My view on God

not if God created the heavens and the earth with sand already in place....i dont know about you but it is more logical to believe that a supernatural creator made us and the earth than believing we came from a rock which over time morphed into monkies and then now a human....

one other thought, polonium halos, evolution states that the earth was a hot molten mass then it cooled down and rained for a long time which gave us the oceans....now polonium halos have the lifespan of about a few minutes, now if the earth were hot like evolution states these particles would melt away, the halos would have to be decaying in a rock that was already solid, so the earth could have never been a hot molten mass...fossils are a big problem for evolution too, they dont have any fossils of animals/humans that were in between their stages of evolution...darwin states that "it is a truly wonderful fact that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other" now this makes no sense no bird has produced a non bird, this is saying that everything has a common ancestor
 
i'm not going to touch on that halo subject because it didn't make too much sense to me.

but saying that god just smacked everything down on the earth and it was that old to begin with doesn't work. carbon dating while isn't perfect, works. it isnt perfect because we can't be sure the exact date the object formed. we can though figure out an average time. you're taking the word of a man written text thousands of years old over the work and research of thousands of brilliant minds. its just such a huge stretch to say the earth is only 6000 years old when scientists have proven that it is at least 4 billion years old

also on your darwin quote, in evolutionary terms he is correct, while we will never ever be able to do this, all things could be broken down further and further to show common ancestry. what do you say, when you sit in biology class and here that a very long time ago birds stemmed off from the reptile kingdom and created their own phylum (or kingdom i forget)?
 
Your way of proving there is a young earth though polonium halos, or "radiohalo" is a flawed example of creationist pseudoscience. It has already been proven wrong through science.

here are some links to scientific research disproving the young earth theory

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/gentry/tiny.htm

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/revised8.htm

http://www.grisda.org/origins/15032.htm

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/default.htm

http://www.answersincreation.org/bookreview/tnb/thousands_not_billions_chapter5.htm

You probably believe in the historical interpretation of Genesis, but im not going to bother to prove all the reasons why thats incompatible with today's science.
 
ummm can you tell me what that means in english, cant understand all the big words, so even having halos today proves evolution false
 
umm i say that is crazy because in the history of man i dont know of any animal producing an animal outside of their own kind, so there is really no evidence for this that i know of, tell me if i am wrong, and that lucy ape stuff has been proven false
 
Ok.

The velociraptor. Up until the last decade, it was believed to be lizard-like, without any fur/feather/etc. But in the last decade, scientists found a FEATHERED velociraptor frozen in the ice of Antarctica. This shows that creatures as different as reptiles and birds COULD have been related at some point. Unless you believe that birds don't have feathers.

Also, continueing with the earth having to be very old; Take fossils. Regardless of whether or not you think they are millions of years old, how do you explain fossils of the same exact animal, found on opposite sides of oceans, if the earth isn't changing and the plates moving about. Geologically, the world today is very much the same as the one Jesus lived in when he formed christianity. Last I checked, animals don't tend to swim across a body of water as large as the Atlantic ocean...

And I'm sure you've heard of Pangea, the supercontinent, which explains why South America and Africa look like they fit together at one time, or why identical fossils exist on opposite sides of oceans.

And if you believe the earth began some 4,000 years prior to Jesus, then I should have you know that it takes a LOT longer than 4,000 years for a tectonic plate to move enough to have a noticeable effect on the landscape. Mountains take hundreds of thousands of years to form, and so does the rest of the world.
 
Evolution states that the colorado river carved out the grand canyon over millions of years, the river enters the canyon at 2800 feet,the rim is 7000-8500 feet.

1)the top is higher than the bottom by over 1 mile

2)the river only runs through the bottom

3)the top is higher than where the river enters the canyon by 4000 feet

4)rivers dont flow uphill

5)there is no delta, where is all the mud that washed out

the colorado river could not have formed the canyon.

