Evidence for Creation / against Evolution

Dannager · Apr 14, 2006

Jacquo said:
Dear Baggins,

So, where is the mention of the Giraffe's particular blood clotting system?

What mention is required? I demonstrated that arguments from irreducible complexity based on the blood clotting mechanism are invalid because we have living examples of creatures - mammals, even - that are missing portions of that mechanism while retaining function (and in this case, full function). Unless you have something in particular you want to focus on as far as giraffes are concerned, the blood clotting issue is done. There is no controversy possible on this subject. Irreducible complexity requires that there be no use for a partial mechanism, and a partial mechanism with utility has been shown.

And, where are the co-ordinates requested?

Locations of 250+ Kuiper Belt Objects: http://www.noao.edu/noao/noaonews/jun00/node2.html

Is there anything else you would like?

Magnus Vile · Apr 15, 2006

TexasSky said:
How about the personal testimony of thousands of people, including kings and rulers, over thousands of years?

It is "easy" to dismiss certain things - until you stop and look at it a little more reasonably.

That Egypt freed the slaves seems to be an easily accepted part of history.

You don't have any Egyptians objecting to the Jewish presentation of that history either. No one standing up going, "No, no. That isn't what happened!"

Now, get into more details. Moses said he spoke to God on numerous occasions. Moses says God performed miracles that resulted in freeing the people from slavery.
The biblical accounts talk about the people seeing things like the parting of the Red Sea, the column they followed, etc.

If Moses was "insane" and "making it up". . . . . . why did all those people follow him? Wouldn't they have seen (or not seen) the truth or the lie of his claims?

Why would generation after generation teach this as "history" and not "myth" if they had lived through the events?

Lest you point to a few cults - let me remind you - we are not talking a few dozen cult-members, or even a few hundred. We are talking THOUSANDS of people.

And that is just one part of the biblical accounts that generation after generation taught as fact.

Somewhere along the way, if it was all a lie, others would have decried it as such near the times the events are reported to have taken place.

Tacitus gave the another version of these events, which seems to be popular among the historians of Egypt and Rome. So it seems that some people didn't accept the Biblical version of events as fact.

Most authorities, however, agree on the following account. The whole of Egypt was once plagued by a wasting disease which caused bodily disfigurement. So pharaoh Bocchoris went to the oracle of Hammon to ask for a cure, and was told to purify his kingdom by expelling the victims to other lands, as they lay under a divine curse. Thus a multitude of sufferers was rounded up, herded together, and abandoned in the wilderness. Here the exiles tearfully resigned themselves to their fate. But one of them, who was called Moses, urged his companions not to wait passively for help from god or man, for both had deserted them: they should trust to their own initiative and to whatever guidance first helped them to extricate themselves from their present plight. They agreed, and started off at random into the unknown. But exhaustion set in, chiefly through lack of water, and the level plain was already strewn with the bodies of those who had collapsed and were at their last gasp when a herd of wild asses left their pasture and made for the spade of a wooded crag. Moses followed them and was able to bring to light a number of abundant channels of water whose presence he had deduced from a grassy patch of ground. This relieved their thirst. They traveled on for six days without a break, and on the seventh they expelled the previous inhabitants of Canaan, took over their lands and in them built a holy city and temple.

Is this an accurate version? Apparantly not. Pharoe Bocchoris ruled after the time that Moses is supposed to have led his people away from Egypt. But it certainly seems that there were other versions of the events being told.

Among those were alternative origins for the Jews:

Evidence of this is sought in the name [for the origin of the Hebrew people]. There is a famous mountain in Crete called Ida; the neighbouring tribe, the Idi, came to be called Judaei by a barbarous lengthening of the national name. Others assert that in the reign of Isis the overflowing population of Egypt, led by Hierosolymus and Judas, discharged itself into the neighbouring countries. Many, again, say that they were a race of Ethiopian origin, who in the time of king Cepheus were driven by fear and hatred of their neighbours to seek a new dwelling-place. Others describe them as an Assyrian horde who, not having sufficient territory, took possession of part of Egypt, and founded cities of their own in what is called the Hebrew country, lying on the borders of Syria. Others, again, assign a very distinguished origin to the Jews, alleging that they were the Solymi, a nation celebrated in the poems of Homer, who called the city which they founded Hierosolyma after their own name.

