Good point. When we measured crystal deformation in the rock lab there was no worldview involved; the measurements were what they were, and the measurements said that the rocks we were handling were old, on the order of hundreds of thousands of years for the oldest.
The only assumptions involved were that reality does not change – no fluctuation or shifting or alteration – which is an assumption that must be held to biblically.
Yes. A meter remains a meter, a gram remains a gram, silica remains silica – and the interesting thing is for a Christian that should be obvious while for atheism it has to be deduced.
It was once obvious to all that humans could never achieve heavier-than-air flight.
“It is obvious to me” has no objective meaning.
If you use the quote function to include at least a fragment of the post to which you are responding, it’s a lot easier for everyone to track the conversation. From what you wrote, I can’t tell what post you’re referring to; the sole one by Mervin certainly doesn’t qualify.
Is really how you’re mixing theology and science to try to sway emotions.
If you’re going to address something scientific, then address it scientifically. In this case, show the degree of complexity of the “Amazing ATP Synthase Motor” and then mathematically demonstrate this claimed “utterly impossible improbability” would be for the “first living cell” – for starters. I don’t care how that turns out; I do care that you be honest by addressing matters of science scientifically.
At this point I would have to say that one can invent an inconvenience but that doesn’t make it real. Unless you have the math to back it up, claiming an inconvenience in science is no different than complaining that your refrigerator won’t make dry ice for you.
Two lies just in the introduction – impressive even for CMI.
So why should I watch the rest of it?
Plus being aware that the information is about you yet you and the information are distinct.
So you begin with the intent to sample with bias. Biased sampling will never get you truth.
This misrepresents the data: what we know from the Beit Shan excavation is that there were Canaanite temples, that later there were apparently Habiru dwelling there in the late Bronze Age, that the Egyptians built extensively at the location, that the Egyptians were kicked out and the location became Canaanite again . . . and that about sums it up. Archaeology says nothing about Israelites building walls.
Archaeology cannot connect any wall remnants with that event.
I think that overstates the case. A four-horned altar has been uncovered, but evidence that it was for “bull calf pagan worship”? That’s interpretation that as far as I know goes beyond the evidence.
Most of the rest of your items are post-David and thus irrelevant to what I said.
So you’re not just sampling with bias, you’re reading into the data more than is there. Both are dishonest.
And meanwhile there are archaeological sites within the area of the Flood that go back as far as 7,000 BC, which contradict the YEC claims, i.e. they contradict a literal reading of the scripture text – which is sufficient to indicate that a literal reading is foolish.
Excavation confirm many details; the recent confirmation that the House of David did exist being a recent delightful one. But confirmed details do not mean that a literal reading of the text is to be preferred.
Archaeology is a science, and science requires honesty.
Noting that the sentence was " “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” . . . that doesn’t have any bearing on evolution at all, anyway. Saying so requires making some assumptions that cannot be derived from the scriptures, and it is thus an unbiblical claim.
it is you that is bringing science into this obvious observation, not that I have any problem with science whatsoever, however what I was hoping to communicate is the simple reality that God created ALL life, just as the Holy Bible ever so plainly tells us.
There are no 'ifs’ or ‘buts’ in Genesis 1.
There is the Truth of HOW God created, and if you look closely, you will recognise that the way the Creator brought into existence, by HIS WORD, if you are a Christian you would recognise immediately that the very same One Who created EVERYTHING that exists, performed many miracles here on Earth about 2,000 years ago, by HIS WORD.
The same Creator, the same method of creation.
Jesus SPOKE and the wind and waves calmed, Jesus SPOKE and the loaves and fishes were created ‘out of nothing’.
In Genesis, He SPOKE and it was so!
IMMEDIATELY!!!
Please for your own sake, get a grip here on the Truth written in the Holy Bible.
And as He created ‘ex nihilo’ ALL life here on Earth to live in the physical realm within the parameters and constrains of the environmental ecosystems that He designed, it isn’t rocket science or even slightly difficult to understand that ALL biological life that was all designed to initially eat plants for food, and live and multiply here on Earth, would allhave similar design in their biological makeup.
