How long has man been created.

[richterforest]

Evolution is not a fact, it is still a theory, mpok1519.

Also, earlier I read a post about morphing stages between species. I am not a scientist by any means just a regular ole guy with Business Degree and whom now builds engines at an auto plant. But I love to learn, so bear with me on my terms if they seem wrong. Now...isnt it true that dogs are descended from wolves?? I have read they were but I am sure they are also descended from other types of wild canines. That being said there are no labradors in the wild, or pit bulls etc. Does that mean if you found the fossil of a say, poodle, and a one of a chihauhau, would they be found to both be dogs or could you possibley mistake them for a different species all together? Of course, this is to be considered under the idea that we do not know these animals as we do today. What would be the answer?
Maybe I need to study up on what makes similar animals a seperate species and who decides on that.

And on Adam. Adam is listed in the new testament many times and never is he considered to be some fictional, literary figure. He is always directed to as being a real man.

 

[GenemZ]

I have front and back. But, I take it less literally.

So, what was written will not happen?

Evolution was a concept before Christ even appeared on earth my friend. Aristotle and greek philosophers theorized certain biological taxonomies, chains of speciation, adaptation, etc. Evolution was an idea that existed beore Christianity existed; it was just in its infant stage.

I think we have too many knee jerk reactions to words at times When I speak of evolution as not being valid, I do not speak of the changes that can take place over time of a given species. I speak of the Jurassic period having boundaries. It had its own beginning and end.

Just like this current creation had its own beginning, and will have its end.


The next creation will be like the following:

Isaiah 11:6-8
"The wolf will live with the lamb,
the leopard will lie down with the goat,
the calf and the lion and the yearling together;
and a little child will lead them.

The cow will feed with the bear,
their young will lie down together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox.

The infant will play near the hole of the cobra,
and the young child put his hand into the viper's nest."​

That change will happen over night. Its not evolution as you know it to be. Science has been speculating as to why we have such distinctly different species to be found in the fossil records. Its speculation.


I am sure if someone had a sample of the DNA of bears and lions today that it will appear to be from an close match to what will be created for the future.


That's the point that both Young Earth Creationists miss and Theory of Evolutionists haven't a clue. Evolutionists are only working with what they have, which is limited because the Bible must be rejected by science. Young Earth Creationists are working with a crusade to defend a long held traditional belief which exists because of shoddy exegesis from its beginning.


Both science and Creationists have been debating each other continuously, and it will be endlessly; because both are devoid of the facts needed.

Without Form and Void - Chapter 1
​

There have been prior creations. The fossil records prove this. They had beginnings and ends. God created the ages, not evolution. Within each age certain levels of evolution could take place, but evolution was not the reason for the next creation that replaced the former. God is the reason.


What is to come.



BibleGateway.com - PassageLookup: Isaiah 65:17-30;





















"

 

[mpok1519]

Evolution is not a fact, it is still a theory, mpok1519.

To you its a theory, but to me, someone who has studied it extesively and rigorously, it is a fact. To someone who doesn't know much about it, it is still just a theory.

Also, earlier I read a post about morphing stages between species. I am not a scientist by any means just a regular ole guy with Business Degree and whom now builds engines at an auto plant. But I love to learn, so bear with me on my terms if they seem wrong. Now...isnt it true that dogs are descended from wolves?? I have read they were but I am sure they are also descended from other types of wild canines. That being said there are no labradors in the wild, or pit bulls etc.

Interesting observation. But, you're insisting that nature itself can makes these breeds of canines without human interaction, but no, its man's methods of breeding that create these breeds of canine, not the natural forces of nature itself. But, an interesting point, both dogs and cats are related and share an ancient common ancestor that resembled both cats and dogs, but looked something like a hyena. Also, another fact, Htyenas are more closely related to cats than they are dogs; would you believe this just from looking at two side by side? No, but when comparing their dna, they share more in common with felines than canines.

Does that mean if you found the fossil of a say, poodle, and a one of a chihauhau, would they be found to both be dogs or could you possibley mistake them for a different species all together?

If they matched skeletal remains from modern chihuahuas or poodles, then they'd have to be the same species. Of course, you will never find chiuhua or poodle fossils that radiometrically date thousands of years ago, because most modern breeds of dogs have only been around for a few hundred years.

Of course, this is to be considered under the idea that we do not know these animals as we do today. What would be the answer?
Maybe I need to study up on what makes similar animals a seperate species and who decides on that.

And on Adam. Adam is listed in the new testament many times and never is he considered to be some fictional, literary figure. He is always directed to as being a real man.

Yes, but, the new testament, and the Bible itself, is not a work of narrative non-fiction by a historian or scientist. The Bible is not a good place to look for in-depth historical or scientific answers.

