-
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.
PROVE EVOLUTION
- Thread starter Mirror
- Start date
- Status
Many religous organizations have made statements that there is no conflict between being a believer and accepting evolution and other mainstream sciences. You can read some of the statements here.faiththatbreathes said:
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/5025_statements_from_religious_orga_12_19_2002.asp
Young earth creationism is many centered in the US. Another misconception that is often forwarded is that the scientists who study evolution and other mainstream sciences are not Christians. That is simply not true. That can be confirmed by just looking aroung our schools and churhes. Plenty of Christians teaching biology and plenty of scientists in the churches.
Upvote
0
Actually, I go by what I have read and studied. You should try it. If you doubt any of my statements, call me on them and I will provide the sources. I would expect you to do the same.Mirror said:
Upvote
0
Hi forum,
Here's the skull of a 10000 year old sabre tooth...has anybody seen one of these lately?
Smilodon - The Sabre-Toothed "Tiger"
The "sabre-toothed tiger," Smilodon, is the California State Fossil and the second most common fossil mammal found in the La Brea tar pits. The name "sabre-toothed tiger" is misleading, for these animals are not closely related to tigers. Juveniles to adults are represented in the large Berkeley collections. The first Chairman of the University of California Department of Paleontology, Professor John C. Merriam, and his student Chester Stock, monographed the morphology of this great carnivore in 1932. Since then, hundreds of thousands of Smilodon bones have been found at La Brea, permitting remarkably detailed reconstructions of how Smilodon lived. For example, Smilodon was about a foot shorter than living lions but was nearly twice as heavy, and unlike cheetahs and lions -- which have long tails that help provide balance when the animals run -- Smilodon had a bobtail. These suggest that Smilodon did not chase down prey animals over long distances, as lions, leopards, and cheetahs do. Instead, it probably charged from ambush, waiting for its prey to come close before attacking.
I brought up this sabre tooth because it is an obvious meat eater. You will all probably know that the creatures were only allowed to eat this:
Genesis 1
30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground-everything that has the breath of life in it-I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
That sabre tooth was not allowed to eat meat so how did it stay alive until God changed His mind?
Is there any mention of sabretooth tigers in scripture?
Justme
Here's the skull of a 10000 year old sabre tooth...has anybody seen one of these lately?
Smilodon - The Sabre-Toothed "Tiger"
The "sabre-toothed tiger," Smilodon, is the California State Fossil and the second most common fossil mammal found in the La Brea tar pits. The name "sabre-toothed tiger" is misleading, for these animals are not closely related to tigers. Juveniles to adults are represented in the large Berkeley collections. The first Chairman of the University of California Department of Paleontology, Professor John C. Merriam, and his student Chester Stock, monographed the morphology of this great carnivore in 1932. Since then, hundreds of thousands of Smilodon bones have been found at La Brea, permitting remarkably detailed reconstructions of how Smilodon lived. For example, Smilodon was about a foot shorter than living lions but was nearly twice as heavy, and unlike cheetahs and lions -- which have long tails that help provide balance when the animals run -- Smilodon had a bobtail. These suggest that Smilodon did not chase down prey animals over long distances, as lions, leopards, and cheetahs do. Instead, it probably charged from ambush, waiting for its prey to come close before attacking.I brought up this sabre tooth because it is an obvious meat eater. You will all probably know that the creatures were only allowed to eat this:
Genesis 1
30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground-everything that has the breath of life in it-I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
That sabre tooth was not allowed to eat meat so how did it stay alive until God changed His mind?
Is there any mention of sabretooth tigers in scripture?
Justme
Upvote
0
Justme said:
The term dinosaur wasn't invented until 1841. The name saber tooth tiger was probably coined around that time also. The bible does make mention of behemoths and other strange creatures.
Upvote
0
Hi Driven,
Something else we could gleen from the picture is that long tooth on the sabre tooth is something that has disappeared or EVOLVED off of the big cats of today. To follow with your early train of thought I guess that tooth would be handy to spear an unsuspecting Sugar Maple.
Justme
I gotta agree with you on the speed of plants, but it was the carnivorism of the whole thing I was meaning.
I'm trying to figure out what this could possibly have to do with anything. If this animal never did have a name it changes nothing...it lived it died.
Something else we could gleen from the picture is that long tooth on the sabre tooth is something that has disappeared or EVOLVED off of the big cats of today. To follow with your early train of thought I guess that tooth would be handy to spear an unsuspecting Sugar Maple.
Justme
Upvote
0
Hi Forum,
This thread is to prove evolution.
I would consider the examination of some humanoid fossils, like the Neanderthal and the Cro-magnan man( I'm doing this from memory and can't spell diddly) The skulls of these two human ancestors are just a tad different than the human skull of today. They have changed, they have adapted, they have evolved. Well, actually the cro-magnan developed further and the Neanderthal died out.
