Hummingbirds Disprove Creationism

[JacksBratt]

People do not believe in creationism because the stories are obviously metaphors and science overwhelming shows evolution and it taking billions of years... not because trees cannot go a day without sun.

People believe evolution because it gives the ability of getting rid of God. Also, because they believe the wisdom of men over the words of God.
This is an argument with no end..

God Bless.

 

[Wunderlust]

No but there are photos, survivors that were there and history books by the score.

Right, which is why is it silly to ask for scripture when it comes to historical issues.

 

[Wunderlust]

Actually, no there was no rain before the flood.

Which is again, according to a metaphorical story. Back then, people did not understand that rain was created by the sun's light causing water to evaporate, which then condensed, which then fell as rain.

Genesis 2 also mentions wind, which is created by the evaporation process. No rain, no wind. Also, I can't imagine someone attempting to explain how the physics of the universe changed that prevented the Sun from evaporating water. Also, what caused wind. I guess it was all magic!

 

[Wunderlust]

Again with the contradiction of Genesis 1 and 2. Please check previous posts. It's like saying that the Bible calls Christ a lion and a lamb so it contradicts itself.

Genesis 1 and 2 give contradictory accounts of the exact same story. The order is different.

 

[Wunderlust]

People believe evolution because it gives the ability of getting rid of God.

People recognized evolution because of overwhelming evidence. Evolution does not get rid of God. It does not explain how existence came to be. Evolution does not get rid of God anymore than when people rejected the idea that rotting meat made flies, or hay produces mice.

Also, because they believe the wisdom of men over the words of God.
This is an argument with no end..

Creationism is the idea of men, not the words of God.

 

[JacksBratt]

Right, which is why is it silly to ask for scripture when it comes to historical issues.

Yes, however, the event I was looking for scripture or any documentation on was quoted as to happening 75 -85 million years ago.

That's not a historical issue. That's way beyond prehistoric. It makes it a guess, at best.

 

[JacksBratt]

Which is again, according to a metaphorical story. Back then, people did not understand that rain was created by the sun's light causing water to evaporate, which then condensed, which then fell as rain.

Genesis 2 also mentions wind, which is created by the evaporation process. No rain, no wind. Also, I can't imagine someone attempting to explain how the physics of the universe changed that prevented the Sun from evaporating water. Also, what caused wind. I guess it was all magic!

Again, this topic has been flogged to death hear on CF.
I'm not going down that beaten up worn out highway of arguments.

 

[ScottA]

They give two contradicting accounts of the order. That's obviously important when you take both accounts to mean that God created the Earth in a literal six days. Then you turn around and call it a metaphor and the details, when they contradict, aren't important.

Genesis is a metaphor, that's where the truth of it exists. If you are going to take it literally, you run into the problem of two different orders of creation.

1. "All things come in parables"...so, if you want to say it is a metaphor, no problem.
2. As for literal days...the only literal day, is "that day" (of the Lord). History is his story.
3. As for different order...there is no order, but rather the unfolding revelation of Jesus Christ, in whom time does not exist. Thus, no contradiction.

The problem here is, you are approaching God and the story of his Son...like a lawyer - Woe, to you lawyers. Luke 11:46, Luke 11:52

 

[Dale]

Simple, they road on the back of dinosaurs.

I thought the dinosaurs drowned in the Flood.
Does anyone seriously believe there was room for dinosaurs on the Ark?

 

[Dale]

In this thread it has been shown that there were indeed examples of hummingbirds in Europe, and maybe Asia and I can even add Africa at some point in time.
It's also been shown that Genesis 7:2-3 pretty much shoots down the only two hummingbirds that the OP addressed.

Not much of a case of hummingbirds putting a dent in creationism. The only dent I see currently is Dale's pride.

Any possibility of hummingbirds in Europe is an outlier at best. An outlier is a piece of data that doesn't fit with anything else. I have yet to hear an age to the alleged fossil in Germany. At most it might mean that a hummingbird from South America reached Germany and died. We are lucky enough to have the fossil.

I started this thread by asking why the greatest concentration of hummingbird species is in Columbia and Ecuador if they are all descended from birds that got off Noah's Ark at Ararat. We haven't seen any serious answer to that question.

Your mention of Genesis 7 is baffling. I am apparently being attacked for failing to distinguish between clean and unclean birds. Well, that's an intriguing point. The Jews never ate hummingbirds, so they were never classified as clean animals. According to Genesis, there would have only been two of them, not seven pairs.

Do you have any authority for suggesting that hummingbirds should be considered clean animals under the Jewish food laws?

Quote:

“It was hard for the rabbinical authorities to distinguish clean from unclean birds, as the Scripture (Lev. xi. 13-19) enumerates only the birds which shall not be eaten, without giving any of the marks which distinguish them from the clean birds.”


Link:
http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4408-clean-and-unclean-animals

 

[Dale]

Einstein presented a glimpse of the reality of God, a perspective uncommon and misunderstood by humanity, for those who could see and hear it. You defending the perspective of humanity, does nothing but obscure the glimpse and put us back 70+ years on our understanding of God. Well done.