I really still dont understand your question though, how dog breeds have to do with human evolution. Evolution has many mechanics; mutation, speciation, decent with modification, natural selection, etc....until you can understand how those things interact with each other, the concept of evolution is difficult to comprehend, I'm sure.

 

[mpok1519]

Isaiah 11:6-8
"The wolf will live with the lamb,
the leopard will lie down with the goat,
the calf and the lion and the yearling together;
and a little child will lead them. ​

The cow will feed with the bear,
their young will lie down together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox. ​

The infant will play near the hole of the cobra,
and the young child put his hand into the viper's nest."​

Well, lets see..lions have been observed taking care of baby antelopes and even nursing them to health. Dogs and cats live together in harmony sometimes. Many carnivorous animals will eat vegetation under the right circumstances. In India, it is not uncommon for people to live side-by-side cobras and poisonous snakes; the snakes eat the pests in the grain fields, and people (children too) handle these poisonous snakes for the very purpose of pest control and entertainment. Bears have been known to live with people harmoniously. All these things don't seem implausible in a literal sense, infact, do happen in nature, in the past, present, and future.

Both science and Creationists have been debating each other continuously, and it will be endlessly; because both are devoid of the facts needed.
"

No, evolution has many facts and evidence to support it claims, warranted by just, reliable, tried and true testing methods and proceses. YEC has no facts, but quite literally, false lies that are, imo, crazy, impossible, unrealistic and just flat out stupid.

 

[praisejahupeople]

they have MANY mid-primate mid-human fossils. Proanthropus Bosiei is a good example; looks like an ape but behaves human. Very mid-ape, mid-human-like. Many fossils of many different species such as australapithicus afarensis and africanus. Lucy is very mid-ape mid human. But, thats not convincing nearly enough, is it for the creationists?

But, the thing is, humans ARE primates! lol Yes, we are classified under primates. So, really, theres no such thing as mid-human/primate because human are primates.

But, we're in luck

they discovered the missing link just recently that links anteaters, cows, and primates.

-------------

You might not belong in the dark ages, but your percepions certainly might.

My perception is just fine thanks,pointing out apes that display intelligence is NOT an example of them being a link to us.
I could point out parrots that can speak,does that mean we are descended from them too(haha you are going to say yes arent you?)
Australopithicus are extinct apes.
Genesis really doesnt mean a whole lot to you does it,the whole"we are made in the image of God and given a higher place".
Do you actually believe in God?

 

[GenemZ]

Well, lets see..lions have been observed taking care of baby antelopes and even nursing them to health. Dogs and cats live together in harmony sometimes. Many carnivorous animals will eat vegetation under the right circumstances. In India, it is not uncommon for people to live side-by-side cobras and poisonous snakes; the snakes eat the pests in the grain fields, and people (children too) handle these poisonous snakes for the very purpose of pest control and entertainment. Bears have been known to live with people harmoniously. All these things don't seem implausible in a literal sense, infact, do happen in nature, in the past, present, and future.

At least I can see where you are coming from now.

Before, I was giving a benefit of a doubt.


Movin on...


In Christ, GeneZ

 

[praisejahupeople]

There is. I keep saying it, but people keep ignoring what I am saying. Pronthropus Bosiei. Australapithics Afarensis and Africanus. Homo Ergaster. Homo Erectus. Theres fossils, skeletons, entire camps of these species living together in Africa, Asia, and Europe. No, they aren't living anymore, they went extinct, like how many animals go extinct. Some of their lineages evolved and adapted to a changing enviornment, eventually evolving into different speces.

We DO SEE a variety of living species of the evolution ofman.

They once lived, but, the evidence of their lives is certainly present. Why do people act as if this evidence doesnt exist when it clearly does.



Living? What do you mean "living connection". Thats not a scientific term used within the study of the evolution of man.



Theres much speculation to infer that neanderthals bred with homo sapiens; two different species, but close enough to genetic compatibility to breed successfully. Coyotes and dogs can breed; theyre separate species, but they can breed successfully with reproductively viable offspring.



lol no it doesnt fall apart. Man and chimpanzee share much genetic material between each other. Bonobos share even more, and share more behavioral characteristics.

No, evolution does not fall apart because theres no 'living conneciton', whatever the heck that means. I've taken the classes, and I've never heard an anthropologist or paleontologist use such a term to describe what you are inferring.

Tell me, have you ever taken a rigorous course in physical anthropology that comprehensively studies evolution of man? No? Then, why should we listen to your argument when it is fundamentally flawed d fallacious, and if I do dare to say, misleading and riddled with deception.

Why dont you do that first, THEN, come back here with your expertise. Okay? Okay. =)


----------

heres my take; if the devil is the father of all deception lies and whats not true, how come so many Christians spread and perpetuate misleading fallacious ideas when it comes to science? I mean, if Satan is responsible for telling lies, how come so many Christians tell and spread lies about science and evolution?

