The Beginning of Life - Page 4

IROC · IROC's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor
“This may be similar to ‘chewing the cud’ in ruminant mammals.”

But it's not chewing their cud, is it? It might similar, but it's not the same thing. The Bible was incorrect on this "scientific" statement.

Mike

svandamme · svandamme's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor
One of my favorites. Regarding the shape of the earth.

There has been much debate about this in man's history.

Of course it's round. A globe, not flat.

At Isaiah 40:22 this is commented on. "circle of the earth"...

Thousands of years before man could finally provide visible proof looking back at the earth from space.

Popular opinion of the day does not equal truth.

KT

that's a poor example of biblical/scientific fact considering the earth is not a flat circle , but a globe... the difference between 2d and 3d is quite important in science...

sure one could argue that the meant to say globe, but it's more plausible to believe they thought it was actually a 2d circle, with bounderies you could fall off, which was popular belief at the time when they didn't even sail beyond the horizon...

calling this a fact that turned out to be true , is quite the liberal interpretation of that text if you ask me

trekkor · 05-25-2006, 10:08 AM

People will argue about everything...And that's fine.

Quote:

popular belief at the time

This is a key statement!!

People seem to think they know everything. That they have discovered absolute truths.

Man's history shows this not the case.

Quote:

But it's not chewing their cud, is it? It might similar, but it's not the same thing. The Bible was incorrect on this "scientific" statement.

If you meant, the Bible said that rabbits are cows, then...OK.

KT

scottmandue · 05-25-2006, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by IROC
Evolution (the process) is an observable fact. The theory of evolution is how we explain the evolution we see occuring today (and for which there is abundant evidence for evolution that has already occured). Your suggestion is kind of like suggesting that plate tectonics is a construct of the human imagination. Or gravity.

Mike

You are mistaking micro evolution for macro evolution, sure nature is changing all around us however nowhere are animals changing species.

trekkor · 05-25-2006, 10:13 AM

Quote:

calling this a fact that turned out to be true , is quite the liberal interpretation of that text if you ask me

100% of the facts turning out to be true should mean something to you...Whenever man decides he's ready to accept the facts as truth seems...ahem... interesting, too.

KT

svandamme · svandamme's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by scottmandue
You are mistaking micro evolution for macro evolution, sure nature is changing all around us however nowhere are animals changing species.

actually we can observe the changing of our own species, the average height is growing over the years, i think it's like several cm's more then 100 years ago
there's plenty of research on how the human species is evolving

IROC · IROC's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by scottmandue
You are mistaking micro evolution for macro evolution, sure nature is changing all around us however nowhere are animals changing species.

Actually we have observed what you are calling "macro" evolution:

"The origin of new species by evolution has also been observed, both in the laboratory and in the wild. See, for example, (Weinberg, J.R., V.R. Starczak, and D. Jorg, 1992, "Evidence for rapid speciation following a founder event in the laboratory." Evolution 46: 1214-1220). The "Observed Instances of Speciation" FAQ in the talk.origins archives gives several additional examples.

Even without these direct observations, it would be wrong to say that evolution hasn't been observed. Evidence isn't limited to seeing something happen before your eyes. Evolution makes predictions about what we would expect to see in the fossil record, comparative anatomy, genetic sequences, geographical distribution of species, etc., and these predictions have been verified many times over. The number of observations supporting evolution is overwhelming."

From:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#observe

Mike

svandamme · svandamme's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by trekkor
100% of the facts turning out to be true should mean something to you...Whenever man decides he's ready to accept the facts as truth seems...ahem... interesting, too.

KT

no this is not a fact, this is interpretation
a fact is , so and so , at that date, fell off his chair and bumped his head and having some means of verification

not we think he said he bumped his head, but it could also have been his behind.. based on proof that something hit some other object..

if you are in metal shop in school, and it's exam time
teacher tells you to mill a sphere with a radius of 10 cm

and you cut out a 2cm thick circle with a saw...
as you hand it in , you say , i meant to make a sphere, but this is how it did it , great isn't it ?

what score do you think the teacher will give you??

science is not about "i think it was like that"
or , "i think we can assume that's what he meant"

artplumber · 05-25-2006, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scottmandue
You are mistaking micro evolution for macro evolution, sure nature is changing all around us however nowhere are animals changing species.