Einstein gave us a glimpse of God?
Einstein was an agnostic.

Any glimpses he gave us must be unintentional.

 

[Dale]

I'll bite....
day 1. Earth and light.
day 2. Expanse
day 3. Land sea vegetation
day 4. Great lights
day 5. Fish birds
day 6. Land animals man

God has stated the order. State the contradiction (as you see it) and I will explain.

Quote:

“I begin with a simple question: According to Genesis, in what order were the land animals, man, and women created? This 'simple' question has two different answers. According to Genesis 1:24-27, God creates the land animals (vv. 24-25), and then man and woman (vv. 26-27). However, in Genesis 2:7, God creates man, and then in v. 19 creates animals, and in v. 22 creates woman. Thus, the commonly heard idea that Genesis 2 is an elaboration upon Genesis 1, filling in various details, does not work—the two accounts tell different stories.”


Link:
http://thetorah.com/conceptions-of-the-divine-creator/



To sum it up:
In Genesis 1, animals are created before man and woman.
In Genesis 2, Adam and Eve are created before animals.


This creates no problems if these passages are metaphorical.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Do you have any text that back this up? I don't mean some university course that I need to attend. Just some intelligent fact that explains how you can arrive at a date like 75 to 85 million years?

You do rumealize that that is a huge amount of time previous to any recorded history, previous to any humans, previous to any written record. It is actually a number someone predicted, extrapolated, assumed or guessed. It is un testable as nobody was here to view it, nobody was there to record it and there is no possible way you can measure the time that hummingbirds morphed, evolved or hatched for the first time, with any accuracy whatsoever.

You can site the "geologic column" yet it has trees growing up through it. You can site carbon dating, yet it is only accurate to 50,000 years. You can site fossil data, yet fossils have been shown to form in 3 months in a laboratory setting. Given that we can throw out any date on a fossil's age. Given this, your 75 - 85 million years is hyperbola.

Clearly your mind is made up regardless of evidence. However, what I did to get a ballpark figure was to go to this site

http://timetree.org/

and search for the age of the common ancestral species between pigeons and hummingbirds. That common ancestor was, of course, not yet a hummingbird. There is also information on the evolution of hummingbirds available on the internet.

Your decision to ignore the scientific date determinations of fossils is, of course, yours to make, but it means you have decided evidence doesn't matter, and therefore you have no way to justify any of your beliefs. Because you have already asserted evidence doesn't matter.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Again with the contradiction of Genesis 1 and 2. Please check previous posts. It's like saying that the Bible calls Christ a lion and a lamb so it contradicts itself.

Again with the refusal to see how creating man before animals in chapter two and creating man after animals in chapter one is a contradiction. The ability to reconcile these contradictions should be used, instead, to reconcile the biblical narrative with the findings of science, which are objectively true, regarding evolution and the common ancestry of all species. It would not be any harder than what you have already done anyway, merely different.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

People believe evolution because it gives the ability of getting rid of God. Also, because they believe the wisdom of men over the words of God.
This is an argument with no end..

God Bless.

People believe evolution because of the evidence that shows it happened. Saying they believe it because it gives the ability of getting rid of God is a lie.

Why should we accept your assertions? You are a human and you say we should not accept the wisdom of humans.

 

[AV1611VET]

Does anyone seriously believe there was room for dinosaurs on the Ark?

If the Ark was a TARDIS booth, it could have housed a trillion dinosaurs.

 

[Wunderlust]

Yes, however, the event I was looking for scripture or any documentation on was quoted as to happening 75 -85 million years ago.

That's not a historical issue. That's way beyond prehistoric. It makes it a guess, at best.

You want a scriptural account of something that occurred 80 millions years ago? Are you serious?

 

[Wunderlust]

Again, this topic has been flogged to death hear on CF.
I'm not going down that beaten up worn out highway of arguments.

If you don't want to discuss a topic - don't discuss it.

DON'T post in a topic and when you can't respond to an argument say that it has been argued to death.

Respond or don't:
Which is again, according to a metaphorical story. Back then, people did not understand that rain was created by the sun's light causing water to evaporate, which then condensed, which then fell as rain.

Genesis 2 also mentions wind, which is created by the evaporation process. No rain, no wind. Also, I can't imagine someone attempting to explain how the physics of the universe changed that prevented the Sun from evaporating water. Also, what caused wind. I guess it was all magic!

 

[Wunderlust]

1. "All things come in parables"...so, if you want to say it is a metaphor, no problem.
2. As for literal days...the only literal day, is "that day" (of the Lord). History is his story.
3. As for different order...there is no order, but rather the unfolding revelation of Jesus Christ, in whom time does not exist. Thus, no contradiction.

The problem here is, you are approaching God and the story of his Son...like a lawyer - Woe, to you lawyers. Luke 11:46, Luke 11:52

Instead of addressing the content of my post you arbitrarily accuse me of approaching "God and the story of His Son" like a lawyer and then you quote passages about lawyers.

 

[AV1611VET]

I guess it was all magic!

Or miracles?