The fact that many have incorrectly mistaken this similarity in design as evidence supporting the belief that evolution is the mechanism that God used to create the diversity of life on Earth, doesn’t add up, nor does it change the reality that of course God would of necessity use a common design for all the life that He designed to all live in this world that He so brilliantly designed with abundant Oxygen, Water, and the field strength of gravity He wished, and the magnetic field to protect us from the solar wind etc…and all eating the same food, i.e., green plants.
Science does not in any way whatsoever preclude the above obvious conclusion, far from it, this conclusion is not only completely in harmony with what we are told about creation in the Holy Scriptures, but it is also a rational conclusion to arrive at from the evidence all around us, but for me, the Holy Scriptures are the most important.
Thus, there is absolutely no problem with stating that the common design we observe is completely consistent,with the reality that it was all created by a common designer, Who is our brilliant Loving Creator.
I truly do not see why you think you should have any problem with this logical and Biblically consistent reality.
Yes of course!
There are many, but this particular one is relevant to the topic at hand, thus is as good as any.
Experiments conducted attempting to explain abiogenesis, under conditions intended to resemble those present on primitive Earth in reality are far from achieving that simulated pre-biotic goal, indeed the attempts are far from what it is ‘assumed’ Earth was like prior to life, not that we actually have even the slightest idea, at best all that can be said is that ‘calculated guesswork’ is employed to decide what may chemically represent the prebiotic world.
Have a read of the brilliant article at:
This article outlines unrealistic bias in purified homochiral chemical selection to be used in the research experiment that constitutes multiple flaws in reality to what a realistic prebiotic world would have had available. These procedures were used to create the so called “building blocks of life”, such as some simple amino acids.
See the following methodology:
Find a trace of compound X in a spark discharge experiment, claim ‘see, X can be produced under realistic primitive-earth conditions’. Then obtain pure, homochiral, concentrated X from an industrial synthetic chemicals company, react it to form traces of the more complex compound Y. Typically, the process is repeated to form traces of Z from purified Y, and so on. In short, the evolutionists’ simulations have an unacceptable level of intelligent interference
Really?What unmitigated tripe. All of the very humble Christians that I know and the others that I know of, and others that I have corresponded with, who all believe the Bible to be God’s Holy Word to mankind would very strongly disagree with you there. Yet another falsehood to discredit Bible believing Christians.
Science is fine but it is never absolute, and many things once thought to be true are later found to be false, that is the nature of science, WHEREAS, the Holy Scriptures are ROCK SOLID, unchanging and profound. The Holy Spirit brings the Scriptures alive for all of us who seek the truth with a humble, contrite heart before God. Of course science and faith can stand shoulder to shoulder, but the Holy Word of God must always take precedence for a Christian.
Science is merely a formal methodology to analyse and test mankind’s best efforts to understand how the world around us works; sometimes we get it right, and sometimes we get it wrong, which is why a person who professes to be a Bible believing Christian should always regard the Holy Scriptures above the thoughts and fallible ideas of mere fallen men.
Science is certainly an admirable profession and used to ease suffering and treat illness and injuries is very good, however the forensic sciences are nowhere as clear cut, when it comes to interpreting events from the distant past, such as how all the life on Earth came to be, it is on far more shaky ground, and conclusions reached have a much lower likelihood of being accurate.
For those forensic fields of science, regarding the creation account, i.e., how we came to be here, my view is that scientific enquiry cannot compete with the eyewitness account that we have in the Holy Bible, that I trust as the Word of God, faithful and true.
Apologies, but of course you are wrong here.
And WHY, well clearly that is because in both of the scenarios that you describe above, you are taking evolution as a given, a fact a reality, which truly is a grave error. It may be your real worldview, but that does not make it correct.
More importantly, the scenario that you deem to omit is the TRUE one, the creation account inspired by God Himself, as explained directly from the Holy Scriptures.
The Holy Scripture in Genesis1 informs us very adequately how the first life came into being, there is no mention of anything that could be even remotely interpreted as God creating a first living cell or the life form to then utilise any sort of theory of evolution mechanism over billions of years of ‘deep time’ filled with horrendous pain and suffering and death, to grow the diversity of life we see today.
God is far BIGGER and better than that.
He is not incompetent, He is kind and Loving.
He does not preside capriciously over a realm that was built upon struggle, death and suffering for billions of years as unfortunately, you would have me believe.