Its, baffeling. Almost as if "true" Christianity follows in the same line as Satanism.

I mean, seriously, if what is not true, is from the devil, and since evolution is true, wouldnt that mean that the Bible was written by the devil?

just a thought. =)

Erectus fossils are either man,animal or man and animal fossils mixed together.In the case of peking man,it doesnt seem to exist.Heres an interesting tidbit as well,the same chap who funded peking man also funded piltdown man.
You seem to have avoided my analogy regarding how to read skulls.Why?

 

[mpok1519]

My perception is just fine thanks,pointing out apes that display intelligence is NOT an example of them being a link to us.
I could point out parrots that can speak,does that mean we are descended from them too(haha you are going to say yes arent you?)
Australopithicus are extinct apes.
Genesis really doesnt mean a whole lot to you does it,the whole"we are made in the image of God and given a higher place".
Do you actually believe in God?

We're talking about evolution, thanks though for trying to derail the thread. Nice try though.


Parrots talk because they mimic humans; its a behavior they get directly from us.

Behavioral comparison is a big part of anthropology; sure parrots could talk, but neanderthals made necklaces and jewelry, homo ergaster made complex tools from stone, bones and wood. These are things apes do not do. BUT, neanderthals and homo ergastor were here more than 6000 years ago, pointing out that YEC is false, and is a lie.

I can't believe something that is a lie, even if it is in the Bible, But, I do take into consideration that perhaps the lesson is within the morals rather than the narrative.

 

[mpok1519]

Erectus fossils are either man,animal or man and animal fossils mixed together.In the case of peking man,it doesnt seem to exist.Heres an interesting tidbit as well,the same chap who funded peking man also funded piltdown man.
You seem to have avoided my analogy regarding how to read skulls.Why?

Well, I ignored it because your anaology absolutely has nothing to do with this discussion, or any other pertinent dicussion regarding how evolution truely works. I avoided it because it would only hurt the integrity of a well-thought out and comprehensive discussion of real things that actually exist.

Also, you cant look at a skull of one person and a skull of another and determine if one was smart than the other. One might have more cranial capacity, but its not a good way to compare intellegence capacity. If one brain is 400 ML cpacity, and another is 395 ML capacity, theres no way to determine whether or not which person was more intellegent.

Things like that are called genetic nonconcordance; you can't observe certain traits and connect them with nonconcordant ideas.

That is why I ignored the question; because it was a question that has no significant scientific inquery.

 

[praisejahupeople]

We're talking about evolution, thanks though for trying to derail the thread. Nice try though.


Parrots talk because they mimic humans; its a behavior they get directly from us.

Interesting..you say that animals can be trained to display intelligence,not only does this apply to parrots but canines felines and possibly primates.

Behavioral comparison is a big part of anthropology; sure parrots could talk, but neanderthals made necklaces and jewelry, homo ergaster made complex tools from stone, bones and wood. These are things apes do not do. BUT, neanderthals and homo ergastor were here more than 6000 years ago, pointing out that YEC is false, and is a lie.

Theres no possibility according to you that neanderthals were in fact human?

 

[mpok1519]

Interesting..you say that animals can be trained to display intelligence,not only does this apply to parrots but canines felines and possibly primates.

Animals have intellegence; its, not a matter if they are trained by humans, or are mimicing humans; animals are naturally intellegent.

Theres no possibility according to you that neanderthals were in fact human?

Neanderthals were closest to humans than any other human descendant. Theres alot of debate going on whether or not neanderthals interbred with homo sapiens, or whether or not they just plain went extinct. Their DNA, however, is almost identical to the DNA of modern humans.

Homo ergastor split into two groups; homo sapiens (modern humans) and neanderthals. What happened to neaderthals is a hotly debated topic in the world of anthropology.

 

[praisejahupeople]

Well, I ignored it because your anaology absolutely has nothing to do with this discussion, or any other pertinent dicussion regarding how evolution truely works. I avoided it because it would only hurt the integrity of a well-thought out and comprehensive discussion of real things that actually exist.

Also, you cant look at a skull of one person and a skull of another and determine if one was smart than the other. One might have more cranial capacity, but its not a good way to compare intellegence capacity. If one brain is 400 ML cpacity, and another is 395 ML capacity, theres no way to determine whether or not which person was more intellegent.

Things like that are called genetic nonconcordance; you can't observe certain traits and connect them with nonconcordant ideas.

That is why I ignored the question; because it was a question that has no significant scientific inquery.

I apologise,i would of thought that placing skulls in a predetermined order according to the discoverers bias was a big part of how mans evolutionary tree was arranged.
You inadvertantly agreed with me regarding how cranial capacity DOES NOT mean higher intelligence.What does this mean for mans apparent evolving?