With the above in mind consider the lowly dandelion plant that may plague your back lawn. Over the past 50 years that dandelion has evolved or adapted to environmental pressures. Herbicide resistance has altered the genetic make-up of certain plants to make certain ones immune to certain chemicals. Now that's 50 years and no one can even spot a physical difference in the plant. It still looks the same. Just take a wild guess how long it would take these minute changes to alter the appearance of the species.
Now when you consider the skull of that cro-magnan man had to loose the long slanty forehead, reduce the size of the facial bones and grow a decent nose, it would take a minute. Next consider that we have skeletal remains from biblical times...guess what? they don't have slanty foreheads, wierd facial bones and ape-like noses...how come? Because the evolution of that type was over by biblical times.
God created the world and everything on it as I see it and the main tool of construction was the first thing He invented...evolution. Hey, if He didn't use evolution, who did? Because things on this planet evolved to their present state, evolution continues as we speak, and it will cary on to infinity.
Justme
This thread is to prove evolution.
I would consider the examination of some humanoid fossils, like the Neanderthal and the Cro-magnan man( I'm doing this from memory and can't spell diddly) The skulls of these two human ancestors are just a tad different than the human skull of today. They have changed, they have adapted, they have evolved. Well, actually the cro-magnan developed further and the Neanderthal died out.
With the above in mind consider the lowly dandelion plant that may plague your back lawn. Over the past 50 years that dandelion has evolved or adapted to environmental pressures. Herbicide resistance has altered the genetic make-up of certain plants to make certain ones immune to certain chemicals. Now that's 50 years and no one can even spot a physical difference in the plant. It still looks the same. Just take a wild guess how long it would take these minute changes to alter the appearance of the species.
Now when you consider the skull of that cro-magnan man had to loose the long slanty forehead, reduce the size of the facial bones and grow a decent nose, it would take a minute. Next consider that we have skeletal remains from biblical times...guess what? they don't have slanty foreheads, wierd facial bones and ape-like noses...how come? Because the evolution of that type was over by biblical times.
God created the world and everything on it as I see it and the main tool of construction was the first thing He invented...evolution. Hey, if He didn't use evolution, who did? Because things on this planet evolved to their present state, evolution continues as we speak, and it will cary on to infinity.
Justme
Upvote
0
brettnolan
Senior Member
Chi_Cygni said:
Creationist nonsense? The Bible is nonsense? Look, I didn't mean to ruffle anyone's feathers, so let me back up and just ask one question at a time.
As a Christian and, more relevant to my questions, as Christian member of this forum, how do you reconcile your scientific theories regarding the beginning of the universe and life on earth with your religious beliefs? In order to post to the Christians only forums, my understanding was that you had to accept the Nicene creed, part of which reads as follows:
"We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
...through him all things were made."
This is not an attack! Just a question. I don't understand how the two are compatible and I'm asking someone to explain it to me.
Also, I didn't say evolution = atheism. My other comments were not unwarranted. My friend made it absolutely clear that he thinks he is smarter than the majority of the population. I base that on the percentage of Americans who claim that they believe in A god. He does not and told me that anyone who does is an idiot. For the moment, I will retract extending that comment to the members of this particular forum, as I would rather sleep right now, than try to explain what I meant.
thanks for the link notto
Upvote
0
What did the dandelion evolve in to? (a dandelion)???Justme said:
This trick is always used by evolutionists. That is variation not evolution. There is a huge difference. Its still a dandelion and always will be.
Upvote
0
- Nov 19, 2003
- 815
- 5
- 37
- Faith
- Christian
Dr.Robert v. Gentry(a non- Christian scientist)
> discovered this while working at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
>Coalified wood in the Colorado Plateau
>sacondary polonium halos AKA Radio Halos(dirived from the decaying of uranium)
>for coal to form, exact conditions must be met.
>When wood is buried water infiltrates it.then uranium enters it as well.
>the wood is then compressed(coal doesn't compress. it shaters).this evidence points to a simultaneus event.
>when Uranium entered the wood it left some of its decayed product(lead)
>uranium and lead therfore should decay in uniform.
>the wood has a low lead/uranium ratio
>that same, very low lead/uranium ratio tells that the wood was buried recently and simultaneusly.
> as the lead and uranium decay the ratio down
>In coal gathered in mines in the Colorado Plateau(believed to be of TRIASSIC age).
"the ratio between 238U and 206Pb should be low; instead some such halos have been found with uranium-lead ratios ranging from about 2,200 to over 64,000. meaning that currently accepted ages may be too high by a factor of 10,000, admitting the possibility that the ages of the wood are to be measured in millenia."
source- Geotimes sept.1976
>this information has remained uncllenged and unreputed by the scientific cummunity since it was published in 1976.
>these results pertain to the simultaneus buriul of the Eocene,60 MY ago, the cretaceuos, 110 MY ago, the Jurassic, 160 MY ago and triasic, 225 MY ago.
>this goes for the origin and age of coal wherever it is found.
>as you can see the earth is only a few 1000 years old.
