Incredible - a single cell

[-57]

How Satan deludes creationists:
Example of Satan doing so:

There is no such thing as original sin.

Evolutionist have become overcome by the slippery slope.

 

[The Barbarian]

There is no such thing as original sin.

So you don't believe that Adam and Eve committed the first sin by humans? How so?

Evolutionist have become overcome by the slippery slope.

You've confused theology and science, again. Science has nothing to say about that.

 

[-57]

So you don't believe that Adam and Eve committed the first sin by humans? How so?

Evolution = no original sin.

You've confused theology and science, again. Science has nothing to say about that.

You're trying to confuse theology with science.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Turns out, it does show common ancestry.

Not for the distant past.

Yep. For the distant past, too. For example, the close DNA relationship between dogs and cats indicated that they must have had a common ancestor "cat-dog." And eventually it was found. Another ornithologist realized that close DNA relationships between ducks and flamingos meant that they had a very recent common ancestor. That is also confirmed:

Barbarian observes:
Linnaeus, impressed with the family tree he got for living things, tried to do it with minerals. Couldn't do it. Because we see nested hierarchies only in cases of common descent.

Life is not a rock.

Right. As you just learned, life exhibits common ancestry. Rocks don't

Barbarian shows another case in which DNA demonstrates common ancestry.

I agree

I can show you more if you like. As you now realize, DNA shows evolutionary phylogenies.

Post flood man did start to have modern DNA.

No, that's just something you added to scripture to make it more acceptable to you.

try to show some from before Noah and you will run into a wall so high, that you need a telescope to see the top.

We have DNA from Neandertals and Denesovans, who weren't even our own subspecies. So you lose there, too.

I suspect the flood may have been somewhere around the time the KT layer was put down. Feel free to offer DNA from before that!

In theory, DNA could last for a hundred million years or so in extraordinary conditions, but typically, it's less than a million. Fortunately, as your fellow YE creationist admits, the large number of transitional series is "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory.

However, there's a very slight chance that DNA might remain in amber, some of which is over 100 million years old. Want to bet that if they find it, it won't be like the DNA we have today?

Barbarian, regarding Satan:
He deludes creationists by using part of the truth.

[quote[Part of what God said, to be more precise.[/quote]

That, too. But for example, God never told Adam that eating from the tree of knowledge would make him like God. The Serpent tells him it does. And that turned out to be true, but not the way the Serpent led him to believe. Read your Bible, and learn.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
So you don't believe that Adam and Eve committed the first sin by humans? How so?

Evolution = no original sin.

(Barbarian checks)...

Nope. You're absolutely wrong about that. Nothing whatever in evolutionary theory or in the phenomenon of evolution says there was no original sin. No wonder you hate science; if I thought it was like that, I'd hate it too.

You've confused theology and science, again. Science has nothing to say about that.

You're trying to confuse theology with science.

Nope. Theology is about God and man and our relationship. Science is about the way the physical universe works. You've confused the two.

 

[dad]

Yep. For the distant past, too. For example, the close DNA relationship between dogs and cats indicated that they must have had a common ancestor "cat-dog." And eventually it was found. Another ornithologist realized that close DNA relationships between ducks and flamingos meant that they had a very recent common ancestor. That is also confirmed:

You were given the time frame I currently guesstimate that the flood was. About 70 million 'science' claimed years ago. You have no dog dna from that time, so just be honest.

Right. As you just learned, life exhibits common ancestry. Rocks don't

I would not compare living things He created with inanimate objects. A lot of rocks were formed after creation.

I can show you more if you like. As you now realize, DNA shows evolutionary phylogenies.

We wait for the dna you exhibit from pre 70 millon years ago. Otherwise it does not relate or matter.

No, that's just something you added to scripture to make it more acceptable to you.

No one offered that as Scripture.

We have DNA from Neandertals and Denesovans, who weren't even our own subspecies. So you lose there, too.

Once again post flood folks who are not even close to the ballpark time involved.

In theory, DNA could last for a hundred million years or so in extraordinary conditions, but typically, it's less than a million.

Isn't that convenient for your fable, there are about 69 million too many years for DNA!!! Hilarious.

Fortunately, as your fellow YE creationist admits, the large number of transitional series is "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory.

You would not know transitional if it bit your ankle.

However, there's a very slight chance that DNA might remain in amber, some of which is over 100 million years old. Want to bet that if they find it, it won't be like the DNA we have today?

If it is, great. Then show us how that relates to some insect now. We could rule out a difference in DNA.

That, too. But for example, God never told Adam that eating from the tree of knowledge would make him like God. The Serpent tells him it does. And that turned out to be true, but not the way the Serpent led him to believe.

Like science, it appealed to the pride of her wanting to be a smartie pants. When he mentioned what God actually said, it was twisted...like origin sciences.

 

[Tone]

They are cognates, yes. However, as God indicated when Moses asked His name, it doesn't matter what name we use, so long as we recognize His majesty and goodness as the Creator.

Again, you are not using a name, but a title.

 

[-57]

Barbarian observes:
Turns out, it does show common ancestry.



