Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

[CabVet]

Why is this happening? This is almost as bad as the person who asked "if we evolved from monkeys, then why aren't we born monkeys, and why can't we speak monkey?" I am not even making it up, someone asked that.

You sound surprised, you shouldn't be.

 

[juvenissun]

It doesn't matter. The bible uses one set. But it wouldn't matter, even if it used more than one. The only way you can make them differing amounts is if you use two INDEPENDENT sets, as in your example.

In your example, the students on the trip IS NOT A SUBSET of the kids in the class.

The students on the trip, COULD be a subset, but then you couldn't use all and every differently, like you tried to. If the students on the trip is a SUBSET of the students in the class, not every student is on the trip, only two-thirds are.

every student (in the trip),
every student (in the class),
every fish (created in Day 5),
every fish (created in Day 6),

How about that? Where is the problem?

 

[juvenissun]

Wrong, since there is no qualifier, "every" means "all". There is no subset without the qualifier.

How do you know? Why is your interpretation correct?

 

[LoricaLady]

No one has presented any evidence for a "Geologic Column" and you should be real honest with yourself and admit there isn't any such thing. You can pick out some random strata somewhere and say "Golly, I think that matches the Devonian period so I'm gonna say I've got evidence." But how can there be a "period" on the GC when the GC is a big fat lie?

And those who say scientists support it, tsk tsk, you oughta do research, you know like a scientist. When you dig a little deep you get the dirty little truth. They admit it's just theoretical. Funny but when I saw it in science books they didn't tell me that.
But if you don't use your own mind well, you're gonna have lot of stuff put into it in this politically correct age of disinformation.

But find me a Geologic Column. Not excuses and untestable, unobservable stories about why it doesn't exist. Fine one. Just one. On the entire planet. While you're looking for it find out the real truth, that the fossils are jumbled.

If you don't show me a picture of the GC I have nothing further to say but you have a lot to learn.

 

[CabVet]

every student (in the trip),
every student (in the class),
every fish (created in Day 5),
every fish (created in Day 6),

How about that? Where is the problem?

The problem is this:

all students (in the trip),
all students (in the class),
all fishes (created in Day 5),
all fishes (created in Day 6),

Here, to make it perfectly clear, the first organisms ever made:

Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Yet, they only appear in the fossil record much later than what is created after them.

 

[juvenissun]

Then tell us what type of fossil order would falsify creationism, and why.

This argument won't work. Creationism includes science and is beyond science and the idea of falsification does not apply. It can not be falsified.

 

[PsychoSarah]

You sound surprised, you shouldn't be.

I thought that they had to be mentally challenged. I still am not convinced they aren't.

 

[CabVet]

It can not be falsified.

And you want it to be taught in the science classroom, great.

 

[PsychoSarah]

This argument won't work. Creationism includes science and is beyond science and the idea of falsification does not apply. It can not be falsified.

Nothing is beyond questioning, as is proven by the fact that people question it.

 

[juvenissun]

And you want it to be taught in the science classroom, great.

Yes. At least provided it as a contrast. It is absolutely worthwhile for an one-hour class. It tells students that science has its limitation.

 

[juvenissun]

Nothing is beyond questioning, as is proven by the fact that people question it.

You can question creationism. But it would always give an answer. There is no falsification on it.

 

[PsychoSarah]

You can question creationism. But it would always give an answer. There is no falsification on it.

Prove it without using religion as the basis for your argument. If it cannot be questioned, then you should be able to scientifically prove it. Or does being beyond science mean literally mean "outside if science" and thus stating that creationism is unscientific?

 

[juvenissun]

The problem is this:

all students (in the trip),
all students (in the class),
all fishes (created in Day 5),
all fishes (created in Day 6),

Here, to make it perfectly clear, the first organisms ever made:

Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Yet, they only appear in the fossil record much later than what is created after them.

What is wrong with that? How many other variables are there to make differences? (I am not sure you understand this sentence).

 

[juvenissun]

Prove it without using religion as the basis for your argument. If it cannot be questioned, then you should be able to scientifically prove it. Or does being beyond science mean literally mean "outside if science" and thus stating that creationism is unscientific?

Nonsense. Shame on you.
Without religion, where does the Creationism come from?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Nonsense. Shame on you.
Without religion, where does the Creationism come from?

