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.
Cichlid fishes (from lakes in Africa) have been observed and manipulated to observe the process of evolution. At least one new species has been followed over a 100 year period, and recoerded as developing into a new species.
lmao thanks for correcting my spelling of chickleds ... too friggen funny
Thank you for all the responses but I have a few questions and need clarification on others.
I am curious how you came to this belief? What factors weighed in that lead to this conclusion?
I think I know what you mean but to be clear which theory are you not willing to automatically exclude at the outset?
this is what I have been saying since I joined city data. The problem is not what people believe. The problem is how people believe. I think if we can get that error settled everything else flushes out. Of course most people don't understand what that means so they start throwing fairytales at each other.
I wish the scientific method had another name. I mean at this point it has been so butchered by some of my atheist friends that theist just shut down when they hear the word science.
I believe that God created the Universe and that He created it in order for it to be sustainable for human life.
If God exists, there is no logical reason that He would not also create the Universe already in the midst of chronological processes. So the trees God created, if you cut it down after the moment of creation, it would have rings that would indicate a longer existence than it actually is.
this is sort of ok. There is a way to show you have a point about things "looking" as if they have a purpose. Maybe not an "absolute" or "grand" purpose but at least we can show some kind of purpose even if it's just reproduction. There is a logical way to claim "something" is more logical than "no-nothing".
Now for your second part here. "god made it look like he used a "chronological" but he really used "poof there it is." I mean say that ten times to yourself. think about that real hard.
1) Why didn't he use "chronological" order if it looks like he did?
2) why if he made it look like "chronological" does it go against the bible to claim "chronological"
3) the bible doesn't say how, so the only logical conclusion is to use the "shown by god himself" chronological order. Why is that wrong?
You don't need to waste your time. Matador and I have been talking past each other and parsing different aspects. I hope my last post clarified the disconnect.
yeah I know. You both have some understanding. I know I really can mess things up when I have some understanding. Your post came across different at first.
The bottom line is there are no "facts". only observations made in the past that are use to predict the future. We can't be 100% certain that some un foreseen event will not make the prediction look wrong.
I don't care how we word it. That's the bottom line. Also, remember you are geologist. You work in a different set of conditions than I work in. So your use of the data is kind of set in stone. So facts looks more solid than it is.
Why cannot the One Who fed over 5,000 on 5 cakes of bread and 2 fishes by miraculously multiplying the bread and fish also form Adam of the soil of the ground?
Please inform us why it is He cannot do so?
let's see, if your first claim is right then ... wait, first claim is unsupported. let me help you my son.
so one unsupported fact is used to support another? really? 'if" he went "poof there is some fish" he can go "poof there is some people". really?
how about logically describing a story on how people shared some food in a time of need. And think how a great teacher would put it in a lesson to show more than just "sharing food".
I actually think that Jesus was showing them "god" has given you all the knowledge you need. That is, if you share it properly you can describe what you don't know with what you do know.
The food is knowledge and the hunger is ignorance. back to the cross we go, the whole of the bible summed up. hash-tag: WOW, a monkey thinks it "not a monkey'.
let's see, if your first claim is right then ... wait, first claim is unsupported. let me help you my son.
so one unsupported fact is used to support another? really? 'if" he went "poof there is some fish" he can go "poof there is some people". really?
how about logically describing a story on how people shared some food in a time of need. And think how a great teacher would put it in a lesson to show more than just "sharing food".
I actually think that Jesus was showing them "god" has given you all the knowledge you need. That is, if you share it properly you can describe what you don't know with what you do know.
The food is knowledge and the hunger is ignorance. back to the cross we go, the whole of the bible summed up. hash-tag: WOW, a monkey thinks it "not a monkey'.
It wasn't just a cute little story about sharing some food.
Have you not read concerning Elijah and how the food was multiplied for this poor woman?
1 Kings 17:10-16 And he rises, and goes to Zarephath, and comes in unto the opening of the city, and lo
there, a widow woman gathering sticks, and he calls unto her, and said, `Bring, I pray you, to me, a little
water in a vessel, and I drink.. (11) And she goes to bring [it], and he calls unto her and said, `Bring, I
pray you, to me a morsel of bread in your hand.. (12) And she said, `Yahweh your Elohim lives, I have
not a cake, but the fulness of the hand of meal in a pitcher, and a little oil in a dish; and lo, I am
gathering two sticks, and have gone in and prepared it for myself, and for my son, and we have eaten
it--and died.. (13) And Elijah said unto her, `Fear not, go, do according to your word, only make for me
thence a little cake, in the first place, and you have brought out to me; and for you and for your son
make--last;" (14) for thus said Yahweh, Elohim of Israel, The pitcher of meal is not consumed, and the
dish of oil is not lacking, till the day of Yahweh's giving a shower on the face of the ground.. (15) And
she goes, and does according to the word of Elijah, and she eats, she and he, and her household--
days;" (16) the pitcher of meal was not consumed, and the dish of oil did not lack, according to the word
of Yahweh that He spoke by the hand of Elijah.