So, again, it seems that the events of the Bible weren't always accepted as being, if you'll forgive the pun, the gospel truth. People did, it seems, disagree with the Jewish version of events.

Lignoba · Apr 15, 2006

Jacquo said:
Hi WC,

I'm surprised you mention the fossil record as evidence for evolution when the reverse is the case.

Perhaps you are also unaware of the many historical pointers to dinos co-existing with man (as opposed to the 'teaching they became extinct 65 million years ago): cave drawings, stone depictions in Peruvian burial sites, clay figurines of them in Mexico, and so on.

I can't recall the rule on outside urls but if someone give me a quick answer to the rule I will gladly give the url to an article I wrote a few years ago "The impossibility of evolution".

Regards,

Jac

If dinosaurs existed with man, man would not exist. We are too large as a species to have survived from them... unless... wait... did we evolve from smaller being into the ones we are now?!?!?!?!

Valkhorn · Apr 15, 2006

I'm surprised you mention the fossil record as evidence for evolution when the reverse is the case.

Geologists and Paleontologists seem to disagree with you there.

Sorry.

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Baggins,

I asked, “where is the mention of the Giraffe's particular blood clotting system?”

And instead of giving me this you persist in pointing out other blood clotting mechanisms.

This is analogous to my saying any medicine developed for giraffe’s you would be confident in applying to other animals without reservation.

I asked “where are the co-ordinates requested?”

This was in the context of the so-called Kuiper belt and Oort cloud. To which you responded with a link and a mention of 250+ objects found in the region of space now commonly mentioned as “the Kuiper Belt” area.

I note there is no mention of any observations of anything in the Oort cloud ‘region’.

Now, it must be realised that the Kuiper Belt first came up as an idea of somewhere as the source of short term comets might be found.

However, looking at this linked article and diagrams I cannot help but picture a cloud in the Kuiper “BELT” so-called area and no distinct belt. But that is an aside.

More importantly all these observations are of objects 1000 times the mass and volume of the largest observed comets. Some argue that Pluto should be classed among them…

So, please where are the co-ordinates for all the comet material?

Until such time as these are ‘found’ the weight of evidence points to the argument that short term comets are indicators of a young solar system.

Regards,

Jac

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Apologies to Dannager,

I have addressed my last post to Baggins instead of you. Sorry.

Also I have somehow got italics in there unintentionally. Sorry folks.

Jac

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Valkhorn,

The mention of fossils is in the context that the creationist viewpoint involves no links between kinds as opposed to species.

Regards,

Jac

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Lignoba,

I understand your skepticism of dinos and men co-existing, but a look at the artwork of our earlier ancestors shows good depictions of stegosaurus and archeopterix (to name but 2). Actually I even one time found a web site of a photo taken during the American civil war of a downed Arche...

Regards,

Jac

Valkhorn · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Valkhorn,

The mention of fossils is in the context that the creationist viewpoint involves no links between kinds as opposed to species.

Regards,

Jac

Well guess what, evolution does not say a monkey will turn into a pineapple.

Nice strawman argument there.

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Valkhorn,

Please explain the strawman in that?

Regards,

Jac

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Wiccan_Child,

In your original thread starter you asked,

“Is there any evidence that the Universe was created by a divine entity? Is there any evidence that this is the same Divinity as a particular terrestrial monotheism, namely Christianity?”

Here are the words of Isaac Newton on the matter:

“. . . Can it be by accident that all birds, beasts, and men have their right side and left side alike shaped, (except in their bowels,) and just two eyes, and no more, on either side of the face; and just two ears on either side of the head, and a nose with two holes; and either two fore- legs, or two wings, or two arms on the shoulders, and two legs on the hips, and no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel and contrivances of an Author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom, and the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside a hard transparent skin, and within transparent humours, with a crystalline lens in the middle, and a pupil before the lens, all of them so finely shaped and fitted for vision, that
no artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light, and what was its refraction, and fit the eyes of all creatures, after the most curious manner, to make use of it? These, and suchlike considerations, always have, and ever will prevail with mankind, to believe that there is a Being who made all things, and has all things in his power, and who is therefore to be feared.”

Taken from Memoirs of the Life, Writings and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton Pages 347-348 written by Sir D.Brewster Volume 2.

Regards,

Jac

Valkhorn · Apr 15, 2006

Here are the words of Isaac Newton on the matter:

So you're going to pull a 17th century scientist's quote against evidence uncovered in the 20th century?

