DINOSAURS! Noah's Flood & other awesome questions.

[ElxDalto]

This really isn't a matter of opinion. It's not really moving it away, it's just how the crust works...

It doesn't work the same in every place.

What does that have anything to do with shame?

Acting like you have the correct answer, when all you have is evidence to support it is not right. It's shameful.

 

[RickG]

Please explain to me the specific knowledge that I'm missing.

How sedimentation occurs and rocks form. What you are calling global flood deposits are no where near that?

 

[ElxDalto]

It was written by biased Hebrews about themselves.

Where do you get that information?

 

[ElxDalto]

How sedimentation occurs and rocks form. What you are calling global flood deposits are no where near that?

Then please. Point me in what you believe is the right direction.

 

[Speedwell]

Errrrm, you need to get out a little more. Have you ever heard of a fellow named Richard Dawkins?

There are others as well--although none, perhaps, quite so notorious. I can sympathize with Dawkins, though. I sometimes find myself in the same frame of mind. But I know more about religion, Christianity in particular, than he does and I know it's Fundies specifically I'm disgusted with, not the whole believing world. If you look at his complaints about religion carefully, you will see that it's the Fundamentalist strain that he is most concerned with. And being an atheist to begin with, he doesn't see enough good in the baby not to throw it out in the bathwater.

 

[Colter]

Where do you get that information?

The book of Genesis and scholarly analysis of the writings.

 

[ElxDalto]

scholarly analysis of the writings.

Where?

 

[RickG]

Then please. Point me in what you believe is the right direction.

All I am saying is believing in a global flood based on scripture is fine. Misrepresenting the geological sciences (creation science literature) to support that belief is a violation of the 9th commandment.

 

[SnowyMacie]

It doesn't work the same in every place.

It may move in different directions, but it's the same process around the globe.

Acting like you have the correct answer, when all you have is evidence to support it is not right. It's shameful.

Am I reading this right? It sounds like you are saying that it's shameful to act like you have the correct answer when you have evidence to support it. I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense to me, that's how evidence works.

 

[ElxDalto]

Misrepresenting the geological sciences (creation science literature) to support that belief is a violation of the 9th commandment.

How is it misrepresenting?? Im looking at the evidence and what it's seems to be most likely. Send me a link to show me I'm wrong. Let me learn what you know.

 

[ElxDalto]

It may move in different directions, but it's the same process around the globe.



Am I reading this right? It sounds like you are saying that it's shameful to act like you have the correct answer when you have evidence to support it. I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense to me, that's how evidence works.

And theres evidence to support the latter, but its thrown under the bus. Is that how evidence works?

 

[RickG]

How is it misrepresenting?? Im looking at the evidence and what it's seems to be most likely.

You are not looking at any evidence. The creation science literature does not present any evidence in the form of original data and research.

Send me a link to show me I'm wrong. Let me learn what you know.

Gladly.

http://creation.com/the-lost-squadron

 

[SnowyMacie]

And theres evidence to support the latter, but its thrown under the bus. Is that how evidence works?

Show me this original evidence and data that's thrown under the bus from a valid and reliable source.

 

[pat34lee]

LOL! I doubt that. I doubt whether you have ever had so much as a college-level genetics text in your hands.

Obviously you don't have a clue

keep a civil tongue in your head and cut out the slanderous comments.

You begin with slander (2x) and then accuse me of it?
Not to mention you fail at the one item I challenged you on.

Name one way evolution can change an animal from one kind
to another in the amount of time necessary for TOE. You can't
because DNA will not be changed in any meaningful positive
way, and if it did, the cell would not know how to interpret the
new programming.

 

[pat34lee]

Funny how all those dogs and cats and every other animal with a true tail gets along just fine without a coccyx.

That is like saying arms are useless because birds have
wings and fish have fins.

 

[pat34lee]

I have credentials in the earth sciences and have investigated if for myself. Can you explain the fossil record and the way it is distributed throughout the geologic column without evolution?

First, the geologic column is a myth. The differences in fossils from one
place to another are not due to time, but habitat and in what order the
flood buried them.
http://nwcreation.net/fossilsorting.html

 

[Speedwell]

You begin with slander (2x) and then accuse me of it?
Not to mention you fail at the one item I challenged you on.

Name one way evolution can change an animal from one kind
to another in the amount of time necessary for TOE. You can't
because DNA will not be changed in any meaningful positive
way, and if it did, the cell would not know how to interpret the
new programming.

There are no "kinds" in evolution, nor is there a necessary time limit. So yes, I have failed your challenge to defend an inaccurate version of the theory of evolution.

I did not slander you. Slander is spreading a false story about someone to put him in bad repute. Not the same thing as doubting your claim to have read all my sources or, for that matter, of knowing anything at all about the real theory of evolution.

That would be derision; not the same thing as slander at all.

 

[RickG]

First, the geologic column is a myth.

How so? How is something we live on a myth?

 

[pat34lee]

And how do you confirm the bible? Are you aware that there are no contemporary accounts of Jesus and especially that of Genesis.

What do you consider contemporary? The early gospels were circulating
within a decade or two of his death, resurrection and ascension. None of
the New Testament was written later than 70 AD, when the temple was
destroyed, or it seems one would have mentioned it as relevant news.

 

[pat34lee]

That would be derision; not the same thing as slander at all.

How about flaming? Seems there is a rule regarding that.

As for the challenge, use your own terms if you fail to understand
mine. How can evolution change a dog into something not a dog,
and how long would it take?