And have you not read concerning Elisha the prophet and how the oil for the poor woman was multiplied?
2 Kings 4:1-7 And a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets has cried unto Elisha,
saying, `Your servant, my husband, is dead, and you have known that your servant was fearing Yahweh,
and the lender has come to take my two children to him for servants.. (2) And Elisha said unto her,
`What do I do for you? declare to me, what have you in the house?' and she said, `Your maid-servant
has nothing in the house except a pot of oil.. (3) And he said, `Go, ask for you vessels from without,
from all your neighbors--empty vessels--let [them] not be few;" (4) and you have entered, and shut
the door upon you, and upon your sons, and have poured out into all these vessels, and the full ones
you do remove.. (5) And she goes from him, and shuts the door upon her, and upon her sons; they are
bringing nigh unto her, and she is pouring out, (6) and it comes to pass, at the filling of the vessels,
that she said unto her son, `Bring nigh unto me a vessel more,' and he said unto her, `There is not a
vessel more;' and the oil stays. (7) And she comes and declares to the man of Elohim, and he said,
`Go, sell the oil, and repay your loan; and you [and] your sons do live of the rest.
A greater than Elijah and Elisha, the Lord Jesus Christ, came to Israel and did many mighty miracles.
God does not need to explain to us the physics of how He multiplied the cakes of bread or fish to feed over 5,000 Israelites. Nor does He have to explain to us how He fed the Israelites in the wilderness for 40 years. It is good enough to know He did it.
It wasn't just a cute little story about sharing some food.
Have you not read concerning Elijah and how the food was multiplied for this poor woman?
1 Kings 17:10-16 And he rises, and goes to Zarephath, and comes in unto the opening of the city, and lo
there, a widow woman gathering sticks, and he calls unto her, and said, `Bring, I pray you, to me, a little
water in a vessel, and I drink.. (11) And she goes to bring [it], and he calls unto her and said, `Bring, I
pray you, to me a morsel of bread in your hand.. (12) And she said, `Yahweh your Elohim lives, I have
not a cake, but the fulness of the hand of meal in a pitcher, and a little oil in a dish; and lo, I am
gathering two sticks, and have gone in and prepared it for myself, and for my son, and we have eaten
it--and died.. (13) And Elijah said unto her, `Fear not, go, do according to your word, only make for me
thence a little cake, in the first place, and you have brought out to me; and for you and for your son
make--last;" (14) for thus said Yahweh, Elohim of Israel, The pitcher of meal is not consumed, and the
dish of oil is not lacking, till the day of Yahweh's giving a shower on the face of the ground.. (15) And
she goes, and does according to the word of Elijah, and she eats, she and he, and her household--
days;" (16) the pitcher of meal was not consumed, and the dish of oil did not lack, according to the word
of Yahweh that He spoke by the hand of Elijah.
And have you not read concerning Elisha the prophet and how the oil for the poor woman was multiplied?
2 Kings 4:1-7 And a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets has cried unto Elisha,
saying, `Your servant, my husband, is dead, and you have known that your servant was fearing Yahweh,
and the lender has come to take my two children to him for servants.. (2) And Elisha said unto her,
`What do I do for you? declare to me, what have you in the house?' and she said, `Your maid-servant
has nothing in the house except a pot of oil.. (3) And he said, `Go, ask for you vessels from without,
from all your neighbors--empty vessels--let [them] not be few;" (4) and you have entered, and shut
the door upon you, and upon your sons, and have poured out into all these vessels, and the full ones
you do remove.. (5) And she goes from him, and shuts the door upon her, and upon her sons; they are
bringing nigh unto her, and she is pouring out, (6) and it comes to pass, at the filling of the vessels,
that she said unto her son, `Bring nigh unto me a vessel more,' and he said unto her, `There is not a
vessel more;' and the oil stays. (7) And she comes and declares to the man of Elohim, and he said,
`Go, sell the oil, and repay your loan; and you [and] your sons do live of the rest.
A greater than Elijah and Elisha, the Lord Jesus Christ, came to Israel and did many mighty miracles.
God does not need to explain to us the physics of how He multiplied the cakes of bread or fish to feed over 5,000 Israelites. Nor does He have to explain to us how He fed the Israelites in the wilderness for 40 years. It is good enough to know He did it.
this is not how I form a belief.
I make observations around me then fit/put the book in its proper place. Jesus is a good focal point and he spoke to making use of reason, common sense, along with the use of control to form a solid base for belief. He did not read a book and squish the universe into it.
and you are flat out wrong about how you tell us what god is and is not. It may not be a cute little story but I know it isn't "poof ... have some fish" either. so now what do we do?