Makes no sense to me.

MrGoodBytes · Apr 15, 2006

Jacquo said:
Dear Lignoba,

I understand your skepticism of dinos and men co-existing, but a look at the artwork of our earlier ancestors shows good depictions of stegosaurus and archeopterix (to name but 2). Actually I even one time found a web site of a photo taken during the American civil war of a downed Arche...

Regards,

Jac

Very interesting. Pictures and sources please, or retract the claim.

MrGoodBytes · Apr 15, 2006

Jacquo said:
. . . Can it be by accident that all birds, beasts, and men have their right side and left side alike shaped, (except in their bowels,) and just two eyes, and no more, on either side of the face; and just two ears on either side of the head, and a nose with two holes; and either two fore- legs, or two wings, or two arms on the shoulders, and two legs on the hips, and no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel and contrivances of an Author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom, and the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside a hard transparent skin, and within transparent humours, with a crystalline lens in the middle, and a pupil before the lens, all of them so finely shaped and fitted for vision, that
no artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light, and what was its refraction, and fit the eyes of all creatures, after the most curious manner, to make use of it? These, and suchlike considerations, always have, and ever will prevail with mankind, to believe that there is a Being who made all things, and has all things in his power, and who is therefore to be feared.

Taken from Memoirs of the Life, Writings and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton Pages 347-348 written by Sir D.Brewster Volume 2.

Regards,

Jac

I'll leave it to yourself to think of a possible conclusion to the fact that even distantly related organisms have very similar structures.

notto · Apr 15, 2006

Jacquo said:
Dear Lignoba,

I understand your skepticism of dinos and men co-existing, but a look at the artwork of our earlier ancestors shows good depictions of stegosaurus and archeopterix (to name but 2). Actually I even one time found a web site of a photo taken during the American civil war of a downed Arche...

Regards,

Jac

And you also probably accept things like basking sharks being confused for pleisours and fakes made by natives to sell to tourists as being actual relics.

Why is it that not a single bone, scale, or tooth was encorporated into any of their artwork yet we find plenty of ornaments, trophies, and relics of known terrestrial animals?

Why no unfossilized bones at all when we can find lots of them for the terrestrial animals that are the subject of artwork and cave drawings?

Where are all the remains?

DJ_Ghost · Apr 15, 2006

MrGoodBytes said:
Very interesting. Pictures and sources please, or retract the claim.

There was a thread on this a while back. You need to squint a bit, and use some imagination.

There is also the point that art is hardly a good scientific source, Ive seen a lot of medieval paintings and wood cuts of dragons, griffons and unicorns, but I remain unconvinced they were bimbeling about in the medieval period.

Ghost

MrGoodBytes · Apr 15, 2006

DJ_Ghost said:
There was a thread on this a while back. You need to squint a bit, and use some imagination.

There is also the point that art is hardly a good scientific source, Ive seen a lot of medieval paintings and wood cuts of dragons, griffons and unicorns, but I remain unconvinced they were bimbeling about in the medieval period.

Ghost

I just wanted to see what he would have came up with. Probably linked to some blurry pictures on a site that also sells von Däniken books.

Valkhorn · Apr 15, 2006

I’ve seen a lot of medieval paintings and wood cuts of dragons, griffons and unicorns

And UFOs

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Dear Valkhorn,

So you're going to pull a 17th century scientist's quote against evidence uncovered in the 20th century?

If you read me in context: i.e. that post alone replying to the quote within, then you would see your point as wholly invalid.

In other words it is NOT "against evidence uncovered in the 20th century"

Regards,

Jac

Jacquo · Apr 15, 2006

Hi Mr GoodByte,

I may now have enough posts to include a link:

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/peru-tomb-rock-art-man-riding-triceratops.jpg

And this is a triceratops, not a stegi or an archei. Please feel free to search the web for those until such time as I have enough posts to permit me to post images.

Regards,

Jac

Evidence for Creation / against Evolution

Back in Town

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

the Antifloccinaucinihilipili ficationist

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

the Antifloccinaucinihilipili ficationist

Active Member

Active Member

the Antifloccinaucinihilipili ficationist

Seeker for life, probably

Seeker for life, probably

Legend

Trad Goth

Seeker for life, probably

the Antifloccinaucinihilipili ficationist

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency