|
oh my god (pg. 19)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dinoXpress |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
no i wasn't. i mean if u are one of those ppl then yes i was, but i didn't have any specific person in mind when i wrote it...i'd have to scroll back and read everything again to point out who i was talking about, but i don't feel like doing that:p |
oh.:toothless |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | Renegade, I had read somewhere that the fossils were there because of the flood which killed all the dinosaurs. And that explains why they're buried so deep. Because the flood made all those layers. It's no use looking for "a" layer.
When the whole world gets hit by a meteor, cracking the fault lines and flooding with water, it created all those layers. How do you think they got bent like rubber in so many places? Take a mountain drive some time and think about your millions of years.
Look at the top of a slanted strata, there is no new layers of flat strata on top. Does that mean it just slanted recently? or are those rocks millions or billions of years old, and they just stopped laying new strata there?? I don't think so!
I think young earth science can help you with all the questions you asked. Check it out. It really is a great way of life. Great hobby looking for geologic weirdness too. I dunno where the so called "real" scientists are getting their explinations. |
hey occrider its good to see that SOMEONE here has some common sence :)
and i know what you mean about the scientistis. they think there smart and worshiping darwin but all there actualy beleiving in is a big LIE :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Masonious |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
yea so, i sent teh lettar!:eek: |
I'm curious as to how she'll take it, that must be an odd paradigm shift having the child you created and raised offer you suggestions on how to behave. |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| I better go make some popcorn. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
sorry id idnt know you were a christian but why are you agrueing with me if we beleive the same things??? :( what church do you go to??? |
I'm arguing with you because what you are suggesting is proof of God is not proof of God and your arguments are flimsy at best. If you are going to try to convince people you need to use real evidence or sound logical and philisophical reasoning. Making statements like "you can't prove God doesn't exist therefore he must" is not only incorrect but it is illogical and only serves to give people the impression that you are a blind believer and accept as truth everything that is written in the bible despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. If you want a good argument for the existance of God then you have to look beyond the litteral meaning of the bible and incorporate what God reveals about himself through the profits with what we know to be true. For instance, regarding the big bang theory... the big bang theory cannot explain anything past the moment known as plank time (the moment that gravety came into existance) because physics breaks down at that point. This means that we have no explenation as to how the singularity that became the universe came into being or why it began to expand. This fits very well with the creation myth in that "in the begining there was nothing". You can then argue that God created the singularity and caused it to expand("God created the heavens and earth"). You can even say that God structured the Universe to work as it does ("he created day and night"). Then you can argue that God allowed for evolution and in this manner he created the plants and animals. See this would be a logical argument.... Genisis is a metaphore for the big bang and evolution.
Rather then looking at science as something that challenges your faith you should look at it as something that reinforces your faith because at some point devine intervention is necessary to make science work and no entity other then God could devise such a complex universe that would result in the world we have here on earth.
BTW, I am a Roman Catholic. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
hey occrider its good to see that SOMEONE here has some common sence :)
and i know what you mean about the scientistis. they think there smart and worshiping darwin but all there actualy beleiving in is a big LIE :rolleyes: |
Have you heard of Ken Ham? He points out that the dinosaurs are in scriptures. They just didn't call them that back then. In Job 40:15-24, God describes to Job (who lived after the Flood) a great beast. This animal, called 'behemoth,' is described as 'the chief of the ways of God,' perhaps the biggest land animal God had created. He moved his tail like a cedar tree! Although some say this may have been an elephant or hippopotamus, the description actually fits that of a dinosaur like Brachiosaurus. Elephants and hippos certainly do not have tails like cedar trees!
Haha does that look like a hippo or a elephants??
It makes sense that at the time of the Flood, many of the sea creatures died (due to the saltwater becoming too fresh), but some survived. In addition, all of the land creatures outside the Ark died, but the representatives of all the kinds that survived on the Ark lived in the new world after the Flood. Those land animals (including dinosaurs) found the new world to be much different than the one before the Flood. Due to (1) competition for food , (2) other catastrophes, (3) man killing for food (and perhaps for fun), and (4) the destruction of habitats, etc., many species of animals eventually died out. The group of animals we now call dinosaurs just happened to die out too. What do you think? |
|
|
| Slylee |
| quote: | Originally posted by Masonious
I'm curious as to how she'll take it, that must be an odd paradigm shift having the child you created and raised offer you suggestions on how to behave. |
yea i know. i love my mom to death, god bless her (no offense all u athiests! hahah), but like all humans, she's got her issues. i'm just thankful i was able to live with my dad for 2 years in high school, because his way of thinking and behavior really rubbed off on me. i used to be a neurotic freak just like my mom...i mean i still am sort of, but my dad is like mr. calm and collected and very fair, always looking at things objectively..very kind man. i definitely have a lot of his personality in me too...