+1 (and no scientific evolutionalist would disagree that there has not been a documented example in recorded history, Darwinism - the origin of evolution theory, is itself under fire as most now believe that step-wise changes via cosmic radiation induced mutation is most likely the source of change rather than gradual changes/original natural selection theory)

Jim Richards · 05-25-2006, 10:22 AM

most believe that?

trekkor · 05-25-2006, 10:23 AM

The teaching of evolution as absolute truth is a good example of this. ( popular opinion of the day )

People don't want/refuse to believe that The Creator is involved.
It's really about accountabilty, not truth.

Evolution removes accountabilty. "Nothing matters. It was all chance."

See the differance?

Just the fact that the earth happens to be at the right distance from the sun to support life should put you on alert.

Why does the earth stay in it's orbit without causing extreme high/low temperature spikes that would make life impossible?

You tell me...

KT

Jim Richards · 05-25-2006, 10:24 AM

it's atmosphere

svandamme · svandamme's Garage

Scott , i was brought up a catholic, i've read several bibles
it's not that i dont' own one now for quotes that don't work in my real life , that i don't have a clue as to what's in it...
observation that a hare eats it's own crap is hardly ground breaking is it? any farmer these days can tell you the same thing without reading a bible or a scientific journal

trekkor · 05-25-2006, 10:40 AM

Popular opinion of the day once held that the earth was the center of the then known universe.

Oh, how things have changed.

I'll repeat myself, the word "circle" has also been translated as "globe or sphere" when describing the shape of the earth from the Bible book of Isaiah written in 732 BC.

Point is, everyone agrees that the earth is a globe now.
In 732 BC, this was not the case.

It set's a pattern. Statements made in the Bible, no matter how unpopular, turn out to be truth anyway. You can't change this...

KT

trekkor · 05-25-2006, 10:43 AM

Quote:

it's atmosphere

Yeah, what are the chances?

"It just happened"...Hmmmm.

KT

See you later, gotta go get my track tires

Jim Richards · 05-25-2006, 10:43 AM

I translate circle to mean a tuna fish sandwich. Mmmm, I'm hungry.

scottmandue · 05-25-2006, 10:59 AM

What is it they say about arguing on the Internet? Only one thing to do...
PUPPIES!

IROC · IROC's Garage

The theory of evolution is not "under fire". At least not by people who understand it. Sure, you've got your armchair biologists criticizing things they don't know about, but where are the real challenges? The funny thing is that the theory of evolution would totally collapse if only *one* piece of evidence could be found to contradict it. Just one smoking gun. How hard could that be to find? Just *one* thing!

If the theory if so obviously wrong, why can't anyone demonstrate it's flaws? I mean, it must be simple to show where it fails? I guarantee you that huge amounts of fame and notoriety would be heaped onto the guy who proves once and for all that the evil "evolutionists" are wrong. Why doesn't that person come forward if the theory is so obviously flawed? It should be easy, right?

Could it be that it isn't flawed? Could it be that it is actually the best explanation we have for the evidence? Why is it so hard to see that it might actually be true? What's the fear?

Mike

scottmandue · 05-25-2006, 11:03 AM

Mike,
You need to do a little research, there are a lot of good books by real scientist who enumerate the problems with evolution.

That is if you are interested...

Quote:

Originally posted by IROC

Could it be that it isn't flawed? Could it be that it is actually the best explanation we have for the evidence? Why is it so hard to see that it might actually be true? What's the fear?

Mike

Could it be that it is flawed? What is the fear in questioning if it is not?

tcar · 05-25-2006, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by svandamme
actually we can observe the changing of our own species, the average height is growing over the years, i think it's like several cm's more then 100 years ago
there's plenty of research on how the human species is evolving

That's a result of better diet, health and sanitation.

Evolution doesn't happen in 100 years.