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.
Christian Forums is looking to bring on new moderators to the CF Staff Team! If you have been an active member of CF for at least three months with 200 posts during that time, you're eligible to apply! This is a great way to give back to CF and keep the forums running smoothly! If you're interested, you can submit your application here!
No, they wouldn't. Any fossil of any species group found under rocks that are 65 million years old are accepted as being at least 65 million years old.
You haven't shown that it is unrealistic for these features to have been preserved for 65 million years. You are begging the question.
The facts are this. Dinosaurs are ALWAYS found below rocks that are at least 65 million years old. It is the ROCKS that give the fossils their age.
Now you are talking utter nonsense I'm afraid. I can't accept that you actually believe that, so I'm out.
They are accepted as 65 million years old based on an evolutionary worldview of millions of years.
They would never think that the fossils were laid only a few thousand years ago as a result of a worldwide flood.
It has nothing to do with evolution. The age of rocks are determined by radiometric dating which uses the ratio of isotopes in the rock itself to establish its age. It is completely independent of evolution or any fossils found above or below the rocks.
You need to read something other than creationist websites.
You need to explain how mutations add up.
There are a lot of young people in schools who see representations such as this in textbooks:
(Image also attached)
We have a lot of pretty pictures in the textbooks and lots of fossils, being used to discourage, raise doubts, and destroy the faith of Christians, young and old as well as indoctrinating the public at large with the religion of evolution. It's everywhere!
However, the pretty pictures and fossils are just that: select pictures presented in a progression that favor and give apparent transition from one creature to another, based on where they find these creatures in the fossil record, i.e. "geologic column."
These pictures present natural selection as a "forward thinking" entity, "selecting future function instead of actual function", causing changes with an intended goal in mind; as opposed to the random, independent changes that natural selection is supposedly to be.
The only science here however, is that yes, there are fossils of these creatures, but that is as far as it goes. Everything else is conjecture, but not bona fide science. Transition from one creature to another cannot be verified or falsified, because it is based on interpretation and worldviews. That is, evolutionists look at the bones and say, "something is changing into something else"; while creationists look at the bones and and say, "something died."
I would like to invite Christian forum members more eloquent than I to provide encouraging remarks that might help Christians, young or old, as well as others who may be seeking answers, understand the fallacy of evolutionism as it relates to these images.
Do you have any speciation where DNA information has been increased via beneficial mutations?
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?