Charlie Lyell wrote a book in 1830 called principles of geology, he invented the geologic column, each layer was given a name, and age, and an index fossil. this was done way before carbon dating or potassium argon dating led 208 or led 206, so how did they get the age of the layers.if the geologic column existed it would be a hundred miles thick.the geologic column is based on circular reasoning, they tell how old the layers of the earth are by index fossils, scientists tell how old the dinosaur bones are by which layer they come from.

if the layers of the grand canyon are different ages why are there no erosion marks between the layers?if the layers were there for millions of years wouldnt there be some marks there.

all over the world they find petrified trees standing straight up through multiple rock layers, sometimes there are trees even upside down through rock layers, wouldnt the wood rot away over millions of years...I think the flood of noah did this and here is why, a person was buried and water ran through the coffin, they dug this grave up 14 years later and the arms had rotted off but the middle of the body had petrified, so if there was a worldwide flood the water would have petrified these trees through layers of rock, that cant happen over millions of years
 
exactly what i was gonna say next. take a look at katrina, just having a hurricane and water wash through new orleans it did that much damage, now picture a worldwide flood....water has tremendous power, i can agree on the pangea thing because i cans see how continents could fit together, saying that a worldwide flood happened which i believe it did, could take fossils and distribute them all across the world, which in this case would be across the oceans. now how do you explain this, there is a 90 foot frozen plum tree in siberia with the fruit still on it now a 90 foot plum tree is 70 feet larger than what plum trees grow to be today

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/babinski/ninety_ft_plum_tree.html

there are also remains of a warm weathered hippo in the muck of the frozen tundra...now i have an explanation for this, back in the days of noah people lived to be way older than they do today, people even lived to be 800-900 years old, and you ask how. here is why, back then scientists theorize that there was a layer of water around the atmosphere, now this water acted as a blanket of warmth and protection against the sun and is given the name "the greenhouse effect" this made everything from people to plants extremely huge

http://www.bibleufo.com/humanphenom7.htm

look at 1877 bones found of a person 12 feet tall

http://www.returnofthenephilim.com/GiantBonesDiscoveries.html
 
Do you even know what happens when something becomes petrified? When a tree becomes petrified, all of the organic materials (i.e. everything that would normally "rot" away") are replaced by minerals. this allows it to be preserved without decaying.
 
yes but if there are trees petrified standing up through different rock layers, its not smart to say that they are different ages
 
Oakley_man_540,

You’ve gone over a lot of points in your argument, and I

feel I would like to step in and correct you in a few places where you have

mentioned evolution. I cannot spend the time and effort to teach you an entire

evolutionary biology class, so we’ll have to start with what you’ve brought up

and move from there.

First, cats and dogs. You seem to understand bits and pieces

about how recessive and dominant genes work. However, you seem to believe that DNA

is completely fixed and permanent. It is not. Recessive and dominant expression

of traits is in fact expressed by subtle changes and switching in DNA strands

of parents that combine in an embryo. Furthermore, DNA can be subtly changed by

errors that occur in DNA replication. These errors don’t happen very often, but

(and this is a common trend in evolution theory) because there are billions of

individual DNA strands in your body and that these divisions occur every second

of every day in your body, its inevitable a mutation will occur.

Next, you brought up a point about how no matter how much

switching on or off of these traits occur, you will not get a new species. To

this, you are correct. However, it is the random mutations that can instigate

new traits, and through these coupled with environmental factors, you can get

new species. Over 95% of your DNA is effectively ‘junk’, as in it codes for

nothing. Scientists believe that a lot of this is just leftover traits and

genes that encode them that are now useless to us, as they’ve mutated beyond

what we could use. All this extra DNA also functions as a ‘jumble box’, where a

stray mutation could create a new gene that codes for a new protein. If that protein

is somehow useful, like say, it gives more o2 to blood cells allowing you to

run faster and further, and is beneficial and helps extend your progeny, it

will likely be kept in the gene pool of the species and distributed as the

offspring generate. Species are created in essence by a lot of these mutations.

Its rare, true, and it takes time. That’s why we don’t see it in many lab experiments,

just due to the generation time. We’ve accomplished speciation in simple life

forms with short life spans however, such as bacteria and recently some algae.

