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.
No argument there, Aman.Looks like the new poster hasn't learned how to communicate effectively and his scientific "buddies" have ignored him.
So true.Even if someone were raised from the dead, you wouldn't believe. Would you?
Doesn't change the fact the energy release would have vaporized the atmosphere. The Ark must have been a space ship.
No argument there, Aman.
Remember verysincere that used to stomp around here yelling at us in capital letters?
This is the problem with creationist beliefs; there is no way to independently validate them.
That statement just shows your denial of facts....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.livescience.com/53841-how-know-dogs-are-same-species.html
Agreed, what you see in nature accelerated through man’s interference.... without man instead of 200+ variations of the SAME species, we would only have 6 or 7 as found in nature when man doesn’t interfere. Your arguments are moot.
Says the man that thinks wolves and poodles are separate species.....
Says the man trying to avoid the problems....
But you are correct, it is funny how there are no recent fossils....... or any even undergoing fossilization..... even small local floods fail to produce them, it takes a catastrophic sized event....:
Some 3.8 billion years worth of evolution.I'd like to know how we got here from the supposed 'simple' organisms that sprang into existence out of the blue.
Funny.
I don't see a challenge in there anywhere.
And I have more challenge threads than you have posts.
Except science has already shown fossilization only occurs after rapid burial so as to prevent rapid decay. So we find right off the bat a false scenario......
https://www.livescience.com/37781-how-do-fossils-form-rocks.html
the conditions where fossilization is ideal occurs through rapid burial in sediments. You know, floods.......
And entire mountain ranges which were once ocean floor.....
Again we find observations do not match your scenaripo.
http://prehistoricflorida.org/131-2/
"the remains of ancient land and sea animals are often mixed together, making it difficult to be sure where animals lived and at what time."
Of course they blame it on the sea reworking the sediments, but naturally failing to weather the fossils
but you were just shown we do. And again, your scenario of them dying then magically fossilizing without first decaying without rapid burial has already been shown to be false. Not a single scientists believes fossilization occurs without immediate and rapid burial in sediments......
Hmm, and yet they are using the excuse that the rock sedimentary layers were reworked to explain exactly what you say didn't happen. I am glad to see you reject their silly excuse.
"Since the sea rose and receded from Florida many times and sediments were reworked each time, the remains of ancient land and sea animals are often mixed together, making it difficult to be sure where animals lived and at what time. Typically, however, the oldest land animals are found in higher elevations in the northern third of the state and along the central ridge, but the creatures of Florida’s last two million years – the Pleistocene animals – are found throughout Florida’s strata."
They are found mixed together all over, you just don't generally hear about it because it tends to weaken the theory of immense time instead of one large catastrophe..... something they prefer not to mention.....
If you are going to challenge flood theory, and all of science which insists animals were buried in sediments rapidly in order to fossilize... please at least understand the theory first..
[...] But dont be fooled by young earthers. The fossil record strongly supports the theory of evolution. But of course nothing in science is perfect, its always an ongoing practice of research and discovery
I'd like to know how we got here from the supposed 'simple' organisms that sprang into existence out of the blue.
But you are correct, it is funny how there are no recent fossils....... or any even undergoing fossilization..... even small local floods fail to produce them, it takes a catastrophic sized event....:
I'm still waiting on the Dodo bird fossilization info.
Sorry dude but that's off topic here. Here is the challenge:
NOT SO difficult to understand, isn't it.
- we OBSERVE fossils in geological layers. HOW these were formed is irrelevant. They were formed otherwise they would not sit there.
- the fossil record of geological formation A differs demonstrably from the biodiversity found in geological formation B. Example: in the geological formatioins of the Ediacaran we observe the typical Ediacaran biota. Nothing of the Ediacran biota was left after the Ediacaran-Cambrian mass extinction event. Because in none of the thousands post-Ediacaran paleontological site worldwide we literally can't find not even one single specimen of Ediacran fossil. On the other hand, in the Ediacaran we literally won't find not even one single specimen of the following major groups of extant life: arthropods (spiders, insects, crustaceans and the like), fish, plants, amphibians, reptiles, dinosaurs, birds, mammals. The fossils of these major groups of organisms are entirely lacking in the Ediacran formations, not one single specimen in any of the dozens of Ediacaran sites we have worldwide.
- the more distant formation A is situated in the geological from formation B, the larger the differences in biodiversity.
If you want to discuss your own subjects, be my guest and start your own thread. HERE on this thread it's about the 3 points above mentioned.
The problem is both smaller and larger than you illustrate.
The task is to show one single change.
The assumption is that additional changes will form a complete trail of transition.
The challenge is for creationists to show what would prevent small changes
from accumulating to form an endless succession.
The problem for paleontology is that a perfect trail is logically impossible to find.
The problem for creationists is that a perfect void is logically impossible to prove.
Let me put it another way. It's not what I believe but lets say all the old animals existed at once. This plot started as a sea bed so has tons of sea fossils, then it dries up as it moves above sea level. At which point a forest grows, then the land animals that were also in existence at the start wander to their new home.
How do we know from the layers that they came about later rather than wandering in to a new environment?
No argument there, Aman.
Remember verysincere that used to stomp around here yelling at us in capital letters?
Looks like the new poster hasn't learned how to communicate effectively and his scientific "buddies" have ignored him. Reminds me of Trump trying to run the country. It's Amateur Hour, all over again.
All you said is
Fossil a is found in Formation A;
Fossil b is found in Formation B.
No one voiced anything against that observation.
But, no one sees any question about it either.
What is your point?
I could list the recently discovered scientific facts in Genesis but you wouldn't read them. Even if someone were raised from the dead, you wouldn't believe. Would you?
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?