Evolution vs. Creationism

[Pilgrim 33]

[/color]
Regardless of whether something is human, plant or demon,

How can the physical examine the spiritual?

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

No that is again a lie, the scientific community has established that light is constant in a vaccuum for quite some time.

No, they have established that it is very close to constant over time.
Pilgrim earlier posted a web page that cast some doubt about it's absolute constancy over time. A similar experiment was done with better precision and demonstrated that if C changes over time it is a very small change.

More precisely the fine structure constant was shown to be as close to constant as we can measure, which is very close.

But they are not, and C has little to do with C-14.

Actually they are pretty closely related, both are related to the fine structure constant. Which is why the fact that is no sign of change in the production of light when we look at stars pretty much puts the kabosh on the idea that the C-14 decay rate might have changed in the last 160,000 years (much less the 50,000 years that C-14 dating is usable for).

 

[Mistermystery]

Learn how to use the quote function

Oh but it is, it is a direct offspring of the humanist religion.

No it isn't. that you tie the origins of human kind together with your religion is fine and dandy. But that doesn't mean that everything that tried to explain origins is a religion. Look up the basic definition up for religion and evolution, and please tell me where they are compatable. Besides, it's been dealt with in court, case dismissed it's not a religion.

Oh but it does, humanists worship man.

NO, AND AGAIN THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT DEITIES.

Oh but they did, unlike humanism's evolutionary monkey ancestors.

Show them. Go on, i dare you to show neliphim bones or whatever.

 

[Mistermystery]

No, they have established that it is very close to constant over time.

Right, but it's been so minutely variable that it's well in the limits of our current ability to measure the speed of light that it's either constant, or minutely changable to the point of dismissable. I hope we both can agree on the fact that it is not anywhere as crazy as creationists want to make it show, right?

More precisely the fine structure constant was shown to be as close to constant as we can measure, which is very close.
Actually they are pretty closely related, both are related to the fine structure constant. Which is why the fact that is no sign of change in the production of light when we look at stars pretty much puts the kabosh on the idea that the C-14 decay rate might have changed in the last 160,000 years (much less the 50,000 years that C-14 dating is usable for).

Hey you're right there. I never looked at it that way. Thanks!

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

Putting back the context that you snipped.

Regardless of whether something is human, plant or demon, if its structure is growing and being replaced and ultimately gets its carbon from the air, then carbon dating will work.

How can the physical examine the spiritual?

If a demon is pure spirit and yet managed to get a human woman pregnant, the off-spring would have to have a physical componant to leave bones behind, said bones likely being produced in the usual way (unless the off-spring was born full grown) so they would be datable via C-14 dating.

If, OTOH, you had an interplaner transferral of material from hell to the bones of growing half-demon, then that would call into question the purely spirit nature of demons...

The wonderful thing about being punch drunk from lack of sleep is that nonsense actually makes sense occasionally.

Toodles

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

Right, but it's been so minutely variable that it's well in the limits of our current ability to measure the speed of light that it's either constant, or minutely changable to the point of dismissable. I hope we both can agree on the fact that it is not anywhere as crazy as creationists want to make it show, right?

The difference in the original measurment cited by creationists was on the order of 1/100,000, a point they apparently failed to understand.
So, yes, we are in agreement there

 

[Mistermystery]

The difference in the original measurment cited by creationists was on the order of 1/100,000, a point they apparently failed to understand.
So, yes, we are in agreement there

Rejoice! wohoo!

 

[Pilgrim 33]

[/color]
I'll put this bluntly, you've been fed a load of hooee and swallowed it whole.

Nothing has been demonstrated, not one expert in the field, and definitely not one with anywhere near the qualifications of this array of professionals (partially listed below) has stepped up, presented proof of their credentials and effectively refuted such. Where are their learned papers published in what relevent publications respected by the professionals in the field? All that has been presented is biased opinion. And, without that it appears, bluntly put, you've been fed a load of hooee and swallowed it whole.


Alan Montgomery
Lambert Dolphin
Barry Setterfield
Trevor Norman
William Q. Sumner
J.P. HSÜ, LEONARDO HSÜ
Dr. H. E. Puthoff
V.S. Troitskii
Curtis E. Renshaw
William M. Kallfelz, M.S. Phys.
Robert V. Gentry
David W. Gentry
Dr. Walt Brown
Steve Farrar
Dr Joao Magueijo
Dr Andreas Albrecht
M.A. Clayton
J.W. Moffat
Phillip F. Schewe
Ben Stein
Paul Dirac
John Webb
John D. Barrow
Ellis, Farakis, Mavromatos, Mitsuo, and Nanopoulos
Laro Schatzer
James Gibson
Tom Van Flandern
Landau, Sisterna, and Vucetich

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Putting back the context that you snipped.
If a demon is pure spirit and yet managed to get a human woman pregnant, the off-spring would have to have a physical componant to leave bones behind, said bones likely being produced in the usual way (unless the off-spring was born full grown) so they would be datable via C-14 dating.