Now, on to the coevolution of bacteria and termites. Lets

look at the ancient termite ancestor. Back before it was a termite, assuming

evolution is in play, it was a simple bug with billions of bacteria in its gut,

like most other bugs. Somewhere along the line, a population of these bugs

started living around trees, since more food was available there. Trees make

lignin, which is a starch that is very hard to digest. If the termites-to-be

started eating little bits of this occasionally when they scavenged, or when

food was scarce, the ancient bacteria strain it its stomach that specialized in

lignin digestion ended up with a lot of food it could digest. In these times,

the population of this bacteria would explode and beat out all the other

bacteria in the gut. Naturally, the bacteria that produced no good effects to

the termite-to-be wouldn’t provide an advantage to that individual bug and

increase its offspring’s chance to survive. But if a bacteria produced a

byproduct that was advantageous, say giving the bug more energy, that bug would

have a greater chance to survive and pass on its genes. Now, at some point,

these bugs started living in communities, which also spread the bacteria to all

the members. Eventually, the bugs began eating only wood, and thus, by competitive

exclusion, only the lignin producing bacteria could survive in their guts. By this time of course, the bacteria

themselves had been specialized to fit the environment of the gut the best. That

of course is just a possible scenario to why we see that today – there are many

possible ways to explain co-evolution based on other systems observed in the

natural world and by following observed trends in evolution.

“i know i am asking

questions that is because there is no answer for them... i am asking all the

evolutionists those questions and am looking for an answer/explanation for the

belief that you have....i am not trying to change what you believe but rather proove

that it is false....get back to me when you have an answer for my questions

about termites and the big bang theory”[/i]

Thank you for trying to invalidate my belief, I’m sure you don’t

want to change what I believe in, just prove that I’m completely ignorant and

wrong when it comes to my reasoning and understanding of my world.

Supernovae: Please go read an astronomy book. The universe

is an incredibly large place – this is fact, not theory. There are billions and

billions of stars we can see. And you’re right about supernovae, we haven’t seen

many. Again, I believe you have trouble grasping incredibly large numbers and

the odds at play here. For one, while there are trillions upon trillions of

stars in our universe (check out the Ultra Deep Field scan the Hubble did back

when for proof of this), we can only see a relative few from Earth. Second, we cannot

scan every corner of the sky at every moment – we’re sure to miss a lot of

them. Lastly, stars have lifespans of billions of years, and supernovae are

there and gone in a instant. The sky isn’t

full of them, and I hope I’ve shed some light on how rare an event us seeing

one really is… I don’t know why you brought this up either, it really doesn’t prove

the existence of a higher power either way.

Next comment:

[if !supportLists]1)

[endif]Birth defects are outward expressions of changes

in DNA. If they’re advantageous, they stick around are proliferate through a

population. Small toe loss could be evolution in action

[if !supportLists]2)

[endif]What the heck are you on about. The appendix was

once the caecum, a structure that’s in cows, rats and many other mammals. It is

a sac that holds bacteria that helps break down tough starches. Since humans

stopped eating grasses many millions of years ago, its slowly shrunk down to

make way for other organs. This too is natural selection – humans having a huge

caecum would devote energy to sustaining an organ that isn’t used, while humans

with it absent could devote energy towards other things, and would survive

stresses better. This is the way that structures can de-evolve, so keep it in

mind.

[if !supportLists]3)

[endif]Fire was probably a more recent innovation,

within the last 30,000 years, maybe older. Its not had enough time to effect us

if there was some sort of evolutionary change it instigated.

Continuing on:

[if !supportLists]1)

[endif]You cant watch a water boil. We have seen gas

clusters and nebulae which one day will make stars, but the time it takes for a

start to form is, well, longer than we as a species have existed. Shit takes a

while. Go ask any astronomer.

