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.
Obviously you are lacking reading skills.
I have never claimed the earth is 6,00 or even 6,000 years old. You have lost credibility old chum.
Then what else does this mean?
"Originally Posted by Eusebius it is impossible for the animals, humans and plants of today to have somehow miraculously evolved from a single celled amoeba in only 6,000 years."
Creation of the earth (I do hope you are not going to try on the Old 1st earth swindle ) with Everything created within one week. From there to today - 6,000 years. What else could you mean? You had better have a good one or your credibility is yet again shot as badly as my typing skills. Nothing wrong with my reading skills. Yours seem lacking since you thought the article saying that a new hominid species was a known one said it was just an ape.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
The fact is that it is a fallacy to suggest one cannot prove a negative.
Correct. It depends on what the negative is. That one is vulnerable to the far -fetched apologetics of theism. And thus you crash an burn again because you were not saying that it is incorrect to say that one cannot disprove a negative but that you gave an example of of a negative that could be disproved. Not to someone using the debating methods you do, old friend.
This is a rumble in the jungle and no mistake old mate!
Since we are way off -topic and Eusebius does have a legitimate point - if what science says debunks genesis, how? - I recall a thread on the creation of light before there was a sun and moon.
Of course this - if what it says is taken at face value - utterly debunks genesis. So it isn't a question of providing peer reviewed papers on the formation of the solar system. That is a red herring. And nobody on that thread tried that one on.
No, instead it was a question of rewriting the Genesis account to try to make it fit the science. The sun was there but covered by cloud. Aside from debunking what Genesis says and instead arguing on what it (supposedly) actually meant, it failed because of course that was written from the point of view of someone on earth looking up at the cloud -cover (for which there is no scientific evidence anyway) and of course nobody was there. God was there and he was outside the clouds and could see the sun perfectly well - if it had been created before the earth and indeed the light. And if he knew better, he should have said so.
Who says God was outside the cloud?
Quote:
So we get some ad hoc suggestions about God showing it to Moses from the human point of view in a dream. So why not show the truth? That would impress us, I can tell you. Instead it gives an account that is wrong - if science counts for anything, no matter how the apologists try to get around it. And that is just one thing. The appearance of birds - and grass - before any land creatures. we had no grass or birds until the Jurassic - if science is to be believed.
You have so many false speculations above which you are trying to pass off as fact, it is hard to know where to begin.
It is scientifically possible for there to be light prior to there being a sun.
The Bible does not say God showed the Genesis account to Moses in a dream. Just more bunk from you.
God created the verdure/grasses and trees on the third day.
Water creatures, flying creatures and land creatures created on the fifth day.
Adam created on the 6th day.
Quote:
There was no flat (circular) earth with a sky dome and God's throne perched on top. There were no waters above that could be released through celestial trapdoors, like the sluices in the surrounding mountains to let the flood gush in.
Just more balogna from you. Where in Genesis does it say God's throne is perched on a sky dome?
Concerning "the windows of the heavens opening" it would appear to Noah as he looked up that that is what is looked like. Not that he believed there were literal windows being opened up above. Have you never heard of figures of speech before?
Quote:
Genesis is wrong with even the basic knowledge of science. Calling for peer -reviewed papers to debunk it is just ludicrous.
So back to our Homo Nailedit.
You are so inept, I can't believe you are posting your trash and people believe you.
Then what else does this mean?
"Originally Posted by Eusebius it is impossible for the animals, humans and plants of today to have somehow miraculously evolved from a single celled amoeba in only 6,000 years."
Creation of the earth (I do hope you are not going to try on the Old 1st earth swindle ) with Everything created within one week. From there to today - 6,000 years. What else could you mean? You had better have a good one or your credibility is yet again shot as badly as my typing skills. Nothing wrong with my reading skills. Yours seem lacking since you thought the article saying that a new hominid species was a known one said it was just an ape.
This is getting tiring having to explain things to you.
I said the earth could be MILLIONS of years old prior to the katabole or casting down prior to the earth BECOMING chaos and VACANT. I then said God made the earth habitable again around 6,000 years ago.