Where it comes from originally; an idea from the minds of humanity. However, if creationism were true, then there should be observable evidence to suggest it is true. So many creationists go through a bunch of effort to try to disprove evolution, but I haven't seen many actually try to prove creationism without treating the "flaws" of evolution as evidence that creationism is correct. It is like trying to say that, since 2+2 doesn't equal 5 that it must equal 6. Disproving one theory doesn't prove another, so even if you could 100% prove that evolution, despite all of the evidence that suggests otherwise, is wrong, it wouldn't prove creationism was correct either, because of the possibility that BOTH theories are incorrect.

 

[46AND2]

every student (in the trip),
every student (in the class),
every fish (created in Day 5),
every fish (created in Day 6),

How about that? Where is the problem?

Now plug in all instead of every.

Still means the same thing.

 

[LoricaLady]

Where it comes from originally; an idea from the minds of humanity. However, if creationism were true, then there should be observable evidence to suggest it is true. So many creationists go through a bunch of effort to try to disprove evolution, but I haven't seen many actually try to prove creationism without treating the "flaws" of evolution as evidence that creationism is correct. It is like trying to say that, since 2+2 doesn't equal 5 that it must equal 6. Disproving one theory doesn't prove another, so even if you could 100% prove that evolution, despite all of the evidence that suggests otherwise, is wrong, it wouldn't prove creationism was correct either, because of the possibility that BOTH theories are incorrect.

I do not have time to give you, and then debate, the endless amount of information being presented to show creation is true. Using science. Real science, not just Bible thumping.

Here are some Youtube vids. All I have time for now.

Creation Facts of Life, Thermodynamic Evidence For Creation. Spike Psarris on the Big Bang. Don Patton on Fossils. These are just the tip of the iceberg.
Go seek and find. Dare to actually give a good listen to the other side. You don't even know it exists, that's how little you know about it. Rolling eyes.

That's all I have time for.

 

[Oafman]

No one has presented any evidence for a "Geologic Column" and you should be real honest with yourself and admit there isn't any such thing. You can pick out some random strata somewhere and say "Golly, I think that matches the Devonian period so I'm gonna say I've got evidence." But how can there be a "period" on the GC when the GC is a big fat lie?

And those who say scientists support it, tsk tsk, you oughta do research, you know like a scientist. When you dig a little deep you get the dirty little truth. They admit it's just theoretical. Funny but when I saw it in science books they didn't tell me that.
But if you don't use your own mind well, you're gonna have lot of stuff put into it in this politically correct age of disinformation.

But find me a Geologic Column. Not excuses and untestable, unobservable stories about why it doesn't exist. Fine one. Just one. On the entire planet. While you're looking for it find out the real truth, that the fossils are jumbled.

If you don't show me a picture of the GC I have nothing further to say but you have a lot to learn.

Amusingly, we're approaching the 1000th anniversary of when we first began to understand stratigraphy. You're attempting to deny a millennium of science

 

[PsychoSarah]

I do not have time to give you, and then debate, the endless amount of information being presented to show creation is true. Using science. Real science, not just Bible thumping.

Here are some Youtube vids. All I have time for now.

Creation Facts of Life, Thermodynamic Evidence For Creation. Spike Psarris on the Big Bang. Don Patton on Fossils. These are just the tip of the iceberg.
Go seek and find. Dare to actually give a good listen to the other side. You don't even know it exists, that's how little you know about it. Rolling eyes.

That's all I have time for.

You make assumptions, as if I haven't listened to the so called "other side". These arguments, unfortunately, still do not prove creationism, they only attempt to disprove evolution. And poorly at that.

 

[HitchSlap]

I do not have time to give you, and then debate, the endless amount of information being presented to show creation is true. Using science. Real science, not just Bible thumping.

Here are some Youtube vids. All I have time for now.

Creation Facts of Life, Thermodynamic Evidence For Creation. Spike Psarris on the Big Bang. Don Patton on Fossils. These are just the tip of the iceberg.
Go seek and find. Dare to actually give a good listen to the other side. You don't even know it exists, that's how little you know about it. Rolling eyes.

That's all I have time for.

Creationism is a bust. It's religious pseudoscience woo-woo. Sorry.

Go back to school.