[if !supportLists]2)

[endif]Why are people more dominant than any other

species? Good question. Its fair to say however, that if say dolphins evolved

before us, might they be asking the same question? Intelligence is a risky endeavor

evolutionarily, and it might just be simple dumb luck that our species ran across

it and it somehow benefited us. Maybe we are special, eh?

Carbon dating is inconsistent…. Oh man. Unless the laws of

physics were DRASTICALLY different just a thousand years ago (and I’m fairly certain

the Earth wasn’t incredibly radioactive during the middle ages, you don’t see

tapestry’s of glowing knights…) Carbon dating is as close as we can get to

discovering the real time period something existed in. Yes, it is limited to

organics for the most part, but it’s a tried, tested and scientifically proven

method of correctly dating a substance. Creationists absolutely hate it simply

because it blows the biggest hole in their argument for a 6,000 year old earth.

And yes, Halo’s are a creationist creation that has no

scientific merit, or evidence supporting. Good try.

Next, you ask about rocks, monkeys and humans. The fact is,

scientists don’t know how life evolved.

We have many ideas of how it could[/i]

have occurred – for example, I’m sure you are familiar with the Miller-Urey

experiments, where amino acids were made from basic elements you would find on

a primordial earth. Recently, under the same conditions, RNA’s were found to

have been made as well. Self replication is quite a feat, but rocks do it.

Crystals for example. My favorite theory at this time is that some amino acid/protein

complex was helped to self replicate through some sort of crystalline silicate

structure. Scientists have made these self assembling and replicating

structures in Germany last year, and it puts many more questions out into the

field of early life.

You may point out here, yet again I might add, that we

cannot ‘make’ life in the lab as of yet. Its true, we cant. We also cannot

produce fusion reactions. But they power our sun. Just because something is out

of humanity’s knowledge doesn’t deny its existence. Based on countless

observations over hundreds of years and around the globe, scientists the world

over have found proof of speciation by evolution. It’s a theory as much as

gravity is a theory. You would be hard pressed to find any respectable

professor in biology to say otherwise.

I know this will not shift your faith in any way shape or

form. However, I hope it has given you answers to some of your questions. They

have been raised by proponents of creationism before, and have been answered by

the scientific community in some way. Scientists are not afraid of simply

saying ‘we don’t know’ when we truly do not have an answer. It does not mean

something is inexplicable or created by some higher being – it simple means

that given our current understanding, we cannot be sure of an answer. We’ll get

back to you on that. For me, I like to base my beliefs of what I see in the

world and the way in which it has been observed to work. Science works in the

same way. I’m sorry that advances in science are butting heads with your system

of belief, but that’s life, and its happened before. But heres my take on that

issue – why do we need a higher power? Humans have split the atom, gone to the

moon, unraveled our structure and delved deep into the cosmos on a quest for

knowledge. Why not just have faith in humanity? Arent we as a species special

and gifted and powerful enough?
 
I can explain all those phenomenon in two words: Plate Tectonics. I would love to hear your answer to this proven phenomenon.
 
that's a dumb way to look at it. why would you want god to put the peices in place and let them evolve into what you are. that's way more interesting than say 'i'm gonna make you like this and you like this, oh i'm gonna give this one a big nose, HAHA!"

why couldn't god have created the whole planet, and it morphed into what is it today. your vision of god seems so bland and unexcited.

i'd rather believe that i'm not of the same species as you. but i am.
 
If you expect to use "bibleufo" as a credible source, can I please have the Easter Bunny testify for my side?
 
are you retarded or something? how canyou read your comments and think you're speaking like an intelligent human being?

2) our appendix doesnt put out an enzyme for raw meats, otherwise we could eat raw meat today

if it has evolved to be none functional then it would not react the same, you know since your appendix isn't from the save man era...unless yu got a transplant.