God doesn't have to do anything, but he did. You are trying to tell me he did not. You are trying to show me he is not logical. Shame on you. It's all about "ignorance EUB ... it's about eliminating ignorance first. Thats what the bible teaches. "ignorance" here is not bad, it just means we don't know. I am telling you point blank "you not only don't know but you are deceitful. I wouldn't be surprised if you were an atheist just trying this infiltration thing."
I make observations around me then fit/put the book in its proper place. Jesus is a good focal point and he spoke to making use of reason, common sense, along with the use of control to form a solid base for belief. He did not read a book and squish the universe into it.
and you are flat out wrong about how you tell us what god is and is not. It may not be a cute little story but I know it isn't "poof ... have some fish" either. so now what do we do?
God doesn't have to do anything, but he did. You are trying to tell me he did not. You are trying to show me he is not logical. Shame on you. It's all about "ignorance EUB ... it's about eliminating ignorance first. Thats what the bible teaches. "ignorance" here is not bad, it just means we don't know. I am telling you point blank "you not only don't know but you are deceitful. I wouldn't be surprised if you were an atheist just trying this infiltration thing."
The facts are these:
God fed the Israelites for 40 years in the wilderness.
God used Elijah for the miracle of the multiplication of food for that family until the famine was over.
God used Elisha for the miracle of multiplying the oil for that poor woman to pay off her debt so her son would not have to be sold to pay for the debt.
Christ multiplied the loaves of bread and fish to feed over 5,000 and He did it twice.
I think you accusing me of being an atheist is laughable. Please spare me the childish comments.
yeah I know. You both have some understanding. I know I really can mess things up when I have some understanding.
Thanks for being so gracious. Although, I would hope that practicing over 40 years would garner me more than just some passing understanding. That's what keeps me from messing up.
Quote:
Your post came across different at first.
There might have been the assumption that I was speaking in the vernacular. This conflates usages. I'm sorry I wasn't clearer at the beginning of this exercise.
Quote:
The bottom line is there are no "facts". only observations made in the past that are use to predict the future. We can't be 100% certain that some un foreseen event will not make the prediction look wrong.
Absolutely, if we are talking in the vernacular where fact means absolute truth, that's correct. In science, they are merely the testable observations, as opposed to conclusions, or the interpretation of the facts. However, as I explained in great lengths, in the scientific sense, facts are not about absolute certainty, much less the predictions. We will always try to gather more facts - more data, to increase the reliability of the predictions. We can't afford to be wrong too often. I suppose each error can be considered a learning experience, but the tuition is just too high. Those tests on the predictions can be really expensive, on the order of millions.
Quote:
Also, remember you are geologist. You work in a different set of conditions than I work in. So your use of the data is kind of set in stone. So facts looks more solid than it is.
Yes, that is a luxury that is not taken lightly, it is nice to go back and review the observation and it is still able to be observed, without having to recreate it so much. Definitely not as fleeting as observations made in QM. But Geology is not done in a vacuum, it is one of the most encompassing fields, being build on Mathematics } Physics } Chemistry } Biology } Geology. Where "}" signifies a foundational hierarchy. However, it doesn't really matter which field, the method is the same.
Thanks for being so gracious. Although, I would hope that practicing over 40 years would garner me more than just some passing understanding. That's what keeps me from messing up.
There might have been the assumption that I was speaking in the vernacular. This conflates usages. I'm sorry I wasn't clearer at the beginning of this exercise.
Absolutely, if we are talking in the vernacular where fact means absolute truth, that's correct. In science, they are merely the testable observations, as opposed to conclusions, or the interpretation of the facts. However, as I explained in great lengths, in the scientific sense, facts are not about absolute certainty, much less the predictions. We will always try to gather more facts - more data, to increase the reliability of the predictions. We can't afford to be wrong too often. I suppose each error can be considered a learning experience, but the tuition is just too high. Those tests on the predictions can be really expensive, on the order of millions.
Yes, that is a luxury that is not taken lightly, it is nice to go back and review the observation and it is still able to be observed, without having to recreate it so much. Definitely not as fleeting as observations made in QM. But Geology is not done in a vacuum, it is one of the most encompassing fields, being build on Mathematics } Physics } Chemistry } Biology } Geology. Where "}" signifies a foundational hierarchy. However, it doesn't really matter which field, the method is the same.
I love geology. It's the only thing I see written in stone. By, "guess who."
we are on the same page. I have yet to meet another science guy, that has some formal training, not get on the same page pretty quickly. In person, posters here, and other forums, could reach rational middle ground conclusions quickly when sitting over a bunch of drawlings. I struggle in the forum setting.
thanks for taking the time.
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.