Read my post here for proof of what I said: //www.city-data.com/forum/41233969-post209.html
Yes there absolutely is something wrong with your reading skills. Read my post more critically before making a fool of yourself.
I don't want to get involved in another Noah/world-wide flood debate and have to show all you folks wrong again. But actually there are two world-wide floods recorded in Genesis, not just the one which occurred in Noah's day.
And no, there doesn't have to be a suspension of any laws of physics for there to be a world-wide flood.
Richard Dawkins is an idiot. The Bible is quite clear that, in Genesis 1:2 "The world BECAME chaos and vacant." And in 1:2 onward is God making the earth habitable again. The earth was not created 6,000 years ago. It was made habitable again 6,000 years ago. The earth could be millions of years old prior to the katabole or down casting of the world in 1:2.
Now then, since the world was BECAME chaos and VACANT of all life prior to 6,000 years ago, it is impossible for the animals, humans and plants of today to have somehow miraculously evolved from a single celled amoeba in only 6,000 years.
It could be that what some of these fossil finds are from is prior to the 6,000 years ago re-start of the earth's inhabitants.
As a physical geographer with a minor in geology I can tell you plain outright there is no geological evidence for a global flood. None. Now science cannot prove that your god did not flood the world leaving no evidence for it and suspending all natural laws. But you have been told that repeatedly. It does not take an honest person to request an impossible demand on ones they do not agree on and think that they are proving their own side. Science cannot prove a negative but as I stated there is zero evidence for a world wide flood. The origin of the universe and the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution so why the name calling of Richard Dawkins? If Dawkins never existed we would still have evolution, an old earth and a non God origin of life, those all existed prior to his birth. The only rational I can see for name calling if for you to feel better or superior about yourself. Any writings I have read by Dawkins has been more inteliigent than any I have read from you and I have never stated that you were one.
Yes you are correct in the impossiblity of the evolution from single celled to humans in 6000 years but there were more years than 6000 more like the billions. No evidence of the wiping out of all life and a restart 6000 years abot but there are evidence of mass extinctions but always some plants and animals made it through these periods. That is the fossil record. In addition or as another story whatever, oher Christians do not seem to agree with you either as there are those who accept the old earth and others state that the earth was created only 6 to 10 thousand years ago. So even accepting the Genesis account with zero evidence, which accout do we accept, yours or YCE.
You can believe that the Bible is a literal truth and your intrepetation is the correct one but that does not it so. Name calling those who disagree with you does not make your belief true either. It is not up to science or anyone else to prove your claim false, it is up to you to prove it true. There is no evidence as far as I can see for your belief.
Sorry, badlander, An actual science-based education just doesn't measure up to Eusie's world of break-through ideas and discoveries.
I suggest you start reading whacko websites written by guys who blog from their basements. That might help you. Try to forget everything those PhD's taught you. A sharp blow to the head might help. Maybe you can hit your head against a wall or something.
Goodness knows I feel like hitting my head against the wall when I read Eusie's posts.
I have read Morris and Gish and all kinds of creationists web sites and articles. They are so fraught with errors and misreprentations that I would be embrassed to say that they even had a decent point in them. The problem with conventional learning is we were taught to look at things with open eyes and to actually go out into the field and observe for ourselves.
I have read enough of his posts to know that his ideas cannot be taken serious.
Actually there is evidence for a world-wide flood all around us. You just weren't taught what to look for.
Not really.
Quote:
But this topic is not about a world-wide flood. So, if you want to continue on that idea, don't expect me to oblige.
That's probably very wise decision just to step away from that since Flood Geology has been falsified for 150 some odd years and is more just a "folk-science." It didn't even really get a hold to where it could even fall out of favor since Ellen G. White had her dream. Talk about a non-starter.
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.
) with Everything created within one week. From there to today - 6,000 years. What else could you mean? You had better have a good one or your credibility is yet again shot as badly as my typing skills.
Nothing wrong with my reading skills. Yours seem lacking since you thought the article saying that a new hominid species was a known one said it was just an ape. 