3) we have no need for fire, wrong....umm cooking on the grill using fire....and that is because we have technology today which limits our need for fire

^ is this an argument to anything or just a statement. if you think acknowledging that we have fire is a valid point to anything your intelligence is far below this conversation.
 
did you just relate sports (a game that is created due to our evolved brains) to actual evolution? kid, just pack up your stuff and go. take a philosophy class and learn. i'm not saying i can prove there is or is not a god, i spent a whole semiest trying to fight for both sides. but you are proving that you can't create any argument for any side and are not worth an opinion until you open a book and train that under developed brain of yours to evolve into on capale of communicating in this thread properly.
 
i took astronomy last summer and i believe we did speak about a nova forming however its just gas right now, it is condensing. cu boulder is a part part of the us space program and i'm pretty sure that my professors were talking about that. i sold my book so i can't look it up. stars don't just form in our lifetimes. that's not how it works.

pop a qustion at you. how do you believe the moon was created?
 
why do you keep saying we came from a rock? we came from a simple organism. rocks aren't simple, they take a shitload of time to form. and if you hate thinking you come from rocks, you're going to hate when you're part of a sedimentary rock. i hate reading your posts. they lack any sort of sense. its not more logical to think god just created us, it's easier to believe because you don't have to explain anything. you jsut accept whats there and say "oh he meant for that too"

and we didn't morph from monkeys, i believe we have a same ancester as monkeys. they went one way, went went another. same is true for neanderthals(sp?).

and yes everything does have a common ancester. small organisms that date a long time back.
 
do you study a lot of animals? is your own personal expirience of observing animals and they're reproduction differences a valid point to this discusssion?
 
Carbon dating does not work. scientists use it but it does not give an accurate date. after about 4 or 5 half lives for carbon containing material it gets so small that you cant measure it, this would work for about 30-50 thousand years maximum, not millions.sounds great but there are assumptions that mess it up,

has the amount of C14 in the atmosphere always been the same?, has it reached equilibrium?equilibrium is estimated to take 30,000 years to reach that point. according to Willard Libby who helped discover carbon dating

he stated that "it would take 30,000 years to reach equilibrium well we know the earth is millions of years old, so we can ignore the equilibrium problem" he obviously contradicts himself and the earths atmosphere has not yet reached equilibrium, so the earth cant be millions of years old, proving my point on a 6-8000 year old earth

in other words say we have a candle burning and i wanna know when was it lit.to do this we would need to do empirical science,

1) measure the candle

2) measure the rate of burn. ex 1/2 in an hour, when was it lit?you dont know unless you make assumptions, how tall was it, has it burned at the same rate

if you find a fossil you can measure the amount of C14 in it and how fast its decaying. ex measuring the candle and the rate of burn. when did the animal die. you dont know unless you make an assumption that the C14 when it was alive is the same as today and assume the rate of decay was the same through history...

the list goes on for problems

-a living snails shell was carbon dated at 27,000 years old, that would mean it would be dead

-one part of a baby frozen mammoth was carbon dated at 40,000 years old and another part 26,000 and the wood immediately around it was 9-10,000 years old

-living pinguins carbon dated at 8,000 years old

-lava from an 1801 hawaiian volcano eruption gave a K-Ar date of 1.6 million years old

-Mt St. Helen's built a new lava dome in 1982, when they dated it, it got numbers from 350,000 to 2.8 million, its not even 30 years old

samples of known age doesn't work but samples of unknown age works?
 
im sorry i read the last two pages and everytime he spoke i was baffeled. anyway im not smrt enough for this conversation. so i'm retiring. i can't believe this has lasted 5 pages, this kid argueing for god is terrible.

i do appreciatea good debate though. if someone wants to step into the god's role this and save this slaughtering that'd be cool. i reading legitiment arguements. good job science team i learned a lot.
 
yep i would like to bring the easter bunny along with the tooth fairy......I never found out about giant skeletons on the internet, i first heard it on tv abc to be exact. now you can say all you want about do you believe everything you see on tv and no i dont but i do believe this one
 
dude, how do you not get it yet? a dog will NEVER give birth to a cat. a dog might however give birth to a new breed of dog or at least one with a new trait whether it's beneficial or not. If it turns out to be beneficial, then through natural selection it would breed because it's new trait allowed it to survive better in it's environment and gain a mating partner. and so it continues until a new species is "born" but i mean born in a very loose sense. not literally "born" from the mother. It takes thousands of years.
 
