having trouble believing...

[rmwilliamsll]

All you have to do is get some hard core facts on evolution. Go to the web and also check out the encyclopedias. If you will notice, most of what is supposed to be 'hard core evidence' is a bunch of guessing on the part of evolutionists. Look up evolution on the web and also get Christian views on evolution on the web. Also, the creation of all animals took place at the same time. the fact that archeaologists have found dinosaur bones means that they do, in fact, exist. I am a christian, but I also believe in facts. I believe that it is just that dinosaurs were harmless as were animals like lions and bears until the fall of Mankind.

perhaps if you had posted this in the YECist only subforum it would make more sense than it does here.

theory is not conjecture.
TofE is an extremely well evidenced and well supported theory.

it is a fact that dinosaurs lived more than 60Mya.
it is a fact that some of them were not "harmless" and ate meat.
and it is nice that you do acknowledge that dinosaur bones exist, there are some here who do not. You are one fact up on them and one fact more towards understanding. that is a good thing.



you really really ought to think about keeping discussions like this on the YECist only subforum. it's easier for you not to have anyone disagree with you.

 

[laptoppop]

it is a fact that dinosaurs lived more than 60Mya.

No, it is an interpretation, not a fact. One must always be careful to distinguish observations from conclusions derived from observations. There is no direct observation of such a timeline -- it is an interpretational framework accepted by the vast majority of scientists, but disputed by young earth creationists.

 

[Jase]

No, it is an interpretation, not a fact. One must always be careful to distinguish observations from conclusions derived from observations. There is no direct observation of such a timeline -- it is an interpretational framework accepted by the vast majority of scientists, but disputed by young earth creationists.

Young Earth creationism is a small minority who has zero evidence to support any of their positions. The fact that they dispute that dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago really has no meaning. I can claim that humans don't exist, we are all the figment of an alien's imagination. Does my claiming so make it true if I don't provide the evidence to back it up?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

No, it is an interpretation, not a fact. One must always be careful to distinguish observations from conclusions derived from observations. There is no direct observation of such a timeline -- it is an interpretational framework accepted by the vast majority of scientists, but disputed by young earth creationists.

lets see. direct observation.....

what did you eat yesterday for breakfast?

spam and eggs. Ok.

how do you know that? you remember it. good.
can you observe that memory? i mean hold it out in front of you like you can a fossilized dinosaur bone and examine the memory of what you ate yesterday for breakfast?

how do you know this is a true memory?
perhaps Descartes demon is fooling you, you really had spam, spam and eggs and if you ask your SO who was eating with you he would tell you that, since his memory is more reliable.

ALL observations are in the past. the present is fleeing, history is all.

the only difference between you figuring out what you really had for breakfast yesterday and when dinosaurs lived is a matter of the amount of time that has passed, there is no distinction simply between present observations and past ones, they are all past. there is no such thing as direct observation versus historical induction like YECism proports, it is a gross misunderstanding of time. there is no direct observation of what you ate for breakfast yesterday, we have to accept your testimony of it (or maybe look in the sink at the dirty dishes, but that is another story)


now. how about this distinction between

One must always be careful to distinguish observations from conclusions derived from observations.

this is an interesting observation which i agree with. we do need to make a distinction between observations and theory. where in the postings above did i make this mistake? and i will apologize and correct it, for i know better.


in conclusion:
the age of a bone is a conclusion based on the evidence. not a conjecture because it is about things that happened too long ago and that extrapolation through that much time is impossible. there is no evidence that cause and effect differs from now into the distant past and lots of very compelling physics to tell us that uniformity of cause and effect projected back in time is a good shaping principle. can i prove it? nope, i can't prove anything in science, i can only provide evidence that for an educated person provides a standard of justification beyond reasonable doubt that theory is true.....

 

[Pats]

can someone please try to explain how dinosaurs supposed of have lived 7 million years ago and the bible refers to the earth as here ony around 4 thousand? also, if Adam and Eve were the first creatures on earth when did the dinosaurs show up? i love and believe God but i am a fact based person. i need facts to back up stories. can someone please help. serious replies please?


stumped?

Hello Welcome to CF and Origins Theology.

You'll find a lot threads in here and a lot posters who enjoy discussing this issue.

You'll find there are many Christians who have come to the conclusion that Genesis certainly contains many Christian truths but was never intended as a science or history book. You're in good company there. Ask away, I'm sure there are many who would love to discuss it with you here.

 

[laptoppop]

One must always be careful to distinguish observations from conclusions derived from observations.

this is an interesting observation which i agree with. we do need to make a distinction between observations and theory. where in the postings above did i make this mistake? and i will apologize and correct it, for i know better.

When you described dinosaurs living 65M years ago as fact.

The example cited in your post is fallacious -- unless (like me) you are always eating breakfast :>). Copernican astronomy (i.e. the solar system) is able to be tested at any time, it is not a historical event. It is an ongoing verfiable condition. Indeed, we step away from observation as we say "and it has been like this for ## years" because that is not directly observable, and has not been able to be observed. We do have enough evidence from many different ancient cultures to be able to say with some confidence that there is a high likelihood that it has continued roughly the same for recorded human history.

in conclusion:
the age of a bone is a conclusion based on the evidence. not a conjecture because it is about things that happened too long ago and that extrapolation through that much time is impossible.

Exactly! It is not a fact, but a conclusion. It is a conclusion, not a direct observation.

there is no evidence that cause and effect differs from now into the distant past and lots of very compelling physics to tell us that uniformity of cause and effect projected back in time is a good shaping principle. can i prove it? nope, i can't prove anything in science, i can only provide evidence that for an educated person provides a standard of justification beyond reasonable doubt that theory is true.....