Surely, surely you know better than that!?!
He created the entire universe, the galaxies, the enormous nuclear fusion balls we call stars, the black holes etc…, so how much more is it such a little thing for Him to create life on Earth ‘ex nihilo’ in six ordinary days as the Holy Scripture, informs us all, that was ever so profoundly written, directly inspired by God Himself (Who knows the end before the beginning), for our edification, that we should not be unknowing about how we came to be here, because He loves us all so very much.
It is necessary to place that very scripture from God’s Holy Word here, so you may read it yourself right now:
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. {the light from…: Heb. between the light and between the darkness} 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. {And the evening…: Heb. And the evening was, and the morning was etc.}
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. {firmament: Heb. expansion} 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. {And the evening…: Heb. And the evening was, and the morning was etc.}
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. {grass: Heb. tender grass} 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day. {And the evening…: Heb. And the evening was, and the morning was etc.}
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: {the day…: Heb. between the day and between the night} 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. {to rule the day…: Heb. for the rule of the day, etc.} 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. {And the evening…: Heb. And the evening was, and the morning was etc.}
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. {moving: or, creeping} {life: Heb. soul} {fowl…: Heb. let fowl fly} {open…: Heb. face of the firmament of heaven} 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. {And the evening…: Heb. And the evening was, and the morning was etc.}
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. {moveth: Heb. creepeth}
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. {bearing…: Heb. seeding seed} {yielding…: Heb. seeding seed} 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. {life: Heb. a living soul}
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Well let’s look at this bit by bit.
Firstly, you state that:
Of course, there are fossils we find all over the Earth that include dinosaur bones (real bone, not mineralised) with intact soft tissue within them, we also find many other fossils of marine creatures, molluscs to fish as well as mammals, terrestrial insects, and plants.
From the literature searches I have made over the past fifty years, it is abundantly clear to me that the fossils positions in Earth’s sedimentary formations represent the order of burial during the year long Global Flood of Noah’s day.
Nothing whatsoever to do with what I consider the completely false and unbiblical theory of evolution claims for the fossils.
Yes, I have come to know there are many people here, (possibly including yourself), that will make the usual claims they see evolution in their work, or cry out that I am telling lies, or other equally derogatory claims, or that evolution is proven by science etc… thus I would like you to answer a very simple and straightforward question.
How do you think the first cell became (over billions of years), all the diversity of life we now see on Earth?
Incorrect, if you would care to read what I wrote once again, you will see that the words I wrote, were specifically:
" the very first single celled organism it is assumed existed in evolutionary theory, needed to be able to reproduce successfully and of obvious necessity needed to have a means of passing on the heritable information, to power cellular activity and reproduction in the next generation."
You make the incorrect claim, in your own words, that, “making the assumption that what life requires now is what it required in the past.” when as you should well know, I said nothing of the sort.
IF and it’s a very BIG IF, evolution were actually real, (which of course it isn’t, it is dead in the water, and should be thrown out of science altogether,) then the simple truth is that the first life OBVIOUSLY needed to reproduce, and to do that successfully so that the offspring could feed, grow to adulthood in reproductive terms, and carry on living, then reproducing successfully, of simple obvious necessity, (and given the extraordinary complexity of any life form), there would have to have been some form of complex information transfer from parent to offspring, for biological functions such as respiration, absorption of nutrients from the environment, given initially there was no organic matter AT ALL, just a planet devoid of any life whatsoever.
If there is anything here you think is wrong, I’d be interested to hear about it.
With regard to RNA, I expect from what you have thus far stated that you would have read enough papers in the literature to know that the RNA world hypothesis has hairs all over it! In short it doesn’t hold water as an explanation for the genesis of life or its assumed evolution from the first cell onwards. It is all just a frantic grabbing at straws to explain how we came to be here without for a second just accepting in faith that what God has so clearly and plainly and unequivocally told us in Genesis 1 is how He created everything including all life.
Why Genesis 1 is such a problem for many people here on this website is a mystery to me; as I see the beautiful creation account ever so clearly, as written, by the author, who I expect was likely Moses, who was inspired by God to write as he did, the profound Truth about how everything and humanity came to exist.
