.
2. Please provide the study which supports your claim that most who accept evolution assume that we evolved from a/the common ancestor of apes.
3. Don't use bible verses, I don't read them anyway. I value the bible as much (or less) as you value any one from this list:

Click to expand...

Dear Elendur, Let's avoid wasting both of our time. You seem to have NO interest in finding the Truth since you have already determined it, and you don't want to be bothered with God's Truth. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

Aman777 said:

Dear Elendur, Let's avoid wasting both of our time. You seem to have NO interest in finding the Truth since you have already determined it, and you don't want to be bothered with God's Truth. God Bless you.

Click to expand...

Translation: 'I can't meet my burden of proof. Time to head for the hills.'

Aman777 said:

Dear Elendur, Let's avoid wasting both of our time. You seem to have NO interest in finding the Truth since you have already determined it, and you don't want to be bothered with God's Truth. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

Click to expand...

I have a huge interest in the truth, however I have a wide range of possible truths (and I haven't determined between them), while you (and others) have done little to convince me that your brand is the brand.

But if you want to end on that note, I won't stop you.

Cheers and have a great christmas.

Edit: A bit of grammar and adding the parenthesis.

Originally Posted by Aman777

Why do you believe these heavens are distinct universes? AV1611VET, for instance, believes they refer to a) the atmosphere, b) outer space, and c) the traditional afterlife. This website also affirms this paradigm, and statements in Genesis about lights in the firmament, birds flying in the firmament, etc, seem to support the idea that this heaven is just the Earth's atmosphere.

Click to expand...

Dear WC, Notice the description of the firmament:
Gen 1:6¶And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

The firmament was to be placed in the middle or midst of the water which was made BEFORE the first Day, and it was to divide the waters from the waters. Have you ever tried to divide water? If you were to put a Tennis Ball into the middle of water, you would be dividing the waters from the waters. Correct?

This reveals that the firmament was an enclosed Biosphere and could be transported anywhere since you could put it in water and the interior of the firmament would be protected from the water into which it was placed.

God made 2 other heavens (firmaments) at the beginning of the 3rd Day. Genesis 2:4 One is our present Cosmos and the THIRD Heaven is spoken of in Scripture in ll Corinthians 12:2 We live in a Multiverse composed of at least 3 Heavens or Universes.

I wrote individual responses to each of your points, but they kept coming back to this core issue: we disagree on what 'heaven' means in Genesis 1 and 2. So if I may, I think I've untangled your cosmology correctly (but I could be completely off):

• First Day: God made heaven1 and an Earth.

Click to expand...

• Not quite. In the beginning God made the heaven (air) and the earth (ground) and the earth (ground) was without form and void or empty. The water came from the heaven or Air since it is oxygen and hydrogen. These are the 3 creation elements which will be used to make EVERYthing physical.

Second Day: God made heaven2 and oceans.

Click to expand...

The water was already there and the LORD God (YHWH/Jesus) made the firmament of the FIRST world with the creation elements which God (Elohim-The Trinity) had created before the first day.

Third Day: God made dry land, plants, and heaven3 (gen2).

Click to expand...

Genesis 2:4-7 tells us after the first Earth was made but BEFORE the plants grew, Jesus made Adam of the dust of the ground BEFORE plants, rain and the FIRST Stars of our 2nd Heaven, which did NOT put forth their light until the FOURTH Day. Genesis 1:16 This means that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Humans to have evolved from ANY other living creature, since we were FIRST made. Right?

Fourth Day: God made lights (sun, moon, stars) in heaven2

• Etc

Click to expand...

Amen. The first Heaven was lighted by Jesus who is Brighter than the Noonday Sun. Jesus is the Light of the first Day and He will also be the Light of Heaven. Rev 21:23

But Genesis 2, Adam, and the Garden of Eden, all occur entirely within the third day. All subsequent days occur in our modern universe, made on the third day in an event we call the Big Bang.

Click to expand...

Not quite. Adam lived with Jesus for 3 Days or Ages, which is some 13.7 Billion years in man's time. This is because he was made the 3rd Day and Today is STILL the 6th Creative Day since God is STILL creating Adam (mankind) in His Image or in Christ. We live today at Genesis 1:27 and we will NOT advance to the PROPHECY of Genesis 1:28-31 until AFTER Jesus returns to this planet at the end of time. Isaiah 11:7 shows that when this event happens EVERY living creature will become a Vegetarian fulfilliing the prophecy of Genesis 1:29-30

So there's three universes: one made on the first day, one made on the second day (where Adam, the Garden of Eden, flowering plants, and the rest of Genesis 2, take place), and our modern universe made on the third day.