If, OTOH, you had an interplaner transferral of material from hell to the bones of growing half-demon,

Take a closer look at Joel 2:1-10 and, also, Revelation on the Locust Army.

then that would call into question the purely spirit nature of demons...

The wonderful thing about being punch drunk from lack of sleep is that nonsense actually makes sense occasionally.

Toodles

The offspring are not pure human. So how could traditional procedures could apply? Half of the individual (ie their spirit parent) was created during creation.

If the growth rate was different effects would also change.

And what happens to their soul when they die?

itmt, How can a clone live without a soul?

What, if any, difference is there between a clone and a Nephillim? Physically? Spiritually?

And, if, as Revelation and Joel seem to say, the Nephilim return, and they buddy up with clones...then what?

Any comments on the following?

Joel 2:2-10, "A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations. A fire devoureth before them; and behind them a flame burneth: the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness; yea, and nothing shall escape them. The appearance of them is as the appearance of horses; and as horsemen, so shall they run. Like the noise of chariots on the tops of mountains shall they leap, like the noise of a flame of fire that devoureth the stubble, as a strong people set in battle array. Before their face the people shall be much pained: all faces shall gather blackness. They shall run like mighty men; they shall climb the wall like men of war; and they shall march every one on his ways, and they shall not break their ranks: Neither shall one thrust another; they shall walk every one in his path: and when they fall upon the sword, they shall not be wounded. They shall run to and fro in the city; they shall run upon the wall, they shall climb up upon the houses; they shall enter in at the windows like a thief. The earth shall quake before them; the heavens shall tremble: the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining"

 

[Pilgrim 33]

If, OTOH, you had an interplaner transferral of material from hell to the bones of growing half-demon, then that would call into question the purely spirit nature of demons...

Does not that assumption then also call into question the Immaculate Conception?

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Everything God does Satan mirror images.
And are we able to recognize the counterfeit when we see it?

 

[Pilgrim 33]

No it isn't. that you tie the origins of human kind together

Where the lack of knowledge of Scripture, history and world religions are exceeded only by persistent refusal to even consider the subject(s) hammers home the truth in the saying, ignorance is bliss.

YES, humanism is a man made religion whose god is himself.
YES, evolution is a near, direct offspring, and integral part of humanism.

 

[Ron21647]

Nothing has been demonstrated, not one expert in the field, and definitely not one with anywhere near the qualifications of this array of professionals (partially listed below) has stepped up, presented proof of their credentials and effectively refuted such. Where are their learned papers published in what relevent publications respected by the professionals in the field? All that has been presented is biased opinion. And, without that it appears, bluntly put, you've been fed a load of hooee and swallowed it whole.


Alan Montgomery
Lambert Dolphin
Barry Setterfield
Trevor Norman
William Q. Sumner
J.P. HSÜ, LEONARDO HSÜ
Dr. H. E. Puthoff
V.S. Troitskii
Curtis E. Renshaw
William M. Kallfelz, M.S. Phys.
Robert V. Gentry
David W. Gentry
Dr. Walt Brown
Steve Farrar
Dr Joao Magueijo
Dr Andreas Albrecht
M.A. Clayton
J.W. Moffat
Phillip F. Schewe
Ben Stein
Paul Dirac
John Webb
John D. Barrow
Ellis, Farakis, Mavromatos, Mitsuo, and Nanopoulos
Laro Schatzer
James Gibson
Tom Van Flandern
Landau, Sisterna, and Vucetich

Here is a link to 518 scientists named Steve who agree with evolution. It also lists their credentials. some of your guys have none.

http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3697_the_list_2_16_2003.asp



Ron

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Here is a link to 443 scientists named Steve who agree with evolution

And not one of them take the Bible at its word. Right?

 

[Ron21647]

And not one of them take the Bible at its word. Right?

I would be willing to bet that some of them do. Of course, it depends on what you mean by that statement. By your definition, it is possible that I don't. Although I think I do.

Ron

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Not one expert in the field has stepped up, presented proof of their credentials and effectively refuted such.

Where are their learned papers published in what relevent publications respected by the professionals in the field?

All that has been presented is biased opinion

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Although I think I do.

I would hope and pray so.

I KNOW I do.

 

[Ron21647]

I would hope and pray so.

I KNOW I do.

you left out part of the quote: "by your definition"

I think that was a pretty sleazy attempt to imply I am not a Christian.

Ron

 

[Pilgrim 33]

you left out part of the quote: "by your definition"

I think that was a pretty sleazy attempt to imply I am not a Christian.

Ron

Sorry if there was a misunderstanding there, no such inferrance was meant or intended. My comment was most sincere.

 

[Ron21647]

Sorry if there was a misunderstanding there, no such inferrance was meant or intended. My comment was most sincere.

apology accepted. thank you

Ron