Now I don’t accept for a nanosecond that God would have written down such a vitally important topic as the creation account in Genesis in words that don’t actually mean what they say.
God knows the end before the beginning, He is omniscient and omnipotent, thus for the One Who can raise the dead, give sight to those blind from birth, speak and the wind and the waves obey Him, it is surely such a small thing to have the Holy Scriptures written so profoundly that peoples from ALL times in history, past, present and future can fully understand the text, without having to be a scholar who can read five languages.
God loves the meek, He loves the poor, He loves the grief stricken, He loves the ones who consider themselves the lowly. He IS LOVE
I read Genesis 1 and know the truth is as it is written.
As I know the battle being waged here has eternal stakes, please, before anyone chimes in about reasons why they think Genesis 1 does not say what it ever so clearly says, you know, the usual things such as a plethora of secular ANE ideas and interpretations, or that genre wasn’t invented yet, or the rubbish of forcing a modern worldview onto the Bible, or the predictable straw man arguments that the Bible is not a science book, when no one I know has ever claimed the Holy Bible to be a science book, etc…
Actually, the fossil record is nothing more than a very, very large collection of fossils of dead things all over the world.
You see a slow and gradual ascension of life because of your evolutionary worldview,
YET
I see a record yes, but it is a record of the sequence of burial in enormous volumes of sediment that cover vast areas of the planet at continental scales and up to 12,000 metres deep!
The polystrate tree trunks and the sharp less than 1 mm straight boundaries between different sediment particle size strata and/or compositions, demonstrate beyond any doubt to me at least that the vast sedimentary formations found all over the Earth are the product of a catastrophic Global Flood, the Global Flood described in the pages of the Holy Bible in Noah’s day without a shadow of doubt in my mind.
Think about the masses of plant and animal fossils that have been unearthed around the world that contain a wide variety of both terrestrial and marine plants and animals all jumbled up and buried together. How can this be possible unless there truly was a Global Flood as the Bible faithfully informs us.
The false claims of a local flood simply don’t stand up to rigorous scrutiny, and again more importantly the whole idea of a local flood is absolutely nonsensical. I only have to look at the geology of the Earth, in particular the sedimentary formations all over the globe to KNOW that the Flood was indeed Global.
But for those that don’t have a geology bent just consider that Noah would have had to have spent many years, perhaps 100 years, constructing the Ark with his three sons, but if the flood was merely local and all he had to do was walk for about a week say about 100 miles then the massive and I do mean massive effort of felling trees and cutting lumber from logs and carrying that lumber to the Ark construction site would have been an utterly futile exercise. God considered Noah to be a good and righteous God fearing man. Do you really believe that God had Noah go through all he went through building the Ark and being mocked by the people up until the day that Noah entered the Ark, if the flood was merely a local flood???
Why would God bring all the pairs of animals to Noah to house on the Ark if all He had to do was move them to an area outside the boundaries of the flood? The whole idea that the flood was local is severe folly.
The Bible is clear that ALL the mountains under heaven were covered by 15 cubits of water, (about 20 feet):
And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth. And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
So, the reality is that the fossils are the result of the Global Flood of Noah’s day.
The sedimentary rock strata found all over the Earth on land and under the sea, at continental scales and to depths of up to 12,000 metres (about 39,000 feet deep) is quite uniform in many aspects, not the least of which as mentioned earlier are the boundaries between the various particle size layers. These boundaries are sharply defined and clean, often straight as a ruler and at other times wany and or folded.
One thing that stands out to the practiced eye is the complete lack of any weathering or erosion, nor are their any soil horizons or tree roots, and there is little to no bioturbation. Thus, for the vast majority of these enormous plates of sedimentary rock found all over the Earth, including Antarctica it is exquisitely clear that the sediments were laid down far too rapidly for any of the above processes to leave a mark, that is again entirely consistent with what we would expect to find from a catastrophic flood of Global proportions.
Tell me please, where today do you see vast sheets of sedimentary rock being laid down at continental scale to depths approaching 40,000 feet?
The evidence for the Global Flood is so overwhelming that I am frankly at a loss for words to understand how so many otherwise intelligent people just refuse to see what so, so, so obvious.
