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.
You do have quite a lot of spectacular reinterpretative ideas about the Bible which quite a lot of other Christians don't agree with, but even a broken clock can be right twice a day, so that you have some passages that others do agree with, isn't going to be a total surprise. What many Christians would disagree with, is that these so called "last days" are here already. We are literally living better now per capita than at any other time in recorded history - longer life, better quality of life, etc. Again, the evidence isn't on your side.
-_- Was I unintentionally typing in Spanish when I told you that no one should disprove anything on the basis of dubious evidence. The reality is that the identity of these fossils as belonging to tetrapods is extremely questionable. Deal with it.the problem here is that even if its a true fossil no one is claiming that evolution is false because of that.
I already explained to you: NO.so what they do in such a case? one possibility is to claim for convergent evolution. means that tetrapod evolved twice.
Which is only possible with early tetrapod evolution because of the fact that the fossil record for that group that far back is very incomplete. The more fossils we have within a range of geological time, the more accurate a picture of events we get. Why aren't you focusing on more recent organisms with more complete fossil records?the second possibility is to push back tetrapod origin. and indeed we have other evidence which point to this possibility:
Rise of the Earliest Tetrapods: An Early Devonian Origin from Marine Environment
"According to our analysis this evolution occurred at about 397–416 MYA during the Early Devonian unlike previously thought"
-_- no, because the fossil record for our species is extremely detailed. That you can't seem to understand that no matter how much I mention the difference in the situations is getting really annoying.so now we see that we can push back human to dinos age without a real problem for evolution.
No. Not for a Precambrian rabbit. I even outlined that not only would evolution be disproven if we found a legitimate Precambrian rabbit fossil, but also our understanding of the environment in that time period (since what is currently understood as the environment of that time could not possibly support the life of a rabbit).and even so they predate these tracks. and by this way you can ignore any fossil.
Unless you actually have a human fossil that old, what's the point?i just show you that even a human with dino fossil can be explain by this way.
You haven't demonstrated that it has ever happened or that anything remotely close has occurred. So why should I consider it possible at all? It's like claiming that humans can flap their arms and fly just on the basis that birds flap their wings and fly, and persistently making that claim without once demonstrating it.again: what is the problem? if a gene can be lost several times why not more few times? there is no real limit for such situation.
and guess what?: "but says that there are other explanations for the identified genes being present in only some branches of the evolutionary tree—a gene that existed in a far-off ancestor could have simply been lost in many relatives other than two seemingly unrelated species, for instance. “
-_- since when do the opinions of 1 microbiologist dictate what is a correct approach when it comes to evaluating evolution? Plus, he never gave a sense of scale or any evidence for that proposition.this is just what i said. see how easy it is to explain anything by evolution?
Why didn't ALL Apes change into Humans? Why didn't they show the traits of modern Humans until 11k years ago? in the same area where the Ark arrived? Why doesn't Science notice the SUDDEN change from foraging creatures to Human agriculture? Is it because such is the Achilles Heel of Godless Evolution? Of course it is?
"Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them" (Book of Common Prayer, p. 236).Question 2 there’s no such thing as the Ark.
Good questions.So where is it? Where did it land? Where is the sediment layer ? Where did the water go and where did it intially come from ?
A fact according to the presuppositions of scientific realism under the current model.Nope, it's done and dusted. Evolution is a fact and scientists of all religions and even of no religion at all have come to a consensus that Evolution is a thing.
All of the evidence available is concordant with Evolution and Evolution is contradicted by none of it.
The so called global flood would have caused the earths surface to heat up enough to melt lead. Any version of the flood. Just because you’re a science denier doesn’t mean I am.Good questions.
1. I believe Noah dismantled it to build his estate.
2. In the mountains of Ararat.
3. I certainly don't have it!
4. I believe the water was siphoned off the earth.
5. It was created on earth, ballooned into space (Genesis 1), and came back to earth to help cause the Flood (Genesis 7).
The so called global flood would have caused the earths surface to heat up enough to melt lead.
Brightmoon said:Any version of the flood.
Brightmoon said:Just because you’re a science denier doesn’t mean I am.
Creationist never take it into consideration that physics doesn’t work in a vacuum.
Brightmoon said:It affects chemistry and visa versa .
Brightmoon said:That heating effect from water vapor forming raindrops is called the heat of condensation.
Brightmoon said:The earth sheds heat at a consistent rate into space .
Brightmoon said:Adding in the ( nonexistent) fountains of the deep only makes this worse.
Brightmoon said:Positing the so called ring of water ( ice ) in space would have prevented the earth from getting sunlight ...
Brightmoon said:... and by falling would have had the similar effect as that asteroid that killed off the dinosaurs
Which is only possible with early tetrapod evolution because of the fact that the fossil record for that group that far back is very incomplete.
-_- no, because the fossil record for our species is extremely detailed. That you can't seem to understand that no matter how much I mention the difference in the situations is getting really annoying.
You haven't demonstrated that it has ever happened or that anything remotely close has occurred.
-_- the fact that these genes can be distinguished from ones that came from common ancestry should be a good indication that they don't present the same as ones that result from common ancestry.
-_- since when do the opinions of 1 microbiologist dictate what is a correct approach when it comes to evaluating evolution? Plus, he never gave a sense of scale or any evidence for that proposition.
Question 1 that’s just stupid.
Question 2 there’s no such thing as the Ark.
question 3 stoop work agriculture is one of the more difficult things that primitive people do without modern tools. Being a hunter gatherer is actually easier. But agriculture allows both cities, and artisans to specialize
You’ve demonstrated repeatedly that you do not understand anything about evolution nor have you shown any desire to learn anything about it.
I can’t deal with deliberate ignorance that thinks it’s wisdom as I’m inclined to think you’re simply a fool.
Where did it land?
Where is the sediment layer ?
Where did the water go and where did it intially come from ?
The so called global flood would have caused the earths surface to heat up enough to melt lead. Any version of the flood. Just because you’re a science denier doesn’t mean I am.
Creationist never take it into consideration that physics doesn’t work in a vacuum. It affects chemistry and visa versa . That heating effect from water vapor forming raindrops is called the heat of condensation. The earth sheds heat at a consistent rate into space . Adding in the ( nonexistent) fountains of the deep only makes this worse. Positing the so called ring of water ( ice ) in space would have prevented the earth from getting sunlight and by falling would have had the similar effect as that asteroid that killed off the dinosaurs
Non avian dinosaurs died out 65 million years before humans existed
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?