Top Ten Problems with Darwinian Evolution

[Justatruthseeker]

Then why don't we find doves and ravens in much deeper sediment, say with the T. rex fossils? Why don't we find them with trilobites? Why can't we find a single modern bird fossil under rock that dates to 200 million years old?

Because you are assuming incorrectly that God created the world 6,000 years ago. God created man and the animals with him about 6,000 years ago, the Earth long, long, long before that. As is evident there have been many mass extinctions, and many creations of all new life during those periods.

Comet, meteor, some other event? The Bible tells us that the Earth became desolate and waste, and darkness covered the surface of the deep. Clearly the last global destruction that killed the dinosaur. Then God made man and the animals with us, which is why except for a few crocodile, shark, etc. all life existing with mankind can not be traced further back than mankind.

The previous creations did not entail anything worth noting, but man was given something the others were not. The ability to reason, think, dream, imagine, to comprehend our creator.

 

[AV1611VET]

Anyway, if they slipped on board prior to the flood, how does that fit with God wiping out* all life with the flood except what Noah took on the ark?

It fits perfectly, why?

A dove on the Ark = a dove who lived through the Flood.

A raven on the Ark = a raven who lived through the Flood.

Had 15 more people boarded the Ark, 15 more people would have survived the Flood.

 

[kellhus]

It has no indication that God said it to him. He is just stating things.

Highlight the words that say it is direct from God.

The whole passage implies it. There is no need to directly state it. This is just a reading comprehension failure on your part.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

What hypothesis? Raven and Doves are the bird kind that can fly.

I am not about to try to break up all the different animals into kinds. Even experts have trouble with categorizing species.

Why, did he not take more than one pair of humans? kinda blows your theory our of the water doesn't it. More than one pair of sheep, as some were to be used, like doves, for sacrifice and food. It was customary to offer doves back then.

I mean come on people, If you are going to try to argue against the Bible at least learn the customs of the time and half of these questions will resolve themselves.

Sorry Eternal, quoted yours by accident, was meant for the one that thought to challenge on such a flimsy ground.

 

[EternalDragon]

Then why don't we find doves and ravens in much deeper sediment, say with the T. rex fossils? Why don't we find them with trilobites? Why can't we find a single modern bird fossil under rock that dates to 200 million years old?

Trilobites are in the ocean and would die first in a world wide flood as well as get buried first. Trilobites can't fly or run up on land.

My question is, why can't you figure that simple logical puzzle out for yourself?

Or why are the trilobites and all other fossils found, fully formed, complex and complete?

 

[EternalDragon]

The whole passage implies it. There is no need to directly state it. This is just a reading comprehension failure on your part.

So now it implies it and does not directly state it, like the Bible does?

I don't think it is me that has the reading comprehension failure.

 

[Loudmouth]

Trilobites are in the ocean and would die first in a world wide flood as well as get buried first.

Shore birds would get buried with them. Where are they?

Also, you are claiming that marine fossils came onto land because of flooding, so why don't we see terrestrial and marine fossils all mixed together?

My question is, why can't you figure that simple logical puzzle out for yourself?

I already have. There was no recent global flood.

Or why are the trilobites and all other fossils found, fully formed, complex and complete?

Because that is what evolution produces.

 

[kellhus]

So now it implies it and does not directly state it, like the Bible does?

If you go on further in the passage, it does. Seems like your claim to have read the Koran yourself isn't exactly true.

I don't think it is me that has the reading comprehension failure.

Your inability to grasp subtext in written English isn't my fault.

 

[Split Rock]

Trilobites are in the ocean and would die first in a world wide flood as well as get buried first. Trilobites can't fly or run up on land.

My question is, why can't you figure that simple logical puzzle out for yourself?

Or why are the trilobites and all other fossils found, fully formed, complex and complete?

Well of course, afterall, the trilobites (who lived in the water) would be the first to drown! LOL

I love the "run up the hills" argument too. I suppose sloths were really fast back then, outrunning those Velociraptors to the top of the hill. "I don't have to outrun the flood waters, I just have to ourrun you!"

 

[Skaloop]

It fits perfectly, why?

A dove on the Ark = a dove who lived through the Flood.

A raven on the Ark = a raven who lived through the Flood.

Had 15 more people boarded the Ark, 15 more people would have survived the Flood.