There are other indicators too, for example, many of the dinosaur fossils display the classic head thrown back posture, typical of death by drowning in reptiles, and an ever growing number of dinosaur bones are actual bone, not mineralised, but made of real bone, believed by some to be 66 million years old; even though those same people are fully aware that an ever growing number of dinosaur bones, mineralised and unmineralised are being found to contain soft tissue, yes, some bones that are mineralised are chemically treated and also found to contain soft tissue. In both types of fossil that is, actual dinosaur bone and mineralised bone those soft tissues are found to contain a wide range of dinosaur proteins including keratin, actin, collagen and even nerve fibres, blood vessels, haemoglobin and fragments of DNA up to several base pairs long with the sugar ribose helix strands still intact. But even knowing that, there are many who choose to believe the lie and refuse to believe what the Holy Scriptures so plainly tell us.
Whether you accept that or reject that fact, is up to you.
It is a matter between you and God. I am just a messenger telling you what I believe. And I thank my Lord and Saviour that He opened my eyes to the Truth, when I once upon a time was like you and could not see what is now so very obvious.
Please know that I do not consider myself any better than you or anyone else on this site. I am I know that I am a worthless sinner, guilty of breaking Gods commands. I do not take writing what I have written here lightly because I know the stakes are very high for everyone reading the posts on this website…
There are many lies peddled on this site about people who I know to be honest men of God, and it pains me to see the injustice, but I know that their reward in heaven is great even though here on Earth they are constantly under attack…
I am not interested in winning an argument, but I am interested in advancing our Lords Kingdom here on Earth.
It pains me to know that so many good people are deceived by the lies of deep time, evolution and local flood nonsense. That is the only reason I am here communicating on this website.
Just because you want to see calculations, does not in any way detract from the obvious reality that the odds of all that coming together in the first life form from non-living chemicals is an insurmountable problem for evolution theory in the secular world!
Although evolution theory very conveniently commences once life is up and running in the evolution story line, the need to explain ‘chemical evolution’ does not go away, it is there front and centre.
If you really believe that Abiogenesis actually happened by chance, I suggest you get your research institution to go and buy a thousand tins of sardines and open them and zap the content with whatever voltage and current you think is realistic to see if life kicks off. After all, in each of those cans are more than all the precursor chemicals you could ever hope for in an imagined prebiotic world, but I can already tell you the result. Life ONLY comes from life. You will not create life, but you will create a smelly mess.
The whole idea of chemical evolution is as nutty as seeing all the sedimentary rock strata around the world believing that it all got there over billions of years of slow and gradual processes, and as nutty as knowing that real dinosaur soft tissue is truly found in dinosaur bones, both mineralised and actual dinosaur bone and still thinking that those animals died out 66 million years ago. I think many people in the future will look back and wonder how so many people got it so wrong.
And I haven’t even brooched the subject of homochirality to any degree.
But if you truly want to get your teeth into some groundbreaking research that debunks the Amyloid world hypothesis and you want the mathematics, the chemistry etc… then I suggest you read the article at:
Anyway, I’ve much to do and have spent far too much time here.
You seemed to be arguing against science in the opening post. Is this not the case?
I don’t see any reason why God would be required to use similar designs in all life. If God is all knowing and all powerful then it would be just as easy for God to come up with millions of different designs than to reuse just one. I can only see one reason why life would share features like this, and that is common ancestry, the very same reason you and I share features.
You also ignore examples of where different designs are used, such as the different designs for the cephalopod and vertebrate camera eyes, or the different designs for flight for bats and birds.
The only problem is that you can’t come up with any potential observation that would be inconsistent with your claims. It seems you have an unfalsifiable belief.
First, those aren’t simulations of evolution. Second, what is wrong with this methodology? It makes complete sense to work with higher concentrations to see what can happen.
All we need to do is look at your posts for this very thing. How many times have you accused scientists of using assumptions and guesswork?
You didn’t address what I said. How would the theory of evolution change if the first life was created by God? I don’t see one thing in the theory that would need to change.
That’s not what I am addressing. You claim scientists are just assuming there was single celled life. That is obviously false because the fossil record demonstrates that they did exist.
There it is again. No one is assuming life existed. We can clearly see in the fossil record that it did.
