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.
Why do you think that the Cambrian explosion is a problem? Relying on creationists that always get confuse on how evolution works will never lead you to the right conclusion. Try siting a valid source next time.
No, the most recent generation in that family tree is most certainly different than the ones preceding it. In case you didn't notice, none of the people in that generation have dark skin, even though that trait is present in the first and second generations towards the middle. Furthermore, the frequency of the red haired trait increases dramatically by the last generation, and genetic drift is a component of evolution. Also, the red haired guy with two red haired parents that married a woman with dark skin and black hair has a kid with intermediate traits that has black hair, that also has kids with a person with blonde hair resulting in BROWN HAIRED CHILDREN.Straight out misinformation and falsehoods...
I see a perfectly nested family tree with no evolution at all. Just separate infraspecific taxa mating with other infraspecific taxa creating new infraspecific taxa.
I am neither angry, nor hostile, and you are absolutely teaching contrary to the Scriptures which is what makes you a false teacher. The obvious proof is that I posted specific passages of Scripture and you reject all of it, couching your arguments in the philosophies of man; not in the word of God. Your talk about "irrational hyper literal interpretations" is all smoke and mirrors. The simple fact is that the Bible states God created the heavens and the Earth in six days, and that Adam was formed from the dust of the earth. It is 100% in opposition to evolution and everyone knows it, including you. Yet here you are promoting a theory you know the Creator told us did not happen. That's false teaching. You can't even distort the Bible enough to make it agree with you which is why you don't post Scripture. In fact, you continue to post untruths about Genesis 2 being another creation story and the killing of Goliath's brothers by David's family as if they were confused reports of David and Goliath. I showed you the truth, you continued with the falsehood.Wrong. You are simply having too much fun here breaking the rules, being angry and hostile and personally attacking me. It is a major no-no here to cast aspersion on the character of anyone, as you are doing here by labeling me a false teacher. That is an incredibly arrogant and ignorant remark on your part.
@Hoghead1 I gotta give this one to KWCrazy here. In this thread he's been extremely measured and for the most part reasonable*. You want to see him angry and hostile, get him talking about Benghazi.I am neither angry, nor hostile,
Seriously?Are you kidding me? Have you read Exod. 32? There is absolute nothing that that says Moses brought down a tablet with the creation narrative of Genesis written on it. Where on earth did you get that idea?
In a small church in central Michigan, circa 1978.When and where did this happen?
God listened, and the answer was no. He was ready for her. When your Father calls you, you WILL go home. Death is the penalty for sin, but eternal life is the gift from God. Her pain and suffering are over. If she was a person of strong faith her place in Heaven would make anything on this earth intolerable after a mere glimpse.Shame God could rustle up a few extra dollars for a church but couldn't be bothered to heal a very good friend of mine who died earlier this year from a brain tumour. She was a pillar of her local church for many years and had a very strong faith but I guess God didn't want to listen to prayers to heal her?
If they happened every day they wouldn't be miracles, would they?Miracle stories do not support an all loving God.
I am neither angry, nor hostile, and you are absolutely teaching contrary to the Scriptures which is what makes you a false teacher. The obvious proof is that I posted specific passages of Scripture and you reject all of it, couching your arguments in the philosophies of man; not in the word of God. Your talk about "irrational hyper literal interpretations" is all smoke and mirrors. The simple fact is that the Bible states God created the heavens and the Earth in six days, and that Adam was formed from the dust of the earth. It is 100% in opposition to evolution and everyone knows it, including you. Yet here you are promoting a theory you know the Creator told us did not happen. That's false teaching. You can't even distort the Bible enough to make it agree with you which is why you don't post Scripture. In fact, you continue to post untruths about Genesis 2 being another creation story and the killing of Goliath's brothers by David's family as if they were confused reports of David and Goliath. I showed you the truth, you continued with the falsehood.
If we were on a paranormal site, I get the feeling I would get the same response from people for not believing the personal testimony of ghost sightings or alien abductions.I really can't help a person who's mind is closed to the possibility of miracles happening; especially on a website surrounded by people with first hand experience with them. It's a ponderous and sad thing, indeed, to be so blind. You really need our prayers.
Yes, according to Exod. 20. No, according to Deut. 5. Please read the Bible more carefully. Anyhow, your original claim was that teh tables were quoting the text of Genesis, not just summarizing a point here.Seriously?
Exodus 32 tells of Moses coming down the mountain with the stone tablets, on which were written the Ten Commandments; including the fourth one which states that in six days the Lord made the Heavens and the earth. Red about it in Exodus 20:11. Nobody but you ever suggested it contained the Genesis narrative. That's just another falsehood.
You should educate yourself. Here's a pretty good video to introduce newbies to the cambrian explosion.
In a way, you are probably right. She would like to see me close my cool. Well, she is just going to have to work much harder. I am well used to this sort of hate mail. The problem I have with such posts is that they bore me. HBO, hum, same old, same old, from the fundamentalists. I am looking and hoping for more exciting and challenging posts. When I was doing graduate work in a Presbyterian seminary, I used to get threatening phone calls and letters from fundamentalists denouncing me because I was in seminary, telling me that Jew atheists were running the place, you name it. Jews running a Presbyterian seminary? I don't think so. But I wasn't particularly surprised. Being very dangerously anti-Semitic is a major feature of the Bible Belt.@Hoghead1 I gotta give this one to KWCrazy here. In this thread he's been extremely measured and for the most part reasonable*. You want to see him angry and hostile, get him talking about Benghazi.
