First born

[xianghua]

If you read sfs' post you would see that these results are considered to be contamination from modern sources.

you probably missed this:

"The possibility of contamination is extremely low because no PCR products were detected in any negative controls, and the laboratory at Washington State University in which DNA of M. latahensis was extracted, amplified, and sequenced never possessed samples of the four extant species of Magnolia that share an ndhF sequence with M. latahensis."

 

[sfs]

"The possibility of contamination is extremely low because no PCR products were detected in any negative controls, and the laboratory at Washington State University in which DNA of M. latahensis was extracted, amplified, and sequenced never possessed samples of the four extant species of Magnolia that share an ndhF sequence with M. latahensis."

I doubt he missed it. Not all statements in scientific papers turn out to be correct. Are you not aware of that fact? Subsequent research has shown that contamination can occur very easily and that extraordinary attempts must be made to detect and eliminate it.

 

[quatona]

Can anyone provide physical evidence of the first mammal that was born? What was the mother (species) and what was the father (species) Not interested in speculation, conjecture, beliefs, I am looking for something that can stand up to a challenge?

Up front, I do not believe anyone can provide such evidence but I have been wrong before and this may be one of those times, time will tell.

It´s about the same as asking for physical evidence for the exact point in time you turned from a child into an adult.

 

[Subduction Zone]

.
I'm sure you could come up with a bunch of other names to call me.
Have at it.
Haven't tipped a thing, that only happens when you are playing games like you are.

Sure you have. I more than met your challenge. You could not deal with the contradiction in the Bible. But then I predicted that as well.

 

[Subduction Zone]

.
You sound like a true X Catholic.

Nope, but most ex-Catholics probably have a far better understanding than you have too. You appear to have a very very shallow understanding of the Bible. You have clearly not studied it. That there are errors in the Bible does not come as a surprise to those that have read and understood the book.

 

[bhsmte]

It´s about the same as asking for physical evidence for the exact point in time you turned from a child into an adult.

Emotionally and intellectually, some folks never make the transition to adulthood.

 

[Loudmouth]

you probably missed this:

"The possibility of contamination is extremely low because no PCR products were detected in any negative controls, and the laboratory at Washington State University in which DNA of M. latahensis was extracted, amplified, and sequenced never possessed samples of the four extant species of Magnolia that share an ndhF sequence with M. latahensis."

Extremely low is not zero.

 

[Aman777]

I see that you do not understand the nature of evidence. Since the myths of Genesis are in doubt (in fact they have been shown to be that) the book of Genesis cannot be used as "evidence" in your arguments.

Neither can your unsupported and unsupportable ideas from the False ToE....until you can actually refute the evidence already posted to you. You obviously have none, except that circular reasoning written by your fellow believers in the False Religion of Evolution. Such false assumptions are NOT "evidence" but instead, are Faith in godless evolution, which is the biggest Satanic Lie ever forced upon our children.

 

[Aman777]

That would be the claim. I am asking for the evidence that this actually happened.

What is PROVES is that Noah was a Human male since Apes don't have enough sense to grow grapes and make wine and they don't know HOW to get naked or make a Tent. This is testable evidence of the arrival of Humans, 11k years ago, in the mountains of Ararat. Amen?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Neither can your unsupported and unsupportable ideas from the False ToE....until you can actually refute the evidence already posted to you. You obviously have none, except that circular reasoning written by your fellow believers in the False Religion of Evolution. Such false assumptions are NOT "evidence" but instead, are Faith in godless evolution, which is the biggest Satanic Lie ever forced upon our children.

Wrong again, I can and have supported my ideas. And you have not shown the theory of evolution to be false, nor is it unsupportable. And there is no circular reasoning involved. Why do you keep repeating claims that were shown to be nonsense?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What is PROVES is that Noah was a Human male since Apes don't have enough sense to grow grapes and make wine and they don't know HOW to get naked or make a Tent. This is testable evidence of the arrival of Humans, 11k years ago, in the mountains of Ararat. Amen?

Nope.

Try again.

