MrGoodBytes
Seeker for life, probably
Indeed, and this expensive science book (note lack of quotation marks) says that flowering plants hadn't evolved yet at the time coal formed.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Indeed, and this expensive science book (note lack of quotation marks) says that flowering plants hadn't evolved yet at the time coal formed.I don't know why Carboniferous plants aren't found in coal. Nor do I really care. I'm sure it's documented in an expensive "science" book somewhere.
If you make the statement plants were created then you have to back it up with evidence, and seeing how creationists put so much sucker on their sudo-science, lets see their evidence.
Excuse me? Are you talking to just me, or the ones who are asking me questions? If the latter, please don't tack this accusation on to my post. I'm only answering questions.
[/size][/font]
I don't know why Carboniferous plants aren't found in coal. Nor do I really care. I'm sure it's documented in an expensive "science" book somewhere.
No, he doesn't have to back it up with evidence. You want evidence of created plants?
Indeed, and this expensive science book (note lack of quotation marks) says that flowering plants hadn't evolved yet at the time coal formed.
Really? Where?I've got a Book that says basically the same thing: The Bible.
And It says it without a copyright.
To be fair, AV1611VET does not want to have creationism taught in science classes, nor does he claim that there exists evidence for the Biblical creation story.I would probably leave creationist alone, but they want to step over the line and have their sudo-science taught in real science classes, so until they go back to the mysticism classes I will keep pushing for creationist sudo-science answers.
Where are the creationist scientists?
Come on we are all waiting.
I would probably leave creationist alone...
...but they want to step over the line and have their sudo-science taught in real science classes...
...so until they go back to the mysticism classes I will keep pushing for creationist sudo-science answers.
Where are the creationist scientists?
Come on we are all waiting.
Or, 5000 years ago, flowering plants arrive on the scene of the swamp.Today is not yesterday.
You are right, today is not yesterday, thats one of the premises of geology and evolution.
Today flowering plants
350 million years ago non-flowering plants.
Here is what the hell it is..they all were created, but not in the swamp. So, of the swamp plants, which ones migrated, and which ones, if any were created there. That is the question.What the hell is mostly created, either they were or there were not created.
Prove it. Silly fairy tale.What we see today were not created they evolved from simpler plant life, such as found in the Carboniferous coal measures.
The bible is evidence. Aside from that, science has nothing but wild guesses.If you make the statement plants were created then you have to back it up with evidence, and seeing how creationists put so much sucker on their sudo-science, lets see their evidence.
He did it. Hey, toss a few seeds, how hard is that??Was god the gardener, or did he have is minions to do it.
In your mind, maybe.The problems are all with creationists.
Amongst the entire vast Carboniferous coal reserves world wide not a single, seed, blade of grass, twig, trunk, bark or any other part of a flowering plant has been found.
Wooooaaaahhhhhhhh. Nosir. They are pre flood.By creationists own admissions these coal reserves are a product of the flood.
Therefore you git on back to that old drawing board.Therefore <4000 years ago there were no flowering plants, no bees, humming birds, no crops for people to grow and eat etc.
So called by you, not me. That is the old passe flood geology.Remember all human crops are flowering plant, and none are found in the so called creationist flood deposits.
They that assume the flood as the be all end all have problems, yes, as do you. I, thankfully, am laughing.The problems are all creationists, which is funny when they actually created these problems in the first place.
Please don't leave this creationist alone. I eat people like you for breakfast.
Please don't leave this creationist alone. I eat people like you for breakfast.
Not this creationist --- I'm on record as saying I wouldn't trust your public education system to teach creation. (I would trust them to teach spelling though.)
Don't expect them to go "back" to mysticism classes anytime soon, except maybe to witness.
They did their job --- having given us:
1. Antiseptic Surgery
2. Bacteriology
3. Calculus
4. Celestial Mechanics
5. Chemistry
6. Comparative Anatomy
7. Computer Science
8. Dimensional Analysis
9. Dynamics
10. Electrodynamics
11. Electromagnetics
12. Electronics
13. Energetics
14. Entomology of LivingInsects
15. Field Theory
16. Fluid Mechanics
17. Galactic Astronomy
18. Gas Dynamics
19. Genetics
20. Glacial Geology
21. Gynecology
22. Hydraulics
23. Hydrography
24. Hydrostatics
25. Ichtyology
26. Isotopic Chemistry
27. Model Analysis
28. Natural History
29. Non-Euclidean Geometry
30. Oceanography
31. Optical Mineralogy
32. Paleontology
33. Pathology
34. Physical Astronomy
35. ReversibleThermodynamics
36. Statistical Thermodynamics
37. Stratigraphy
38. Systematic Biology
39. Thermodynamics
40. Thermokinetics
41. Vertebrate Paleontology
In addition to ---
1. Absolute Temperature Scale
2. Actuarial Tables
3. Barometer
4. Biogenesis Law
5. Calculating Machine
6. Chloroform
7. Classification System
8. Double Stars
9. Electric Generator
10. Electric Motor
11. Ephemeris Tables
12. Fermentation Control
13. Galvanometer
14. Global Star Catalog
15. Inert Gases
16. Kaleidoscope
17. Law of Gravity
18. Mine Safety Lamp
19. Pasteurization
20. Reflecting Telescope
21. Scientific Method
22. Self-Induction
23. Telegraph
24. Thermionic Valve
25. Trans-Atlantic Cable
26. Vaccination and Immunization
Lead the way.
Creationist science is a whole new ball game, they claim to do research that supports a young Earth hypothesis. These are the people I want to come here and back up their claims with evidences, but sadly I think they will never do that, because they know how wrong they are.
Since when did the Bible count as empiracle evidence?Well, I'm not too sure what they're talking about. I don't understand why anyone would want to extend creationism beyond Genesis 1; but if that's the direction the Lord is leading them, then, of course, it would be okay. I would be highly interested at what they would come up with in the form of empirical evidence - (other than the Bible, of course).
Since when did the Bible count as empiracle evidence?
Like the Qu'ran, the Vedic texts, and the writings of the Bahá'u'lláh? True, they weren't all made simultaneously in 96CE, but you get my point.Since It was completed in 96AD and survived 1912 years of modified preservation under hostile conditions.
Well, I'm not too sure what they're talking about. I don't understand why anyone would want to extend creationism beyond Genesis 1; but if that's the direction the Lord is leading them, then, of course, it would be okay. I would be highly interested at what they would come up with in the form of empirical evidence - (other than the Bible, of course).
What I am talking about is creationist science versus science, is that so hard for you to understand.
Like the Qu'ran, the Vedic texts, and the writings of the Bahá'u'lláh? True, they weren't all made simultaneously in 96CE, but you get my point.
So how can you tell Satan's imitations from the real deal? What if the Bible is itself an imitation of, say, the Qu'ran? Or the Vedic texts? Or the Wiccan Rede (Accept no imitations ---
Everything God has, Satan has a cheap imitation for --- including documentation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?