because evolution states we do... in the textbooks it says earth started as a hot molten mass and then cooled down and formed a Rocky crust, then they say life got started 3 billion years ago, and it rained for millions of years which created oceans, then swirling in the waters of the oceans is a bubbling broth of complex chemicals, however the progress from a complex chemical soup to a living organism is very slow. now you can believe what you want but that is just retarded, and dont call it science because it is not religion vs science..."the first living cells emerged between 4 billion and 3.8 billion years ago. there is no record of this event" Biology the Unity and diversity of life. Wadsworth 1992 p300those are the exact words, now how do they know if there is no record and why do they teach it in schools

here is my point on why i say you believe you came from a rock. evolutionists believe they come from a macro molecule, where does a macro molecule come from?, from the oceans, from the "soup", where did the soup come from?, from the ROCKSwhere it rained on for millions of years. so if you trace it back far enough you come from rocks, sorry but there is no other way to say it but that is stupid
 
yes dogs can give birth to a new breed that is what i believe, i would have to because i believe all dogs came from 2 dogs on noahs ark.
 
umm yea i wouldnt call it a slaughter, all i have got out of this that it takes a long time and we havent been around long enough to see evolution take place.. you can say that forever that does not prove or disprove anything
 
ummm yes your appendix does serve a purpose, it is part of the immune system, and it helps fight off diseases, now you can live without your appendix but it does make you more susceptible to certain diseases. EX. leukemia,Hodgkin's disease,Cancer of the colon and ovaries.....this isnt a proof of evolution, you can still live without both your legs arms and eyes
 
yeah, and even if they did come off of Noah's Arc (you can't even spell something form your own religion correctly....) all of the different species of dogs that spawned from those two dogs prove evolution exists. whether god "created" evolution or not, it exists and it is. that is all.
 
hum, i think we have all proved that we can't disprove god. however you are trying to disprove science. look up what scientific fact is and then think about why you are sitting at your computer wasting you time. instead click my sticky thread and help out.

you're allowed to believe in god, no one is stopping you. but respect a huge culture of people by not treating us like idiots and saying that your view is the correct view. your god is a theory as well. a theory that lacks evidence besides prints from an old book, but at least it's an excepted theory.

religion has it easy, they make things pretty and then people accept it. science breaks things down and makes things not so flattering to the human race and people hate on it. its a shame that members of our society still act how they did when Galileo was trying to prve that the earth rotated around the sun.

soon this kid is going to fight that one.
 
probably not with erosion...i dunno man i'm not a scientist. but it sounds convincing and i saw the model they're tlaking about, it's pretty cool.
 
^ deposition...however the earth was so young when it happened that the crater is probably completely filled in and unnoticle.
 
i wouldnt call evolution science, i call it tax funded religion...its in all the public schools. and i get frustrated when Earnest Haeckel's fake embryo drawings which are a fraud are still in textbooks today....and i also get frustrated every time i hear millions and billions of years....carbon dating is inaccurate when measuring time beyond 30,000 years, which i stated in my post above
 
if something that big hit the earth wouldn't it knock the earth off coarse in its orbit around the sun?, and wouldn't archaeologists find pieces of the moon here on earth
 
you should quit public school then. if they're not teaching you stuff you think is correct, you should goto a christian school.
 
ok i take it you are saying that feathers evolved from scales, this however is totally false, they have totally different genes on the chromosome, a scale is a hard wrinkle on the skin, they attach to the skin very differently, feathers are super complex, however, they are both made from the same protein keratin. but that is as far as it goes...forks and battleships both have iron in them, doesn't prove that they evolved from a tin can
 
ok so far everyone is just argueing and proving themselves stupid. if god is smart lets say just protending he in fact exists, he wouldnt make humans that simple
 
we are made in his image, we are nothing even close to God himself....we dont have the power to create life, and we never will
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top