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.
Then you can explain the fossil record without evolution. Please do, I am very interested.Next thing you know, they'll want to call in the Hardly Boys to solve the case and try to prove we evolved from fossils they find in rocks and coal. Never mind what the book of Genesis says. God was just being allegorical. He really didn't create man as a separately unique species. My great x 1,000,000,000,000,000th ancestor was some single-celled organism that eventually evolved into a poo-slinging ape, from which evolved man.
You go on and on and on about fossil records and such, when all they have is a theory, and a very poor one. You know, the scientists proposing this trash remind me of some of the stupid crackpot scientists on the show called Ancient Aliens that usually airs on the History Channel. They present the material very convincingly, but then you find that it is all built on a bunch of lies. They should start a spinoff show and call it "Ancient Evolution", and say at the start of every other sentence in the show, "Ancient Evolution Theorists believe, claim, etc.".
Cataclysmic floods can do that.
If you knew the actual science you too would be able to see that the information they present is deliberate misrepresentations of the science. You have never actually read Schweitzers paper have you?
There's a perfect example of your total ignorance of any geologic dating method, and I have discussed this with you in other threads in the past as well. First, carbon dating does not date or try to date anything millions of years. Its half-life is only 5730 years. The 14C in diamonds and coal is "in situ" 14C, not atmospheric 14C which is used in dating. They form through different avenues, something the dishonest creation science literature purposely leaves out.
No, you find tons of opinion and baseless claims that are not supported any original data or research. Think I'm wrong? Then provide a link to one of those tons of sources that provides "original data and research" to support their claims. Just one 57, just one.
Wow, great argument bro.ummmm no they can't thats just rediculous,
Mt St Helens provided us with proof for that.explain how ANYTHING let alone flood can turn sea shells and other things into solid stone in under a year.
Both genetics and evolution are important in modern biomedical research. That's why the biomedical research institute I work for spends a lot of money and effort studying evolution, as does Harvard Medical School across the river.
Wow, great argument bro.
Mt St Helens provided us with proof for that.
Then you can explain the fossil record without evolution. Please do, I am very interested.
Haven't you ever heard about the world wide flood? It's in the bible.
Wouldn’t we expect to find rock layers all over the earth filled with billions of dead animals and plants that were buried rapidly and fossilized in sand, mud, and lime? Of course, and that’s exactly what we find. Furthermore, even though the catastrophic geologic activity of the Flood would have waned in the immediate post-Flood period, ongoing mini-catastrophes would still have produced localized fossil deposits. rest of article
Wow, great argument bro.Mt St Helens provided us with proof for that.
Then you can explain the fossil record without evolution. Please do, I am very interested.
This is really not a reasonable response.I don't need a argument, what you said is impossible,
Perhaps because there were no seashells there?and no mt st hellens did NOT turn seashells into solid stone
I'm not responsible for your ignorance.try again. Show ANYTHING becoming solid stone in under 6000 years.
Overwhelmingly neutral. When did they happen?
This is really not a reasonable response. Perhaps because there were no seashells there?
By the way, seashells are made of calcium- something, which is already 'stone'.I'm not responsible for your ignorance.
Good day to you.
when we talk about seashells on mountains this is what were talking about.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8a/2b/ed/8a2bed275117b4146b87845ffe3dd550.jpg
Thats no a seashell thats the impression of a seashell left in solid stone, or like with bones it's been replaced, show a mechanism that can turn ANYTHING into solid stone in under a year.
Of course they're not a living system. The point is they are ordered structures.
Survival of a species from a mutation(which you say is random) does not get us from apes to humans.
Oh, not the fossils and carbon-dating nonsense again... thought up by a bunch of knuckleheads that want to push the evolution theory. I thought it was common knowledge that carbon-dating is only accurate back to a couple of thousand years?
I don't need a argument, what you said is impossible, and no mt st hellens did NOT turn seashells into solid stone try again. Show ANYTHING becoming solid stone in under 6000 years.
It doesn't matter. I'm talking about the overwhelming majority that are neutral. When did those mutations occur? Each of us carries thousands of them. Which of our ancestors did they occur in?What percentage is beneficial? I understand you can't nail the percentage down hard and fast....but a ball park number will suffice.
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?