• 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.

The Fossil Record- As God Would Have Made It Through Time

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,209
10,097
✟282,166.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
One more thing, why does the idea of creation by a loving God scare so many people? Thinking it is not true is no different in that I can live from conception to the grave embracing a loving God and a sacrificing Son and an ever present Holy Spirit and not one thing has changed in my life. I would have lived and loved and learned and at the edge of my grave will be staring into the same hole. Meanwhile, my love for my fellow man would still be relevant to all that I did and all that I cared for and left behind. (P.S., the idea of the lightening bolt hitting the primordial ooze to kick-start a living critter is exactly how it was once explained.)
Hi MarineImaging. I want to reply to your earlier post, but got sidetracked. I'll get to it later. In the meantime:

I don't think I have run across anyone who has declared they are scared of the idea of Creation by a loving God. Now, I grant you it is not something I specifically going around asking, so many of the people I've met may, indeed, be scared by such a notion - I just haven't been told about it.

I hope you will agree, that one can form an idea of a person's worldview through conversation. In some such conversations the answer to the unasked question (Are you afraid of Creation....) emerges quite naturally. I've lived and worked on four of the world's continents, during the better part of fifty years, interfacing with a diversity of people, with diverse views. I simply have never encountered such a view as you describe. What make you think it is the case? Have many people actually told you this, or are you rationalising their rejection of the concept?

P.S. :)))Whoever told you that about the lightning strike was oversimplifying to the point of talking nonsense. I shall note, however, that s/he may have misinterpreted a brief remark by Charles Darwin.
You will likely have been told that the origin of life (abiogenesis) is quite distinct from evolution. Darwin dealt with the latter and not the former, with one exception. In a letter to his friend Joseph Hooker he wrote:
"But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity etcetera present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes . . "
The electricity may be interpreted as lightning, but note that Darwin, in what he makes clear is only a speculation on his part, is talking about this setting generating a protein, not a 'living critter'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

marineimaging

Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
Jul 14, 2014
1,447
1,223
Ward, Colorado
Visit site
✟97,707.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Respecting the others right to have and hold our own beliefs and to live in harmony is not admission that the other might just be right. It is simply recognizing each human the right to exist.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

tas8831

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2017
5,611
3,999
56
Northeast
✟101,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The following post is why we can be sure creationists like OWG are not serious people. All this work, dismissed by the creationist because it damaged his unwarranted beliefs. Sad.
LOL!!

Really?

You implied you know about Gray's anatomy, right?

By the way - I ALREADY provided you with a source, but you probably just didn't bother to read it. Creationists are like that - they don't actually want to know how little they know.


So, since you think Google U makes you the expert you pretend to be, I found these in a couple of minutes:

The Neural Basis of Speech and Language (this is the one I linked for you before and you clearly ignored or more likely could not understand)
http://samples.jbpub.com/9781449652678/74738_CH02_FINAL.pdf


Vagus Nerve
http://www.caam.rice.edu/~cox/wrap/vagusnerve.pdf

Why, even Wiki:
General visceral afferent fibers - Wikipedia


From here:


General visceral afferent fibers


The general visceral afferent fibers (GVA) conduct sensory impulses (usually pain or reflex sensations) from the internal organs, glands, and blood vessels to the central nervous system.[1] They are considered to be part of the autonomic nervous system. However, unlike the efferent fibers of the autonomic nervous system, the afferent fibers are not classified as either sympathetic or parasympathetic.[2]

GVA fibers create referred pain by activating general somatic afferent fibers where the two meet in the posterior grey column.

The cranial nerves that contain GVA fibers include the facial nerve (CN VII), the glossopharyngeal nerve (CN IX), and the vagus nerve (CN X).[3]

Generally, they are insensitive to cutting, crushing or burning, excessive tension in smooth muscle and some pathological conditions produce visceral pain (referred pain).[4]

Pathway
Abdomen

In the abdomen, general visceral afferent fibers usually accompany sympathetic efferent fibers. This means that a signal traveling in an afferent fiber will begin at sensory receptors in the afferent fiber's target organ, travel up to the ganglion where the sympathetic efferent fiber synapses, continue back along a splanchnic nerve from the ganglion into the sympathetic trunk, move into a ventral ramus via a white ramus communicans, and finally move into the mixed spinal nerve between the division of the rami and the division of the roots of the spinal nerve. The GVA pathway then diverges from the sympathetic efferent pathway, which follows the ventral root into the spinal column, by following the dorsal root into the dorsal root ganglion, where the cell body of the visceral afferent nerve is located.[5] Finally, the signal continues along the dorsal root from the dorsal root ganglion to a region of gray matter in the dorsal horn of the spinal column where it is transmitted via a synapse to a neuron in the central nervous system.[2]