Yep. For the distant past, too. For example, the close DNA relationship between dogs and cats indicated that they must have had a common ancestor "cat-dog." And eventually it was found. Another ornithologist realized that close DNA relationships between ducks and flamingos meant that they had a very recent common ancestor. That is also confirmed:

Yep. For the distant past, too. For example, the close DNA relationship between dogs and cats indicated that they must have had a common CREATOR "cat-dog." And eventually it was found. Another ornithologist realized that close DNA relationships between ducks and flamingos meant that they had a very recent common CREATOR. That is also confirmed:

 

[-57]

That, too. But for example, God never told Adam that eating from the tree of knowledge would make him like God. The Serpent tells him it does. And that turned out to be true, but not the way the Serpent led him to believe. Read your Bible, and learn.

According to the Theo-Evo camp....that event never happened. There was no fall.

 

[-57]

Barbarian observes:
So you don't believe that Adam and Eve committed the first sin by humans? How so?



(Barbarian checks)...

Nope. You're absolutely wrong about that. Nothing whatever in evolutionary theory or in the phenomenon of evolution says there was no original sin. No wonder you hate science; if I thought it was like that, I'd hate it too.

You've confused theology and science, again. Science has nothing to say about that.



Nope. Theology is about God and man and our relationship. Science is about the way the physical universe works. You've confused the two.

OK, you checked...then how, when, where why did man fall?

 

[The Barbarian]

OK, you checked...then how, when, where why did man fall?

By disobeying God. Time, date, and precise location are not given by scripture.

 

[The Barbarian]

According to the Theo-Evo camp....that event never happened.

No, you were really misled about that. Scientists have a lot of differing opinions on that issue.

There was no fall.

I'll just have to disagree with you on that. We may not have the specifics, but we do know it happened.

 

[-57]

By disobeying God. Time, date, and precise location are not given by scripture.

By disobeying God. Time, date, and precise location are not given by scripture.

You completely avoided the question. I asked "how, when, where why did man fall?"
Those answers are found in Genesis and other portions of the bible.

 

[-57]

-57 indicated....according to theo-Evoism there was no fall.

You replied back with..

I'll just have to disagree with you on that. We may not have the specifics, but we do know it happened.

so, you throw away the Genesis account...which give an explanation, answer...and exchange it for an "I don't know".

That should be a big indication Theo-Evoism is moving away from the foundations of Christianity.

 

[The Barbarian]

so, you throw away the Genesis account...

Rather, I accept it as it is, without the YE editing.

which give an explanation, answer...and exchange it for an "I don't know".

As I pointed out, it doesn't give a date, a time, or a specific place. You know this. YE creationists added all of that to fit their own desires.

Fortunately, God doesn't care if you don't accept the way He managed creation. Unless you make a idol of your man-made doctrine, and insist that others must believe it to be Chrstians, it won't cost you your salvation.

 

[dad]

By disobeying God. Time, date, and precise location are not given by scripture.

In the garden of Eden sometime after the day they were created and before they got the boot from the garden.

 

[-57]

Rather, I accept it as it is, without the YE editing.



As I pointed out, it doesn't give a date, a time, or a specific place. You know this. YE creationists added all of that to fit their own desires.

Fortunately, God doesn't care if you don't accept the way He managed creation. Unless you make a idol of your man-made doctrine, and insist that others must believe it to be Chrstians, it won't cost you your salvation.

You are still dodging the question. The reason, your Theo-Evo theology has no answer.

 

[The Barbarian]

(Barbarian notes that the Bible doesn't give a date, a time, or a specific location for the fall)

You are still dodging the question. The reason, your Theo-Evo theology has no answer.

Christian theology doesn't make up a story when the Bible doesn't say. So give us the date, time, and specific location from a YE revisionist view. What do you have?

 

[The Barbarian]

Yep. For the distant past, too. For example, the close DNA relationship between dogs and cats indicated that they must have had a common CREATOR "cat-dog."

The cat/dog wasn't a creator. It was merely one of a line of animals whose descendants included both cats and dogs. The finding of these transitional forms confirms the prediction based on DNA analysis, showing a close relationship between cats and dogs.

Retroposon-based phylogenetic tree of carnivores according to the most statistically favored data. SINEs and LINEs are presented as yellow and red balls, respectively. Divergence times in millions of years ago (MYA) were taken from Eizirik et al. (2010). Alternative relationships are presented at the bottom of the figure (Ursoidea plus Pinnipedia supported by 34 SINEs and 26 LINEs; Ursoidea plus Musteloidea supported by 40 SINEs and 34 LINEs). Zones of possible ILS are indicated as diffuse gray areas. The tree topology was derived by PAUP based on the presence/absence data. The same tree topology was obtained using the Bayesian reconstruction method. ILS, incomplete lineage sorting.

And eventually it was found. Another ornithologist realized that close DNA relationships between ducks and flamingos meant that they had a very recent common ancestor. That is also confirmed.

The fact that these predicted transitional forms are found is (as honest creationists admit) very good evidence for common descent. But what is even more convincing, is that we never see a transitional form where there shouldn't be any.

No point in denying the obvious. Try to find a way to deal with the facts that is consistent with the evidence.

 

[-57]

(Barbarian notes that the Bible doesn't give a date, a time, or a specific location for the fall)



Christian theology doesn't make up a story when the Bible doesn't say. So give us the date, time, and specific location from a YE revisionist view. What do you have?

You're off road.
The question is...why?

The specific location is the Garden of Eden...at least that's what my bible says. But, when you're a TE..there ws no Garden of Eden.
When? At the time only Adam and Eve existed...as there was no other humans. But when you are a TE...there was a large population.