> discovered this while working at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
>Coalified wood in the Colorado Plateau
>sacondary polonium halos AKA Radio Halos(dirived from the decaying of uranium)
>for coal to form, exact conditions must be met.
>When wood is buried water infiltrates it.then uranium enters it as well.
>the wood is then compressed(coal doesn't compress. it shaters).this evidence points to a simultaneus event.
>when Uranium entered the wood it left some of its decayed product(lead)
>uranium and lead therfore should decay in uniform.
>the wood has a low lead/uranium ratio
>that same, very low lead/uranium ratio tells that the wood was buried recently and simultaneusly.
> as the lead and uranium decay the ratio down
>In coal gathered in mines in the Colorado Plateau(believed to be of TRIASSIC age).
"the ratio between 238U and 206Pb should be low; instead some such halos have been found with uranium-lead ratios ranging from about 2,200 to over 64,000. meaning that currently accepted ages may be too high by a factor of 10,000, admitting the possibility that the ages of the wood are to be measured in millenia."
source- Geotimes sept.1976
>this information has remained uncllenged and unreputed by the scientific cummunity since it was published in 1976.
>these results pertain to the simultaneus buriul of the Eocene,60 MY ago, the cretaceuos, 110 MY ago, the Jurassic, 160 MY ago and triasic, 225 MY ago.
>this goes for the origin and age of coal wherever it is found.
>as you can see the earth is only a few 1000 years old.
Upvote
0
Parts of the skull continue to grow through our entire life(like the brow area). With the long lifespan of preflood humans, this growth would have been very pronounced. Our lifespan now is usually less than 100 years now so its not so noticeable. So there's no evolution there either just age.Justme said:
Upvote
0
- Nov 19, 2003
- 815
- 5
- 37
- Faith
- Christian
as you can see I have evidence proving that the earth is not billions of years old. i ask you now to disprove me. who dares. oh and by the way god created everything.
Upvote
0
Hi Driven,
Have you ever been to Hawaii? All those beautiful islands are the result of volcanic action. God created those islands because He set in motion the volcanic action that 'day' in time whenever He chose to do it and that action is still going on. There is presently a new island starting to form near the big island.
I'll ask a question of strict creationists here. How much elevation would you estimate to be added to the big island of Hawaii in one year? i inch? one foot? one yard? One what?
I'll ask another serious question of strict creationists..are you really serious?
Justme
There you go...yes, what I described can be termed a variation, but if you put enough of these variations together over thousands of years you get evolution....and there is no difference. Eventually the sabre toothed tiger didn't look like a sabre toothed tiger anymore.. it looked more like whatever they named the next big cat.....It evolved.
Yippee, now there are still skeletal remains from all of the chapters of biblical history and from those skeletal remains there are no skulls with those slopey foreheads, the wierd facial features and the ape-like nose. Would you think archeologists only uncovered those who lived a couple of hundred years? Note there are no skeletal remains(barring misshapen mutants) within the digs of biblical areas that resemble the cro-magnon, yet areas are uncovered that are ALL cro-magnan. It is evolution.
Have you ever been to Hawaii? All those beautiful islands are the result of volcanic action. God created those islands because He set in motion the volcanic action that 'day' in time whenever He chose to do it and that action is still going on. There is presently a new island starting to form near the big island.
I'll ask a question of strict creationists here. How much elevation would you estimate to be added to the big island of Hawaii in one year? i inch? one foot? one yard? One what?
I'll ask another serious question of strict creationists..are you really serious?
Justme
Upvote
0
Justme said:
There is a huge difference between variation and evolution. Variation as great as it can be will never lead to a new species. The same bones, bone structure, organs and organ structure are present in weenie dogs and great danes. They are both still dogs. Evolution says new species will originate from other species. As long as this theory has been around, there is still no proof. I've never seen it and my granddad never saw it. It does not happen. Never has, never will. If you can proove it I know where you can get $250,000.
Upvote
0
Hi Mirror,
Boy this took me on an interesting trip.
Here's a link that don't look good for this Gentry fella who is a creatist from down south somewhere.
I don't know diddly about radiohalos and I guessing you don't either, but it just may be this Gentry fella might be snowing us a bit too.
The ORNL does some work for the US gov't, NASA and the like....NASA isn't in to a 6000 year old earth...forget it.
Justme
Boy this took me on an interesting trip.
First, I agree that God is responsible for everything, biblically speaking, but you got problems with the rest.
Here's a link that don't look good for this Gentry fella who is a creatist from down south somewhere.
I found tons of testemonies to this guy and kept coming to dead ends at the Oak Ridge Lab. First, he has only a honourary doctorate and he was a 'guest reasearcher' at ORNL. He did publish in some scientific papers, but he had some censored in the past as well.
I don't know diddly about radiohalos and I guessing you don't either, but it just may be this Gentry fella might be snowing us a bit too.
The ORNL does some work for the US gov't, NASA and the like....NASA isn't in to a 6000 year old earth...forget it.
Justme
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