 

[Aman777]

The claim of evolution is backed by mountains of verifiable and observable evidence:

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

False, since the last universal common ancestor lived 3.8 Billion years ago AND Humans (Adam's descendants) didn't arrive on this planet until 11k years ago. Human civilization can be traced to the Arks arrival in the Fertile Crescent. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

 

[Aman777]

Neither the verse nor your views on it are relevant; the archeological evidence shows no such sudden change.

It's the nature of Human Intelligence since it is invisible. Evolutionists CANNOT tell us the origin of Humans, since it was NOT on this Earth. Their incomplete false assumptions can only speak of the present Earth, since they have REJECTED God's Truth of the flood, which totally destroyed Adam's world. ll Peter 3:3-7 In the last days God is showing us His Truth and refuting (proving wrong) the false ToE. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth...soon.

 

[Aman777]

The earliest candidates likely to be classified as mammals were small creatures between 150 to 200 million years ago. This article gives a reasonable account of the transition to mammals (see sections 5 and 6).

Amen. You are good about the knowledge of this Earth but not about Adam's formation, which was in another Heaven. Adam was made BEFORE the big bang of our cosmos 13.8 Billion years ago, in man's time. He was alive and watched when Jesus lit the FIRST Stars on the 4th Day. Gen 1:16

Adam watched as God created "every living creature that moveth" from water on the 5th Day Gen 1:21 which was some 10 Billion years AFTER he was first made. Adam watched as Jesus formed the beasts of the field and birds and named them at the beginning of the present 6th Day/Age in the Creation. Gen 2:19 Adam also had the FIRST operation which took out a rib and made Eve Gen 2:22.

IF scientists insist that Humans are mammals, then they should also accept that Adam, the FIRST mammal, was made some 14 Billion years ago. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

Wrong again, I can and have supported my ideas. And you have not shown the theory of evolution to be false, nor is it unsupportable. And there is no circular reasoning involved. Why do you keep repeating claims that were shown to be nonsense?

Deceptive, since you did NOT post any "evidence" to support your rant. Support your False ToE by explaining where the first prehistoric man came from IF you can....Waiting with Occam's Razor in hand.

 

[Aman777]

Nope.

Try again.

Check the prison records and see if we have ever had a problem with drunk Apes and compare them to Humans, just like ole drunk Noah. The mathematics will PROVE to everyone who is telling the Truth and who is drunk. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

More do it yourself exegesis. I will stick with the scholars who can read Hebrew, if you don't mind.

Their story has been told for thousands of years and some make a living showing its contradictions with discovered Truth. God told us they had NONE understanding. Jer 4:22 He also tells us that ONLY the people of the last days have the increased knowledge to understand. Dan 12:4 God also tells us that He will "pour out His Spirit" which is the Spirit of Truth upon ALL FLESH in the last days. Joe 2:28 and Act 2:17

Think about it. The ONLY way to pour out His Truth upon atheists, agnostics and Evolutionists, is to have His Truth discovered by Science. Otherwise, unbelievers will never recognize God's Truth in Genesis chapter One.

 

[JIMINZ]

Sure you have. I more than met your challenge. You could not deal with the contradiction in the Bible. But then I predicted that as well.

.
I was speaking to someone else at the time, and I went and got something to eat, you were so impatient, you naturally assumed I was dodging your statements.
Your just playing games like children tend to do, then you accuse.
I don't need your.......

 

[JIMINZ]

Nope, but most ex-Catholics probably have a far better understanding than you have too. You appear to have a very very shallow understanding of the Bible. You have clearly not studied it. That there are errors in the Bible does not come as a surprise to those that have read and understood the book.

.
Yeah, I am sure now you were Catholic.

Errors, no errors, just your misunderstanding of Spiritual things, as it says in the Bible, you are out of the loop of understanding being a natural man.

It's really to bad too, it can lead you to Salvation, but your to smart for that......Some day.

 

[Loudmouth]

False, since the last universal common ancestor lived 3.8 Billion years ago AND Humans (Adam's descendants) didn't arrive on this planet until 11k years ago. Human civilization can be traced to the Arks arrival in the Fertile Crescent. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

Repeating the same bare assertion is just repetition. You need to provide evidence for your claim.

Also, what is stopping me from saying that humans didn't arrive on this planet until the early 1900's when airplanes were first made? How is that any different than defining humans by agriculture?