That opens a whole new can of worms for other threads. There is some interesting evidence from the RATE project, for example, that radiometric decay rates may have not been constant as assumed. I need to do more research before I can talk intelligently about that, however.

 

[Assyrian]

No, it is an interpretation, not a fact. One must always be careful to distinguish observations from conclusions derived from observations. There is no direct observation of such a timeline -- it is an interpretational framework accepted by the vast majority of scientists, but disputed by young earth creationists.

Technically it is a measurement, using known decay rates. These decay rates have been measured accurately, both today, and in light travelling from distant galaxies long long ago.

Now YECs claim the decay rates have changed, but are unable to provide any evidence that they have, nor are they able to explain how their vastly increased decay rate wouldn't melt the planet.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Does the bible tell you what your pancreas or liver are for?
Does the bible even mention the existance of these - and other - organs?

Does that mean they have no function or don't exist?

 

[laptoppop]

Does the bible tell you what your pancreas or liver are for?
Does the bible even mention the existance of these - and other - organs?

Does that mean they have no function or don't exist?

Huh? Of course not. Where the Bible is silent, there are no theological problems or issues.

 

[shernren]

Okay, I hope we haven't scared the newbie away!

The problem, accordingtotom, is that most of the people who are well-read on this evolution stuff ... spend their time here to argue without end with other people who are also well-read on different areas of this evolution stuff.

Basically, I would advise you to ask people via PM to try to explain what they believe or accept about origins. Try to listen to views from all sides - TEs (theistic evolutionists), YECs (young earth creationists), OECs (old earth creationists), and Gap Theorists. If you can't make up your mind, it's alright. If you listen and get too confused and can't figure out just how dinosaurs and Scripture go together, it's alright too. Remember that there is a lot in the Bible that makes perfect sense, no matter how old or young the earth is or what dinosaurs really were like.

If at the end all you can say is "I don't know", that's alright. Knowing Jesus is far more important than knowing about evolution!

 

[shernren]

Oh, and Behemoth and Leviathan aren't dinosaurs. I think that Behemoth is the mythical depiction of Death, and Leviathan is the mythical depiction of Satan.

Just ask me why ...

 

[Assyrian]

That opens a whole new can of worms for other threads. There is some interesting evidence from the RATE project, for example, that radiometric decay rates may have not been constant as assumed. I need to do more research before I can talk intelligently about that, however.

A nice quote mined from Larry Vardiman, the manager of the RATE Project:

Because if in fact you take the data at face value the best explanation is that the Earth is billions of years old.
http://www.gatago.com/talk/origins/17183376.html

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Oh, and Behemoth and Leviathan aren't dinosaurs. I think that Behemoth is the mythical depiction of Death, and Leviathan is the mythical depiction of Satan.

Just ask me why ...

why?

(start another thread...please!!)

 

[shernren]

(where on earth would it go? GT? It's an argument I read in a book entitled "Now my eyes have seen You", by Robert S. Fyall, from the New Studies in Biblical Theology series.)

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Huh? Of course not. Where the Bible is silent, there are no theological problems or issues.

And is the bible silent on evolutionary theory?

 

[laptoppop]

No, IMHO, some of what the Bible teaches is in contradiction to the ToE -- and so it is not silent.

 

[Mallon]

No, IMHO, some of what the Bible teaches is in contradiction to the ToE -- and so it is not silent.

So what about those passages that speak of the atmosphere being a solid dome with windows, the earth sitting on pillars, or the sun revolving around the earth? Should we reject all modern evidence to the contrary, too?
All too often I will hear creationists reply, "Well, obviously God either intended for these passages to be taken metaphorically, or they were written from the fallible viewpoint of man." To which I respond: what makes the Genesis creation account any different???
I so rarely get an answer to this question that I may just have to post it in the Creationism subforum in order to force a reply.

 

[Assyrian]

(where on earth would it go? GT? It's an argument I read in a book entitled "Now my eyes have seen You", by Robert S. Fyall, from the New Studies in Biblical Theology series.)

OT? 'Was Leviathan the Serpent of Eden?'

I like to show how Ezekiel, Jesus and John in Revelation all interpret the Serpent in Eden allegorically as Satan instead of a literal reptile, I suspect, though I don't know enough about it, that the Leviathan passages, Isaiah 27:1 Leviathan the twisting serpent, are drawn from the Serpent of Eden as well, again interpreting the snake as Satan.

 

[shernren]

OT? 'Was Leviathan the Serpent of Eden?'

I like to show how Ezekiel, Jesus and John in Revelation all interpret the Serpent in Eden allegorically as Satan instead of a literal reptile, I suspect, though I don't know enough about it, that the Leviathan passages, Isaiah 27:1 Leviathan the twisting serpent, are drawn from the Serpent of Eden as well, again interpreting the snake as Satan.

Okay, I think it will probably surface in one or another of the "plain meaning" discussions around here, soon enough.

 

[Babel Fish]

I don't know where this whole "christians think the world is only 4 thousand years old" thing came from; but the reality is that there are no specific dates and times as to when our creation, or the creation of life before humans, actually occured. Just as, we don't know exactly when the, so called fall of man, occurred, or the great flood that covered the earth. We know these things happened. but before roughly 4500 years ago when history started being recorded, all we have are specutlations. There are some people who are better at presenting their argument than others. So what I would suggest is not to take anyones opinion on this topic as fact until you have sifted through enough information.

fact: Dinosaurs lived before humans
fact: creatures lived before dinosaurs
fact: an asteroid landed off of the coast of the Youkatan Peninsula right around the time the dinosaurs became extinct. Possible cause?

I don't know why God created other beings befor humans but then again who am I to understand God....Doesn't mean I won't try though.