 

[praisejahupeople]

Animals have intellegence; its, not a matter if they are trained by humans, or are mimicing humans; animals are naturally intellegent.




Neanderthals were closest to humans than any other human descendant. Theres alot of debate going on whether or not neanderthals interbred with homo sapiens, or whether or not they just plain went extinct. Their DNA, however, is almost identical to the DNA of modern humans.

Almost identical to?Like a variety of human?

 

[mpok1519]

I apologise,i would of thought that placing skulls in a predetermined order according to the discoverers bias was a big part of how mans evolutionary tree was arranged.
You inadvertantly agreed with me regarding how cranial capacity DOES NOT mean higher intelligence.What does this mean for mans apparent evolving?

When observing two of the same species' skulls, its impossible to determine an intellegence quotient based on cranial capacity alone.

and, its WAY more complicated than just arranging skulls side by side. Evolution isn't really one straight line, its a huge, multi-lateral branching bush with hundreds of branches.

But, homo habilis, a very ape-like descendant of man, used stone tools and made caches of stored goods strategically placed in their territories, which shows thatvery ape-like human descendants were displaying human-like intellegence a million years ago.

What baffles me is the fact that things from millions of years ago can be carbon dated using radiometric dating methods that are generaly accurate, but yet still think the earth is 6000 years old without the smallest shred or iota of evidence to support such an outrageous claim. What, do they think God just put these fossils here to test our faith? Doubtful. That would make God a decietful, lying God, in essence, the devil, not God.

 

[mpok1519]

Almost identical to?Like a variety of human?

like 99.5 percent identical. I dont know what you mean by 'variety', but yes, kind of in that sense.

 

[praisejahupeople]

When observing two of the same species' skulls, its impossible to determine an intellegence quotient based on cranial capacity alone.

and, its WAY more complicated than just arranging skulls side by side. Evolution isn't really one straight line, its a huge, multi-lateral branching bush with hundreds of branches.

But, homo habilis, a very ape-like descendant of man, used stone tools and made caches of stored goods strategically placed in their territories, which shows thatvery ape-like human descendants were displaying human-like intellegence a million years ago.

What baffles me is the fact that things from millions of years ago can be carbon dated using radiometric dating methods that are generaly accurate, but yet still think the earth is 6000 years old without the smallest shred or iota of evidence to support such an outrageous claim. What, do they think God just put these fossils here to test our faith? Doubtful. That would make God a decietful, lying God, in essence, the devil, not God.

Im not a YEC,the bible never says how long it took for the universe to be created.Yom the hebrew word for day isnt literal.Its used in genesis 2:4 as well to describe all the creative time period.Obviously not 24 hrs.
Its more like saying back in our grandaddies day etc.

Habilis fossils are rare and chimps display tool usage.It would take a major leap of faith to say that they are our ancestors.

 

[praisejahupeople]

like 99.5 percent identical. I dont know what you mean by 'variety', but yes, kind of in that sense.

Neanderthals were isolated and inbred hence the morphological differences between them and other humans.Spread out after the tower of babel and were assimilated by other advancing civilsations.I would of thought that them being able to breed with humans would be a rather large clue.

 

[mpok1519]

not as major of a leap as you may think. You can connect species, with geologic stratification, populations, etc, etc to draw some remarkablly accurate conclusions. You can see whic layers of sediment put which species in what time, and the connections of time and space. Its not a major leap; more like a small hop.

Okay, chimps and homo habilis used tools; but, they did not create, or build them (although chimps have been noted to make beds, and even toys, but not tools in the sense we know), but, species such as homo ergaster made tools, and they existed like 400,000 years ago. They made tools from stone, bone, wood, other organic material, etc.....

homo habilis fossils are only rare because we havn't found many of them. if we could dig up all the land in the world, we could probably find thousands more.

 

[mpok1519]

Neanderthals were isolated and inbred hence the morphological differences between them and other humans.Spread out after the tower of babel and were assimilated by other advancing civilsations.I would of thought that them being able to breed with humans would be a rather large clue.

no...

Tower of Babel existed around a few thousand years ago.

Neanderthals went extinct around 40 thousand years ago.

The two didn't exist in the same time frame.

Although some anthropologists think they did just assimilate into homo sapien populations and simply evolved with and eventualy into homo sapiens.

 

[praisejahupeople]

no...

Tower of Babel existed around a few thousand years ago.

Neanderthals went extinct around 40 thousand years ago.

The two didn't exist in the same time frame.

Although some anthropologists think they did just assimilate into homo sapien populations and simply evolved with and eventualy into homo sapiens.

The differences in time frames is of course due to C-14 dating.