But Noah didn't take them on the ark in that case, the raven and dove just showed up. Which would mean at least two extra animals on board, ignoring the possibility of who knows how many other animals that could have snuck on.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

That simply isn't true. There is plenty of "increase" in biology through evolution. Antibiotic resistance, resistant forms of tuberculosis, nylonase bacteria, Lenski's E. coli metabolizing citrate...

Yes, we are aware that kinds can adapt to their environment. But those resistant forms of tuberculosis are still the same bacteria they were before, terbuculosis bacteria, not a whole new kind. Funny how that works huh?

 

[kellhus]

Yes, we are aware that kinds can adapt to their environment.

Genetic analysis shows it isn't adaptation. Nice try.

But those resistant forms of tuberculosis are still the same bacteria they were before, terbuculosis bacteria, not a whole new kind. Funny how that works huh?

This is meaningless until you can tell us what a kind is.

 

[EternalDragon]

Also, you are claiming that marine fossils came onto land because of flooding, so why don't we see terrestrial and marine fossils all mixed together?

I do not believe for one minute that all the fossils are in a nice, orderly fashion as depicted in clever drawings.

I asked for evidence for that in another thread and no one could produce even one shred.

Here is a marine fossil that was found in Iraq, that was laying out on a mule track, being used as a stepping stone. Not buried in many layers of sediment..

Marine Reptile Fossil Found In Iraq Shows Prehistoric Sea Creature's Unlikely Survival

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Also, you are claiming that marine fossils came onto land because of flooding, so why don't we see terrestrial and marine fossils all mixed together?

We do, you just don't like to mention them because it doesn't fit your theory.

Dinosaur Fossil 'Wasn't Supposed to Be There'

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Genetic analysis shows it isn't adaptation. Nice try.

Prove to me all cats are not the same kind.

A housecat can mate with a Lynx. A Lynx can mate with a Jaguar. A Jaguar can mate with a Panther. A Panther can mate with a Lion. A Lion can mate with a Tiger. You mean what your genetics tell you is that they are of the exact same kind. You can just not figure out a way yet to get around this fact, so you ignore it and call them different species, when clearly they are anything but. Seems to me you are the one in difficulty, not me. Science proves creation, not evolution. Kind after kind, always has been, always will be.

And you have not one shred of scientific evidence showing otherwise.

This is meaningless until you can tell us what a kind is.

Told you 25 times already. What is a species? What is a Family? What is a Phylum? You have the classification problem, not me.

Species problem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


When you stop calling two cats different species, perhaps then you might figure it out. Until then you will always be confused about how to classify them.

 

[kellhus]

Prove to me all cats are not the same kind.

Fine, since you refuse to tell me what a kind is, I'm going to say a kind is a subfamily. There are multiple subfamilies of cat, such as Felinae and Pantheridae. Therefore, not all cats are of the same kind.

 

[Skaloop]

A housecat can mate with a Lynx. A Lynx can mate with a Jaguar. A Jaguar can mate with a Panther. A Panther can mate with a Lion. A Lion can mate with a Tiger. You mean what your genetics tell you is that they are of the exact same kind. You can just not figure out a way yet to get around this fact, so you ignore it and call them different species, when clearly they are anything but. Seems to me you are the one in difficulty, not me. Science proves creation, not evolution. Kind after kind, always has been, always will be.

First of all, citation needed that a housecat can mate with a lynx, which can mate with a jaguar, which can mate with a panther, which can mate with a lion, which can mate with a tiger. And of course by mate, I mean produce viable, fertile offspring.

Even if you can do that, a housecat cannot mate with a tiger.

 

[TheBeardedDude]

OP not going to address to my rebuttals to the claims?

 

[AV1611VET]

But Noah didn't take them on the ark in that case, the raven and dove just showed up. Which would mean at least two extra animals on board, ignoring the possibility of who knows how many other animals that could have snuck on.

Then what's your question?

 

[Skaloop]

Then what's your question?

Basically, if it was God's plan to kill off all life except for the pairs or sevens of animals He had Noah take on the ark, having a bunch of extra animals sneak on would seem to go against that plan, would it not? It would also create an imbalance in the post-flood population sizes of the various kinds; things like birds (which could fly on board) and small animals like mice (which could sneak on board undetected) would greatly outnumber the larger or less swift animals (such as elephants or sloths) that would not be able to surreptitiously gain access.