Perhaps you could go over the evidence that you claim invalidates the RNA World hypothesis? Perhaps from an actual scientific source and not a creationist website?
Tell me please, where today do you see vast sheets of sedimentary rock being laid down at continental scale to depths approaching 40,000 feet?
See all that blue stuff? That’s where continent scale sedimentary deposition is occurring. It doesn’t require a global flood, nor a recent flood. Just look at the Mediterranean Sea that has dried up and refilled multiple times.
The real question is what would change your mind? What features would a geologic formation need in order to falsify a recent global flood?
Why do dinosaur fossils correlate with the ratio of parent and daughter isotopes in the rocks aroudn them? Why would you need a global flood or a recent flood in order to drown a dinosaur?
The theory of evolution doesn’t require abiogenesis.
How exactly are venom harpoons, suctorial feeding, or depending on endosymbiotic bacteria “eating plants”? And each of those is very inherent to how conoids, pyramidelloids, and lucinoids are designed.
That’s a lie.
That’s also a lie–it’s soft tissue remnants, often thoroughly mineralized ones.
And how exactly can we get this out of a one-year flood?
The only way to get abrupt-looking changes in sediment size is to abruptly (in terms of deposition rate, not time) change water flow speed. Thus, that requires an extremely complex flood that keeps oscillating between very calm and very violent. There is a problem, however; once it is ever violent, it cannot deposit fine mud quickly:
Think about the hundreds of deposits that don’t look like that, that have definable paleoclimatology and water depth ranges that slowly move up and down–like the Paris Basin, or anywhere in a coastal plain in the eastern US south of New Jersey. How can they be possible if there was a truly global flood?
All the mountains/hills under the solid dome over the flat earth-disk. If they lived somewhere like Mesopotamia, 15 cubits itself would be a very high hill for the region.
Like global planktonic foraminifera and d18O values, which cannot have time to equalize under modern flood geopseudology models.
Three more lies. There are some deposits that lack weathering on their surfaces, but most have been weathered. There are some places that lack soil horizons or tree roots (mostly because of erosion). There are some places that lack bioturbation. Many deposits have all three obvious from a cursory glance.
Except for everywhere that they did.
On every single continental shelf across the planet:
It’s called “rigor mortis”, and it happens whether the reptile drowned or not.
I’m still unaware of any that aren’t at least somewhat mineralized.
Soft tissue breakdown products or very stable types of soft tissue like collagen.
Breakdown products of these, not them themselves.
Like Michael Tuomey, whom I quoted above? He actually qualifies as honest, unlike every article or video I’ve ever seen from AiG or CMI.
Given that most of the text of this comes from replies to previous posts or threads created by you, this would seem to suggest a lack of listening or heeding correction.
No. It does not. And when you force it to do something like this you provide people the means to prove the Bible is simply telling lies. And the same goes for many other parts of the Bible when you force an interpretation contradicting the findings of science.
The Bible says the earth does not move: Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5, and 1 Chronicles 16:30. But the earth does move. And we need not even take this to mean the planet relative to other celestial bodies (or relative to any inertial frame of reference), but even small portions of the planet fitting the Biblical word used for “earth” also moves measurably in the rotation of the earth, plate tectonics, and earthquakes.
And in Genesis 1 there are so many things which are demonstrably wrong when this is treated as a literal description of the creation of the earth. The order is very wrong in saying fruit trees came before animals (let alone before the sun and moon), or birds before land animals.
Does the Bible really tell us HOW God created things? If so then it is inconsistent. Some places say it is by His word but others say it is by his outstretched arm, some by shaping materials, some by breathing. Others passages say it is not just by His power but also His understanding. And it says if we would understand how God did things then we should learn this from the beasts, birds, bushes and fish. This is what scientists have done and the story told by them is evolution.
So if it is not about how God created things, then what is Genesis 1 really about? It is saying that all these things, waters, plants, animals, sun, moon, and stars are all not gods but creations of one God. And it puts it all in a context for supporting the celebration of Sabbath on one day of the week. Insisting we take this in a simple minded literal manner is the same as doing so for Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5, and 1 Chronicles 16:30. But they likewise can understood differently in which the foundations of the earth are the unchanging laws of nature and the earth stands firm and unmoved from the purpose for which God made it.
