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.
Just your usual science vs. theology debates.
I think people are getting tired of hearing Jesus walked on water.
Getting enough people is easy. Getting the right amount and frequency of genetic diversity (i.e. what we see in humans) is not.
And, I say again,,,,,,
Ya, for that you would need a single spontanious life form that needs to figure out how to find a food source, somewhere, figure out what part of itself will absorb the nutrients, what part will convert it to energy that it can use.
Then figure out how to self replicate, and then from this one solitary organism we can get all the genetic diversity of the earth.
But, you cannot get the biodiversity of just the human race from three related males and three unrelated females...... That's too much of a stretch..... somehow!
Am I the only one that sees the Irony here.
Well i think for a NASA astronaut to go looking for Noah's ark says something about it's validity.
I think Noah may have dismantled the Ark to build his homestead.
Now that makes sense, he was the first vineyarder, must have been huge.
Gopher wood cask aged wine. Could be tasty.I think Noah may have dismantled the Ark to build his homestead.
Huh? Regardless of where the first life came from -- miraculous creation or chemistry -- yes, there would plenty of time to get all of the genetic diversity on earth.And, I say again,,,,,,
Ya, for that you would need a single spontanious life form that needs to figure out how to find a food source, somewhere, figure out what part of itself will absorb the nutrients, what part will convert it to energy that it can use.
Then figure out how to self replicate, and then from this one solitary organism we can get all the genetic diversity of the earth.
Yes, that's too much of a stretch. We have only vague ideas about how the first life could have come to exist, but we know a great deal about how genetic diversity arises and what it looks like for different demographic histories. Modern human genetic diversity did not come from 5 individuals (Noah, wife, 3 daughters-in-law) at any time within the last half million years or so.But, you cannot get the biodiversity of just the human race from three related males and three unrelated females...... That's too much of a stretch..... somehow!
Science isn't exactly your thing, is it?Am I the only one that sees the Irony here.
Well i think for a NASA astronaut to go looking for Noah's ark says something about it's validity. I may have been just localized and then mixed with other nations. The first cities were in Asia which could have been the land of Nod where Cain went.
No, referring to a NASA astronaut is only a false appeal to authority.
It's called speaking ex cathedra.
I hear [a form of] that a lot when I quote a footnote from [the late] Mr. Morris' Defender's Study Bible, or when I quote Gail Riplinger.
The reason that you hear that about Morris is that he has shown himself to be extremely ignorant about almost all science many times over.
From the Defender's Study Bible:
Jacob did know from long experience as a shepherd and stock breeder, that some "heterozygous" animals would be in the flock, even though all appeared to be "homozygous," so that at least a few animals would be born spotted and speckled, even from Laban's solid-colored animals. He trusted the Lord to determine how many.
These striped rods were not for the purpose of inducing some "prenatal influence" on the animals. With his seventy years or more of practical experience with large flocks, Jacob knew better than that. Either the chemicals from the wood or the sight of the streaked rods must have served as an aphrodisiac for the animals, inducing them to mate as they came to the troughs. Jacob only used the rods with the stronger animals, so that the progeny would also be strong. Under usual conditions, this stratagem should have greatly benefited Laban's flocks.
You've read his footnotes, have you?
Here's an example of his work:
I know it is solid gold
Internet scientists* here like to point out that real scientists are not qualified to refute Internet scientists' interpretations of the Scriptures, because these real scientists would be speaking outside of their respective fields of expertise.
So I'm going to give you poly-experts a chance to demonstrate your point.
Here is a passage of Scripture that you poly-experts interpret as saying the Bible teaches geocentrism:
Joshua 10:12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
Joshua 10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
And here is [the late] Henry M. Morris' -- an hydraulics engineer -- interpretation of that passage:
Here is my challenge:One objection to the long day account is that the writer made a scientific mistake when he said that the sun stood still. The sun does not move, it is argued, so Joshua should have told the earth to stand still. The sun does move, however, and so does every star, planet and satellite in the universe, so far as known. Scientifically, every motion must therefore actually be expressed as relative motion, using some arbitrarily assumed reference point of zero motion. The latter is normally chosen for maximum convenience and simplicity of calculations. As far as relative motion of sun and earth is concerned, the optimum method normally used is to define the point of the observer as the point of zero motion. Thus the most scientific approach (as in the Bible) is to assume that the sun moves relative to the earth.
Highlight in red what Morris said wrong.
* Those who appeal to the scientific method as a valid tool for refuting the Bible.
QV my Morris Challenge thread:
year 280 > 25 billion
year 295 > 125 billion
? Believe?
I think Noah may have dismantled the Ark to build his homestead.
Yes, that's too much of a stretch. We have only vague ideas about how the first life could have come to exist, but we know a great deal about how genetic diversity arises and what it looks like for different demographic histories. Modern human genetic diversity did not come from 5 individuals (Noah, wife, 3 daughters-in-law) at any time within the last half million years or so.
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?