it's funny how when you're little, you see your parents as like a God...they can do no wrong, they are your heros. it's kinda sad that i look at my mom sometimes now, as an adult, and shake my head. i feel bad for her...she's this amazing smart, independant, and very funny woman but she's lonely and can never find a date, and I’m starting to realize why. She’s just way too set in her ways…she’s not very open-minded when it comes to certain things…I dunno, she is and she isn’t…it’s hard to explain. My mom is a very complex person, but she has, without a doubt, a heart of gold, believe that.
if ur into astrology at all, she's a very typical aries. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
um have you actualy read the bible??? it say we weren't created by evolution ONLY BY GOD so i dont think you know what your talking about :)
also i dont know what a metaphore is but the bible is the TRUTH not a metaphore!!! |
I have read the bible. You may also want to note that the bible is writen in poetic form and at no times claims to be litteral. Additionally, based on the bible this planet is a little over 4000 years old.... we know that is not the case. Moreover, just because I regard the bible as a metaphore does not mean it is not true. Further, you should note that belief in a literal interpretation of the bible only acts as evidence of blind faith which is something Jesus himself cautions against.
I would also like to note that I have read the Vedicts as well. They tell us that the world was ushered into being by the reverberation of a single sound made by Brahman (their highest god)... that sound was the "aum" which is often used as a mantra when meditating. The story is very complex and I cannot be arsed to explain it to you, however, I see this as being no more or less valid a metaphore for the creation of the universe then Genisis, as both fit quite well with the scientific fact. |
|
|
| occrider |
Hey Renegade, I found those darwin sayings for you:
The number of intermediate and transitional links between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great.~ Charles Darwin
But just in proportion as this process of extermination has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record. ~ Charles Darwin
He who rejects these views on the nature of the geologic record, will rightly reject my whole theory. ~ Charles Darwin
Sounds like he didn't belief himself haha!
You know who did belief in him????
The German Fuhrer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution. ~ Arthur Keith
If Nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile. ~ Adolf Hitler
National Socialism is nothing but applied biology. ~ Rudolph Hess |
|
|
| NiteMer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sorry brother but both your post and the one that you are attempting to support show a serious lack of knowledge regarding physical anthropology.
There certainly is a clear chain from Astrolopithicus to Homo Sapien... granted, we don't have skeletal records for every part of this chain but the chain is there. Try to remember that the search for fosil records of these two classes of primate have only really been going on since the early 60s. The fact that we have found as much of the chain as we have is somewhat astounding.
Where your argument that evolution is not correct because we have not found a direct link is flawed is because you are suggesting that there is only one link. We already know of at least 4 Homo species prior to Homo Sapien Archaic and 3 Astrololpithicus species after Afarencis.... it is only a matter of time before we find the last Astrolopithicus and the first Homo.
BTW, as I said earlier creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive. If you take an interpretive view of the bible the story of creation is a very good allagory for evolution.... which makes sense to me because God is certainly bright enough to know that no bronze age people would understand the big bang and evolution so he had to tell the story in a manner they could relate to. |
Why, then, is it still referred to as the "theory" of evolution. There isn't any definitive proof that these intermediary species existed, just a lot of assumption. Half the time they're pulling parts from different species. I think it takes just as much a leap of faith to believe evolution, as it does to believe in God. In addition, the big bang theory goes against the laws of thermodynamics. A bunch of gases (disorder) created solids (order). I'm not going to say I'm an expert in evolutionary theory, as I don't buy it and would rather not waste time on it, but I did take Physical Anthropology, in college, and there were a lot of assumptions and unsubstantiated data. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, because I'm sure we're not gonna change each others minds. |
|
|
| Scottaculous |
Just checked in to this thread and having gone through a few pages I am left wondering,
Why does Slylee always create the longest discussion? :conf: |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by NiteMer
Why, then, is it still referred to as the "theory" of evolution. There isn't any definitive proof that these intermediary species existed, just a lot of assumption. Half the time they're pulling parts from different species. I think it takes just as much a leap of faith to believe evolution, as it does to believe in God. In addition, the big bang theory goes against the laws of thermodynamics. A bunch of gases (disorder) created solids (order). I'm not going to say I'm an expert in evolutionary theory, as I don't buy it and would rather not waste time on it, but I did take Physical Anthropology, in college, and there were a lot of assumptions and unsubstantiated data. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, because I'm sure we're not gonna change each others minds. |
We will not change each other's minds, that is true.
Most scientists do not refer to evolution as a theory anymore.
I agree the fossil record is incomplete, however, as I pointed out earlier that is not evidence that evolution is flawed but rather that we simply have not found them yet.
With regard to the big bang theory it should be noted that the early universe would have been liquid rather then gaseous. Additionally, we are able to observe new stars forming which is where the model for the formation of the early universe comes from. The extrapolations are done based on proven physics and observable events.
Finally, the only difference between our beliefes is that I don't believe in a literal translation of the bible. |
|
|
|
|
