Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recall in High School, years ago, matter only had 3 states: Solid/Liquid/Gas. And the argument used by science was that the Biblical account in Genesis 2:7 was contrary to the physical laws of Nature since the Biblical account of man's creation represented only two of the fundamental states of matter from which God made up the physical body of man. So therefore, there couldn't be any truth to the Biblical account of Genesis. And the ]LORD God formed man of the dustof the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. GENESIS 2:7
And even today, most those who believe in Genesis often cite that all things are possible with God in response to this apparent anomaly . However, in Genesis 1:10, and the Gods called the dry land Earth.and Genesis 2:5; And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
Since the Scriptures clearly holds establishes the precept and in such all things are not possible, including that the physical body living without the spirit, blood and water. In fact all one has to do is ask Jesus.
However, now science considers there to be 4 states of matter; Solid/Liquid/Gas/Plasma [ionized gas]. In such, the gas contains ions giving the gas atoms a net positive or negative electrical charge which gives "life" to the matter. However the term "plasma" is actually a derived from the Latin term, "phasma" or ghost [spirit]. It seems that the Sun is this now considered as being comprised completely of this "plasma", or ionized gas, without any solid matter as previously held.
And while evolutionist often cite that the Bible is just another form of sun worship, who is really worshipping the Sun. So I wonder if they know where the wind comes from and where it goes?
However the term "plasma" is actually a derived from the Latin term, "phasma" or ghost [spirit]. It seems that the Sun is this now considered as being comprised completely of this "plasma", or ionized gas, without any solid matter as previously held.
And while evolutionist often cite that the Bible is just another form of sun worship, who is really worshipping the Sun. So I wonder if they know where the wind comes from and where it goes?
'Evolutionists' do not worship the Sun.
Anyone with even a basic understanding of physics or meteorology would know where wind goes from/to. It moves from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure (differing areas of pressure are due to variable rates of heating).
Anyone with even a basic understanding of physics or meteorology would know where wind goes from/to. It moves from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure (differing areas of pressure are due to variable rates of heating).
Oh, so the wind so it moves randomly according to the areas of hi/low pressure due to the rate of heating? you sure?
Genesis 2-3 is not the only ANE Creation Account in which humans are created from the soil or clay - so this is by no means some unique revelation of science by the author of Genesis 2-3. The author of Genesis is actually making a wordplay on the word for soil: adamah. The adam (human) was taken out of the adamah (soil, ground).
The root that the two words come from can be traced back to a primary meaning of "redness" and "reddish soil", "reddish tilled soil", "reddish clay", etc. This root and its derivatives can be found in various ANE Semitic languages - not just Biblical Hebrew, which is one of the youngest in its language group. So the fact that we have various etymologies of adam (humans) from the adamah (ground) makes perfect sense, from a wordplay perspective. It also helps set up why humans are buried in the ground - because that's where they came from, according to the old Creation stories.
Does this mean that all the ANE peoples had some sort of scientific enlightenment concerning DNA? Of course not. Its just like the stories of "why the Bear lost his tail" and "why the snake has no legs" or "why the snake sheds his skin". They explain the way "things are" through entertaining stories.
And while evolutionist often cite that the Bible is just another form of sun worship, who is really worshipping the Sun. So I wonder if they know where the wind comes from and where it goes?
Where the wind "comes from and then where it goes"???
..and yet again it springeth eternal from it's usual wondrous source, The Kiddy's Official BS Chapter on Purposeful Scientific Misunderstandings.
But still... let's try. After all, The SM was not "created" in one day, now was it? And... "If it saves the inquisitive mind of just one child..." etc., Yada-yada, Poofy-piffy... Bumph-Oh Bimph-Oh...] it'll be well worth it!
Meantime, please... do point out just one instance where "evolutionists often cite that the bible is just another form of sun worship." Frankly, I'd like to see even one such blurt from us! But at least I'm asking nicely!
And then go on to essplayn, Luthee to all of us gathered at you knee... the critical inter-relationship between observable and documented global organism diversity through natural and retained [via: "biochemically memorized" ]DNA mutations ]and.. uhmmm... what was it again?
Oh yeah: weather. As in: the behavior of air masses when subjected to regional or continental pressure patterns. Or... perhaps that's all just God's fall season allergies? His sneezing? I wonder why He missed out on the design of early anti-histamines? Where was or is His drooling and dripping compassion?
Also....asked but never answered: please provide just one or two basic points of defined Evolution soz we know you have any real idea of how it works!
No? 'Course not!
Well... darn it: Now I have to add to your mandatory homework reading list to include an intro text on climatology.
1. Biology (covers sell-established Evolution)
2. Geology (covers basic & documented sediment and geo-column formation, easily shown to be annual & countable [spores, wind- animal dropping and water-spread seed heads, dead leaf-drops, fish skeletons, differences in rock/gravel/mud deposition particle sizes, layers and locations... and so on...)
Now, we have to add No. 3:
3. Basics of Climatology. You know: just so you don't decide that biochemical & genetic Evolution has anythingspecifically to do with the weather!
(Sad Note: Given your demo'd illiteracy, I'm going to predict now that the next text you'll need to read will be on the origins of the cosmos and it's semi-predictable future..)
_______________________________________________
My my... you do exhibit quite a deficit in basic technical knowledge, don't you deadwood? How DOES that feel, deadwood? You've left it all to basic Christian rote-chants?
Amazing. Even the Pope can easily out-distance your understandings. Personally, I'd be downright ashamed to be you! (For a good example of modern and honest forthright thinking, read on!)
However the term "plasma" is actually a derived from the Latin term, "phasma" or ghost [spirit].
The word "plasma" is derived from the Latin term "phasma" you say? Are you sure? That's not what I find. Where exactly are you getting this nonsense from? Maybe you should do a little research before making such trollish declarations. Here are a couple of short links to help get you started. Nothing is said about "phasma", ghosts or spirits. It is getting close to Halloween though. You seem to be handing out tricks instead of treats. BOO!
Why did you decide to lie about the origin of the word 'plasma'?
Here you go with your insults.
Didn't lie, but sorry but the origin of the term is not so clear cut as you believe, the Greek "term" translates through Latin which does not contain the word plasma.
It appears that the driving motivation of Sir William Crooke was his psychic phenomena investigation who used the term "radiant matter" coined by another scientist to describe what he called phasma. The reason cited was that what he considered it "so distinct are these phenomena from anything which occurs in air or gas at ordinary tension, that we are led to assume that we are here brought face to face with matter in a fourth state or condition, a condition as far removed from the state of gas as a gas is from a liquid."
The term plasma was made Jan Evangelista Purkynˇe to designate the reminiscent translucid liquid that remains after completely removing the blood from all the corpuscles.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All together now: let's close our minds in union!
)
