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.
First of all, man has always been man since God created him.
Not according to the evidence of archaeology, paleontology, biostratigraphy, comparative anatomy, biochemistry and genetics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound of Reason
Second, there is no evidence to support that man had a "common ancestor". It doesn't exist in the fossil record. Others have been ape bones claimed to have been a missing link. Others have been humans claimed to have been an old ancestor. Even today, not all of mankind has the same type of skull. People can look at a skeleton and know whether the person was a Caucasoid or Negroid. These people are still identifiably human, however. The same way that some of the links are identifiably human, even though evolutionists use the differences to claim that they were not. Some of the other so-called transitional forms were hoaxes. One was an ape skull found in the same vicinity as a human skeleton. They used it to claim it was a transition.
Ignoring that your account of the hominid fossil record is grossly in error, yes. We actually have absolute proof that humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor. Objective, incontrovertible proof.
I have now offered twice to bring you up to speed on endogenous retroviruses. Let me know if you're interested.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound of Reason
Third, the Earth is not billions of years old, and man has not been around for millions of years. There's a lot of problems arguing with such, things that can easily disprove such a theory, whether it be by way of the Grand Canyon, Niagra Falls, gravitational pull, etc. Absolute dating techniques are not reliable. The Flood laid down the layers of sediment which contain all the fossils (a lot of organisms died in the flood). Sediment deposition is not uniform but ebbs and flows and can lay many layers of sediment down rather quickly. Fossilization does not take millions of years, or even thousands of years. It can take place in under one hundred years.
Lets talk about those layer. More specifically, let's talk about the Glen Rose formation in Texas. It sits on top of thousands of feet of sediments that (according to you) were set down by the flood. It also is overlain by thousands of feet of additional sediments that (according to you) were also set by the flood.
Somehow, in the middle of the flood, hundreds of dinosaurs managed to run around and make thousands of footprints as they went about the ordinary business of hunting, feeding and herding.
How many floods were there?
Better yet. lets talk about other layers.Varves. These are annual layers set down in lake sediments. One each year.
The Green River Shale records a series of annual varves set down on the floor of a set of ancient fresh water lakes in modern day Utah. Remember... varves are set down seasonally at the rate of one a year.
There are 3 million varves in the Green River Shale.
While I'm not certain, it seems plausible that there was once one continent, as evidenced by plate boundaries and coastlines.
It also seems plausible that the Genesis flood was the doing of the break-up of the continent into many.
Genesis states that the Earth burst open. You have to figure that these breaks down to the Earth's mantle could have caused the continents to drift, considering that water burst forth and covered the entire Earth. The breaks, coupled with the recession of water, likely caused the plates to drift to their present spots in a relatively short time period, given the force and fluidity of the plates. We know that the crustal plates kind of "float" on top of the mantle. That mantle was likely much more fluid considering a historic worldwide global flood. Since that time, the plates have stabilized leading only to very minor changes in their locations.
Did you know that the North American continent is moving 2 cm per year, with no time of it stopping any time soon?
That is the evolutionists answer to everything - "the only thing wrong with our theory(there is a lot wrong with the theory) is that we don't have enough time for it to work, so let's just tack on a couple million years on to the age of the earth, and scoff at the people who don't buy our arrogant tripe".
Whatever. Pretty soon, all your deceivers will come around to accept the facts as the facts that they are, and you'll be the only one crying that it isn't so.
For the life of me I can't understand why you are so resistant to accpeting the knowledge gained by the scientific process. Smart people spend decades of their life in an unbiased observation, quantificaiton and descriptionof nature, that is tested, peer reviews etc., and you scoff at it like its poison.
BTw, the earth is NOT flat, the Universe doesn't revolve around the earch, nor does the sun or the balance of the solar system, there are no ghosts, spirits, demons, devils, vampires warewolves, Kracken, dragons etc., ether.
BTW, how did the dogs swim across the Oceans after the flood, and where did the water go. and how about the specieis that we are only just now finding. How did Noah go to get them, and how did he put them back.
The only dogs remaining would have been the dog kind. The water receded. Once disembarked from the ark, they would have mated, have puppies, and so they continued to interbreed. Since this pair of dogs had lots of genetic material, it was enough to create all the types of wild dogs that existed on the Earth. Man simply used artificial selection to make use of the genes in existence, as evidenced in the traits, to bring about new breeds of dogs. However, it's still a dog. No new DNA.
Any species that we are now finding? It's called being small and remote from humans.
Noah didn't get the animals. They came to him, I suppose in an almost migratory sense under the direction of God. The Bible says that he led the animals to the ark.
Quote:
Answer: He didn't its a compelte and utter myth. An urban legand tantamount to a lie.
I disagree.
Quote:
No wooden vessel could hold all the numbers of various species that exists, much less their food source.
Again, the key word is KINDS. The ark was very large and contained multiple levels. Studies have been done on this subject, and it can be easily shown how the ark could have contained all the animals, especially considering that most were likely juveniles, since they would be smaller and would be used to repopulate the Earth.
There were two of the dog kind, two of the cat kind and so on. These kinds likely had all the DNA of every organism in existence today within their respective kinds. Every modern animal species likely wasn't on the ark, but their created original kind was.
Food source? It's called storage. Noah had a lot of time to prepare. Studies on the subject have shown that there would have been more than enough room to feed and water the animals, possibly using a series of contraptions that make use of gravity from a top level into feeding bins of all the various animals.
While I'm not certain, it seems plausible that there was once one continent, as evidenced by plate boundaries and coastlines.
It also seems plausible that the Genesis flood was the doing of the break-up of the continent into many.
Genesis states that the Earth burst open. You have to figure that these breaks down to the Earth's mantle could have caused the continents to drift, considering that water burst forth and covered the entire Earth. The breaks, coupled with the recession of water, likely caused the plates to drift to their present spots in a relatively short time period, given the force and fluidity of the plates. We know that the crustal plates kind of "float" on top of the mantle. That mantle was likely much more fluid considering a historic worldwide global flood. Since that time, the plates have stabilized leading only to very minor changes in their locations.
It is referred to as Pangaea and it started seperating approx 200 million years ago, and have continued drifting ever since.
BTW, there is not a shred of evidence anywhere in all of geology or other earth science of any global flood - none whatsoever. It is 100% fable.
Why don't you prove that the theory of evolution is valid?
People have aleady done that many times on threads you have been involved in.
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.
