Question For The YECers.

[RickG]

No it is not

One of the science forums of the CF.

 

[Davian]

I just made it up.

Every picture of Adam I've seen, shows him coming on the scene as a 20 or 30 year old.
...

They had cameras back then?

 

[bhsmte]

Those who witnessed Jesus resurrection came to understand
what God is capable of doing and accepted the scriptures
they had as correct. Then they wrote about it.

We just have to decide if they were all insane, or not.

They wouldn't be insane if someone simply made the story up.

 

[AV1611VET]

You made the claim. This is a science forum. I am asking for physical evidence. Who is the author of the book of Genesis and how do you verify that author(s).

God is the Author of Genesis.

God lives in me, bearing witness that what I am reading is His words, and guiding me into all Truth (as long as I follow).

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

 

[AV1611VET]

They had cameras back then?

We have something better than a camera: the Bible.

 

[RickG]

God is the Author of Genesis.

God lives in me, bearing witness that what I am reading is His words, and guiding me into all Truth (as long as I follow).

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

That fine, now where is the evidence.

 

[Davian]

We have something better than a camera: the Bible.

Better to have a translated, hand-copied, unevidenced, subject-to-interpretation story, where the originals are lost to time, than an image of the actual event.

 

[justlookinla]

Better to have a translated, hand-copied, unevidenced, subject-to-interpretation story, where the originals are lost to time, than an image of the actual event.

Anyone have an image of the creation of the first life form?

 

[RickG]

Anyone have an image of the creation of the first life form?

Cyanobacteria, 3.5 Ga

Glad to be of help.

 

[justlookinla]

Cyanobacteria, 3.5 Ga

Glad to be of help.

I think you misread the question. The question was, anyone have an image of the creation of the first life form? The question wasn't about identifying the first life form.

Nevertheless, you probably need to go over to this site and correct the guesses and suppositions concerning the first life form...

"So what were the first living things and when did they appear? Studies of genetic material indicate that a living group of single-celled organisms called Archaea may share many features with early life on Earth. Many Archaea now live in hot springs, deep-sea vents, saline water, and other harsh environments. If the first organisms resembled modern Archaea, they also may have lived in such places, but direct evidence for early life is controversial because it is difficult to distinguish between complex inorganic structures and simple biological ones in the geologic record."​

Archean : The First Life on Earth

 

[juvenissun]

The point is that Adam could have lived for quite a few years before the 6000 year clock started.

That earth was not this earth.

 

[juvenissun]

Anyone have an image of the creation of the first life form?

 

[RickG]

I think you misread the question. The question was, anyone have an image of the creation of the first life form? The question wasn't about identifying the first life form.

Nevertheless, you probably need to go over to this site and correct the guesses and suppositions concerning the first life form...

"So what were the first living things and when did they appear? Studies of genetic material indicate that a living group of single-celled organisms called Archaea may share many features with early life on Earth. Many Archaea now live in hot springs, deep-sea vents, saline water, and other harsh environments. If the first organisms resembled modern Archaea, they also may have lived in such places, but direct evidence for early life is controversial because it is difficult to distinguish between complex inorganic structures and simple biological ones in the geologic record."​

Archean : The First Life on Earth

I SEE!

And from your link.

The oldest evidence for life may be 3.5-billion-year-old sedimentary structures from Australia that resemble stromatolites.
Stromatolites are commonly formed by the trapping, binding, or precipitating of sediment by colonies of microbes, commonly cyanobacterial archaeans or bacteria.

Hmmm. Did I not mention cyanobacteria dating 3.5 Ga?

 

[justlookinla]

I SEE!

And from your link.

The oldest evidence for life may be 3.5-billion-year-old sedimentary structures from Australia that resemble stromatolites.
Stromatolites are commonly formed by the trapping, binding, or precipitating of sediment by colonies of microbes, commonly cyanobacterial archaeans or bacteria.

Hmmm. Did I not mention cyanobacteria dating 3.5 Ga?

From my link...

"could have"
" one possibility"
" may have been"
"If the first organisms"
"may have"
"direct evidence for early life is controversial"
"may be"
"has, however, been questioned"
"supposed Archean stromatolites and the microfossils"
"may have been produced"

I guess that maybe, possibly, could have, questionably settles it!

 

[justlookinla]

That earth was not this earth.

Explain.

 

[Davian]

From my link...

"could have"
" one possibility"
" may have been"
"If the first organisms"
"may have"
"direct evidence for early life is controversial"
"may be"
"has, however, been questioned"
"supposed Archean stromatolites and the microfossils"
"may have been produced"

I guess that maybe, possibly, could have, questionably settles it!

Would you find the same information more convincing if it were declared or asserted as truth? or that it is not open to revision or falsification?

 

[ChetSinger]

,
For the sake of argument, lets say that Adam's creation date was about 6,000 years ago. That doesn't address the issue of the age of the universe.

No, it doesn't. If you're looking to reconcile an old universe with a young earth I suggest investigating the ideas of John Hartnett and Russell Humphreys. Each is a physicist who is also a Christian literalist.

 

[justlookinla]

Would you find the same information more convincing if it were declared or assorted as truth? or that it is not open to revision or falsification?

As I've said all along, guesses and suppositions, guesses and suppositions.

There are many faith-based creationist sects within Scientism.

 

[justlookinla]

No, it doesn't. If you're looking to reconcile an old universe with a young earth I suggest investigating the ideas of John Hartnett and Russell Humphreys. Each is a physicist who is also a Christian literalist.

Never heard of either of them. I'll check it out.

 

[Davian]

As I've said all along, guesses and suppositions, guesses and suppositions.

There are many faith-based creationist sects within Scientism.

You missed the question that was in that post.

Would you find the same information more convincing if it were declared or assorted as truth? or that it is not open to revision or falsification?

Is that not what religion does?