*Note: reasonable is not the same thing as right.
"When Charles Darwin wrote "The Origin of Species " in 1859, the sudden appearance of animal fossils at the beginning of the Cambrian was of particular concern to him. It was at odds with his view that the diversification of life on earth through natural selection had required a long period of time. Darwin's theory predicted that the major groups of animals should gradually diverge during evolution. He knew that the sudden appearance of fossils would be used by his opponents as a powerful argument against his theories of descent with modification and natural selection. Consequently, he argued that a long period of time, unrepresented in the fossil record, must have preceded the Cambrian to allow the various major groups of animals to diverge. At that time the strata that we now regard as Cambrian were subsumed within the concept of the Silurian, so Darwin wrote,
'I cannot doubt that all the Silurian trilobites have descended from some one crustacean, which must have lived long before the Silurian age....Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian strata was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian to the present day.....The case must at present remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained'
The Origin of Species, 1859, pp. 313 - 314Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian stratum was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian age to the present day; and that during these vast, yet quite unknown periods of time, the world swarmed with living creatures. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.
- Derek E.G. Briggs, Douglas H. Erwin, & Frederick J. Collier
"The Fossils of the Burgess Shale," 1994, Smithsonian Institution, p.39.
- Darwin, Charles
On the Origin of Species, 1st edition
Harvard Univ. Press, facsimile reprint, 1964, p. 307Note: In Darwin's time, the "Silurian" was the name given the oldest known fossil-bearing strata. "Cambrian" does not occur as an index entry in this edition of the Origin.
http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/cambrian.html
Well, I am always willing to learn something. However, I think I am about "educationed" out at the moment. I have a doctorate in theology and my dissertation addressed God in relationship to an ever-evolving, changing world. I work with a very different view or take on evolution, so the Cambrian problem really isn't an issue to me.You should educate yourself. Here's a pretty good video to introduce newbies to the cambrian explosion.
Actually you evolutionists are wrong again. As usual.
http://www.africaresource.com/rasta...ack-couple-makes-a-white-baby-oguejiofo-annu/
We can only wonder what your point is, since nothing has ever been observed to become anything else but what it started as.
But even knowing a black person never becomes anything but a black person, you want them to magically become Asian.
That's why fish evolved into humans, because they don't jump branches, right? So fish are homo-sapiens????? Or are we sub-species of fish????
Yet fish became mammals.
Hmmm, seems consistency is not really your strong point in evolution theory. So which is it?
Because at some point the Latin infraspecific taxa mated with another infraspecific taxa and made a Spanish infraspecific Taxa.
No. Intelligence has little to do with the physical body.
Is there any study on the correlation between IQ and a particular body part?
"When Charles Darwin wrote "The Origin of Species " in 1859, the sudden appearance of animal fossils at the beginning of the Cambrian was of particular concern to him. It was at odds with his view that the diversification of life on earth through natural selection had required a long period of time. Darwin's theory predicted that the major groups of animals should gradually diverge during evolution. He knew that the sudden appearance of fossils would be used by his opponents as a powerful argument against his theories of descent with modification and natural selection. Consequently, he argued that a long period of time, unrepresented in the fossil record, must have preceded the Cambrian to allow the various major groups of animals to diverge. At that time the strata that we now regard as Cambrian were subsumed within the concept of the Silurian, so Darwin wrote,
'I cannot doubt that all the Silurian trilobites have descended from some one crustacean, which must have lived long before the Silurian age....Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian strata was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian to the present day.....The case must at present remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained'
The Origin of Species, 1859, pp. 313 - 314Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian stratum was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian age to the present day; and that during these vast, yet quite unknown periods of time, the world swarmed with living creatures. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.
- Derek E.G. Briggs, Douglas H. Erwin, & Frederick J. Collier
"The Fossils of the Burgess Shale," 1994, Smithsonian Institution, p.39.
- Darwin, Charles
On the Origin of Species, 1st edition
Harvard Univ. Press, facsimile reprint, 1964, p. 307Note: In Darwin's time, the "Silurian" was the name given the oldest known fossil-bearing strata. "Cambrian" does not occur as an index entry in this edition of the Origin.
http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/cambrian.html
I haven't seen anything from KWCrazy that would qualify as "hate mail" towards you. Especially not in regards to the degree of aggression some people can have on this site. You definitely strongly and persistently disagree, but otherwise, your discussion is quite tame.In a way, you are probably right. She would like to see me close my cool. Well, she is just going to have to work much harder. I am well used to this sort of hate mail. The problem I have with such posts is that they bore me. HBO, hum, same old, same old, from the fundamentalists. I am looking and hoping for more exciting and challenging posts. When I was doing graduate work in a Presbyterian seminary, I used to get threatening phone calls and letters from fundamentalists denouncing me because I was in seminary, telling me that Jew atheists were running the place, you name it. Jews running a Presbyterian seminary? I don't think so. But I wasn't particularly surprised. Being very dangerously anti-Semitic is a major feature of the Bible Belt.
Yes, people without a functioning brain tend to score very low on IQ tests.
There is considerable evidence from medical studies about brain injuries and deformities and how they effect intelligence and cognition.No. Intelligence has little to do with the physical body.
Is there any study on the correlation between IQ and a particular body part?
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?