Before we carry on, is the above correct? If not, could you elaborate?

Click to expand...

Here is the Chronology. The first firmament which God called Heaven was made the 2nd Day. Genesis 1:6-8

The first Earth, the Earth of Adam, was made the 3rd Day. Genesis 1:9-10 and Genesis 2:4
The 2nd and 3rd or the other HeavenS or Universes were made the 3rd Day. Genesis 2:4
Adam was made the 3rd Day after the first earth was made but Before the plants, herbs and trees. Genesis 2:4-7

The Stars put forth their light on the 4th Day. Genesis 1:16

Every living creature that moves was created and brought forth from the WATER, on the 5th Day, in total agreement with the discoveries of Science. Genesis 1:21

At the beginning of the present 6th Day, Jesus made the beasts of the field and birds and Adam named them. Genesis 2:19

Jesus makes Eve from Adam's rib. Genesis 2:22

God (Elohim) CREATES Adam and Eve in His Image or in Christ at the SAME time on the present 6th Day. Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 5:1-2 IOW, Both were born again Spiritually.

I hope this helps you to see God's Truth as written in Genesis. God bless you.

In Love,
Aman

USincognito said:

No. They really aren't. The centromeres and telomeres in human chromosome 2 aren't "assumptions". They are observations. The presence of Hand2 and SonicHedgehog in whales isn't an "assumption". It's an observation. That manatees have fingernails as if they evolved from land-dwelling hoofed or toe possessing beings is not an "assumption. It's simply a fact. And all of these facts Creationists have no valid response.

Click to expand...

Lots of things have fingernails. It's a design feature. If you see a similarity it doesn't automatically mean "evolution".

Yes, we can all observe things. Then we make assumptions about them.

EternalDragon said:

Lots of things have fingernails. It's a design feature. If you see a similarity it doesn't automatically mean "evolution".

Click to expand...

Correct. Similarity does not automatically mean evolution. Similarity plus dozens of other converging lines of evidence means evolution.

Congratulations. You accidentally said something true.

There are NO objections to evolution, there is however religion.

Eight Foot Manchild said:

Correct. Similarity does not automatically mean evolution. Similarity plus dozens of other converging lines of evidence means evolution.

Congratulations. You accidentally said something true.

Click to expand...

Or it could mean design by an ID.

AECellini said:

good for you! i've heard people using the second law as an argument an i never quite understood why. it seems to always be a combination of a misunderstanding of the second law and a straw man of evolution.

Click to expand...

The thing that bothers me about that argument is that it works at least as well for life as it does for evolution.

Of course that becomes rather absurd since the argument is always made by a living being.

EternalDragon said:

Or it could mean design by an ID.

Click to expand...

Yes, just like finding the suspect's fingerprints at a crime scene could mean that Leprechauns planted them there to frame the suspect.

keith99 said:

The thing that bothers me about that argument is that it works at least as well for life as it does for evolution.

Of course that becomes rather absurd since the argument is always made by a living being.

Click to expand...

Life, as a collective entity, is not a closed system.

But it is extant within the universe, which is a closed system (insofarasweknow), which is a massive bummer.

EternalDragon said:

It just so happens that those are one assumption and there are many scientists with a different assumption about the data. In fact science is open to changing their conclusions with new evidence so don't be so quick to hold onto what some of them say today.

Click to expand...

What are the different assumptions, and why are they a problem?

Also, we always here that we shouldn't trust scientists because they refuse to change their conclusions or listen to skeptics. Now you are saying that we shouldn't scientists because they change their conclusions based on new evidence and work done by skeptics of the ruling paradigm. Sure wish the creationists would be consistent on this one.

Loudmouth said:

Yes, just like finding the suspect's fingerprints at a crime scene could mean that Leprechauns planted them there to frame the suspect.

Click to expand...

Or someone else planted them there to frame the suspect. Or the
suspect was there before and left fingerprints but is not the real perpetrator.

Why don't we keep on subject and dispense with silly analogies.

EternalDragon said:

Or it could mean design by an ID.

Click to expand...

Sure, my neighbor Tom is a pretty intelligent guy.