The only GVA nerves in the abdomen that do not follow the above pathway are those that innervate structures in the distal half of the sigmoid colon and the rectum. These afferent fibers, instead, follow the path of parasympathetic efferent fibers back to the vertebral column, where the afferent fibers enter the S2-S4 sensory (dorsal root) ganglia followed by the spinal cord.[5]
Pelvis

The course of GVA fibers from organs in the pelvis, in general, depends on the organ's position relative to the pelvic pain line. An organ, or part of an organ, in the pelvis is said to be "above the pelvic pain line" if it is in contact with the peritoneum, except in the case of the large intestine, where the pelvic pain line is said to be located in the middle of the sigmoid colon.[6] GVA fibers from structures above the pain line follow the course of the sympathetic efferent fibers, and GVA fibers from structures below the pain line follow the course of the parasympathetic efferents.[6] Pain from the latter fibers is less likely to be consciously experienced.[6]


References

Moore, Keith; Anne Agur (2007). Essential Clinical Anatomy, Third Edition. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. p. 635. ISBN 0-7817-6274-X.
Moore, Keith; Anne Agur (2007). Essential Clinical Anatomy, Third Edition. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. pp. 34–35. ISBN 0-7817-6274-X.
Mehta, Samir et al. Step-Up: A High-Yield, Systems-Based Review for the USMLE Step 1. Baltimore, MD: LWW, 2003.
Susan,, Standring,. Gray's anatomy : the anatomical basis of clinical practice. ISBN 9780702052309. OCLC 920806541.
Moore, K.L., & Agur, A.M. (2007). Essential Clinical Anatomy: Third Edition. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 180. ISBN 978-0-7817-6274-8
Moore, Keith; Anne Agur (2007). Essential Clinical Anatomy, Third Edition. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. p. 220. ISBN 0-7817-6274-X.​


Same source, on the special visceral afferent fibers - uh uh! this one actually mentions the larynx! Maybe this will be my Waterloo, and will provide evidence for the creationist's anatomical assertions?

Special visceral afferent fibers (SVA) are the afferent fibers that develop in association with the gastrointestinal tract.[1] They carry the special senses of smell (olfaction) and taste (gustation). The cranial nerves containing SVA fibers are the olfactory nerve (I), the facial nerve (VII), the glossopharyngeal nerve (IX), trigeminal nerve (V) and the vagus nerve (X). The facial nerve receives taste from the anterior two-thirds of the tongue; the glossopharyngeal from the posterior third. SVA fibers in the vagus originate in the larynx and pharynx.[2] The sensory processes, using their primary cell bodies from the inferior ganglion, send projections to the medulla, from which they travel in the tractus solitarius, later terminating at the rostral nucleus solitarius.[3]​


Nope. Just more evidence that the creationist is out of his depth and that his claim of studying anatomy was a farce.

And wiki again on the RLN:

Recurrent laryngeal nerve - Wikipedia


Now please provide an actual source that shows that motor impulses for vocalizations can be produced anywhere other than the Nucleus ambiguus (which in turn receives inputs from the motor speech area).

Surely you know what that is, what with your keen grasp of the relevant anatomy, right?


Of course, you would have had to understand anatomy enough to know what to search for (e.g., vagus nerve, visceral afferents, etc.) which you obviously do not (and remember that according to you, if something is obvious it must be so). This is why your keyword search technique has, every time I have seen you employ it thus far, ended up making you look foolish for linking to articles that actually undermine your position.


Funny - note that I was easily able to provide sources that actually do support my position, yet the creationist cannot seem to be able to do it ever.


PREDICTION - this will be responded to with first a one or two liner blow off, probably bringing up some ancillary subject, and perhaps later with a tangential link to a creationist essay.

Bets?
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
One more thing, why does the idea of creation by a loving God scare so many people? Thinking it is not true is no different in that I can live from conception to the grave embracing a loving God and a sacrificing Son and an ever present Holy Spirit and not one thing has changed in my life. I would have lived and loved and learned and at the edge of my grave will be staring into the same hole. Meanwhile, my love for my fellow man would still be relevant to all that I did and all that I cared for and left behind. (P.S., the idea of the lightening bolt hitting the primordial ooze to kick-start a living critter is exactly how it was once explained.)
It doesn't scare me. Creationists scare me.
 
Upvote 0