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.
Except we were talking about these assumptions of yours:Yes it is when my assumption is they don't know!
Yes, of course we can. Science needs solid evidence of it's foundational premise of a same nature in the past. End of story.
Science assumes they were the same. To make that a valid supposition and belief you need to solidly support it. Here. Now.Except we were talking about these assumptions of yours:
I am assuming that life was different, and life processes. We lived @ 1000 yrs. Trees grew in weeks. Animals evolved lightning fast compared to now. People could marry relatives. Etc. So the genetics had to be different! I assume the fundamental forces like the nuclear forces, and forces that control atoms were different.
No one needs you to admit or know the bible is right, just to admit you have belief and don't know. The rest will sort itself out! In school, I can just hear teachers start to tell kids 'they really do not know what they are talking about, science is actually just belief after all, and you can pick whatever belief you like'.I don't know on what planet you live but here on earth your reasoning is considered flawed and fallacious. When we don't have an explanation for something that doesn't mean whatever the Bible says about it is correct by default.
You actually have to demonstrate the truth of your claims.
Well, were talking about your assumptions.Science assumes they were the same.
You don´t meet these very criteria.To make that a valid supposition and belief you need to solidly support it. Here. Now.
Prove the nature was the same so that thus, the genetics would be the same or the thread is kaput as relates to origins.Well, were talking about your assumptions.
(On another note, it´s the thread starter´s premise that they were the same. So maybe you can have this discussion with him.)
You don´t meet these very criteria.
You made the assumptions, you support them.Prove the nature was the same so that thus, the genetics would be the same
Indeed, you are arguing against the thread starter and his ID argument.or the thread is kaput as relates to origins.
A few questions,This video provides reasons why DNA is definite evidence that there is indeed a creator.
You are making the claim that nature wasn't the same as it is now so it's up to you to show that it wasn't, if you can't show that it wasn't then you are just flapping your lips and making a noise.Prove the nature was the same so that thus, the genetics would be the same or the thread is kaput as relates to origins.
It is no assumption that science assumes laws were the same.You made the assumptions, you support them.
Indeed, you are arguing against the thread starter and his ID argument.
I am saying the bible indicates a different past and future and science doesn't know at all, but has merely assumed the past was the same without any proof.You are making the claim that nature wasn't the same as it is now so it's up to you to show that it wasn't, if you can't show that it wasn't then you are just flapping your lips and making a noise.
What could a book written when people knew virtually nothing about themselves or the world they lived in tell you about the past? I'm afraid your need to believe in a God is clouding your judgement.I am saying the bible indicates a different past and future and science doesn't know at all, but has merely assumed the past was the same without any proof.
Your idea of ancient man is wholly made up. The reality is we are less intelligent today.What could a book written when people knew virtually nothing about themselves or the world they lived in tell you about the past? I'm afraid your need to believe in a God is clouding your judgement.
It evolved?Yes, I am saying the present nature DNA does not equal former nature DNA that we know.
No. God changed the laws probably, and that affected genetics. It all depends on the nature in place...how life processes work.It evolved?
You are invited to support this wild assumption.No. God changed the laws probably, and that affected genetics.
Seeing your vehement insistence that assumptions need to be supported (or else can be dismissed as wrong), it sure does, by your own standards.It doesn't matter if that is right or not.
Bible believers already accept that Jesus supported Scripture. Not an issue. The issue is science and supporting the science claim of a same nature in the past that is used for all past models.Seeing your vehement insistence that assumptions need to be supported (or else can be dismissed as wrong), it sure does, by your own standards.
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?