And even if we do take the talk in the Bible of God creating by speaking then there is no reason for us to accept some idea this means a magical power of command since the Bible says nothing of the kind. The most natural meaning is that God had help from angels and/or the host of heaven spoken of frequently in the text.
You are inconsistent. The Bible says nothing of creating galaxies, fusion, black holes let alone all the things you didn’t even mention such as nebulae, planets, matter, and electrons. By the logic you have used, if the Bible doesn’t say it then no such things ever happened.
People used to believe a lot of things “beyond any doubt”. That is neither a sound scientific nor theological argument. For example, people believe that everything in the universe went around the earth, to the point that they developed complex mathematics to describe it, all “without a shadow of doubt”. And people used to believe that everything was made of just four elements, without a shadow of doubt.
Their personal convictions did not make these things so, and your personal convictions do not make your beliefs so, no matter how many Bible verses you throw out – they had Bible verses that supported their views, as well, and would call you an unbeliever because you don’t agree with them. Yet you in fact don’t agree with them while doing the very same thing, calling people unbelievers because they do not agree with your personal convictions.
You mean YEC? It is a great falsehood that serves to make Bible-believing Christians look like idiots, and drives many people away from Christ.
It is like reading the sentence, “I sat in my chair to read a book,” and taking this to mean that sitting in a chair is how I do the actual reading of a book – that I don’t even look at the words or turn the pages.
Hi All and Mitchell,
please accept my sincere apologies, the 240 volt mains power has been out of action due to a faulty high voltage transformer not operating as it should with 220,000 volts tracking to Earth and shorting the system in a local transformer.
I am hopefully properly back online now for a while, and see there have been more posts added, thus, I will endeavour to get through to responding to the ones that are worthy of response as soon as I can.
Below are my responses to this particular post from Mitchell to kick off.
Of course AI can do a great many very clever things that already take a lot of the grunt work out of numerically massive and/or tedious repetitive tasks and as time goes by, AI technology will obviously continue to become more and more complex and powerful, BUT, that said, it will never have a spirit, it will never have a conscience and it will never have a part of its makeup specifically created for the Holy Spirit as I believe ALL humans have.
Of course you can teach AI to do a great many things including to mimic humans, but depending upon what you believe ‘Soul’ to mean, in my humble opinion the word soul should be combined with the word living to make the description more precise, as a ‘living soul’, that I truly believe AI will never be. Sure, it may have even a sophisticated appearance of a living soul, but it will never be truly alive, at the current state of development, you only have to pull the power cord from the socket to see that. People SHOULD be able to know the difference between fiction and reality; it is worrying that some don’t.
CORRECT!
INCORRECT! To have a conscience you have to have an inbuilt God given discernment of right and wrong. God is the absolute Law giver with regard to Right and Wrong; it is only His Laws and Commandments that ultimately matter. Mankind’s arbitrary rules, laws and customs are fine if they align with God’s Laws and Commandments but if they differ, then those responsible are putting themselves in a dire predicament.
That said, sure, AI may have even a sophisticated appearance of a conscience, but it will not be a conscience in the sense of that little voice in a person’s head that most of us should know well, you know that quiet but unwavering voice, and because there may be cultural differences at play here, perhaps ‘voice’ is too strong a word, it’s more like a clear knowledge that is telling you when you are about to cross from doing the right thing to doing the wrong thing. The AI may be programmed with a set of rules, and thus act as if it has a conscience but again that will only be an illusion, it will not be a conscience that we humans are born with. Yes, many people silence their conscience by continually ignoring it to the point they no longer hear it, but we all start out in life as innocent little children, and then grow into all types of people, some with a strong conscience and empathy for others and some with seemingly no conscience and no empathy for others and a broad range in between.
From my experience over the last seventy years, or so, I know we ALL have the capability to hear God, and before anyone jumps in, I don’t mean audibly through our ears but rather deep down in our heart, and I don’t mean the blood pump.
I believe we are made in His image and we are ALL hard wired that way, but ultimately, it is God Who draws whichever individual He sees wishes to Himself. I know that I myself as a sinner and as a person most unworthy of anything from God, that He still Loves me nonetheless, and He forgives me for my many faults. That to me is amazing Love beyond my feeble understanding and I love Him and thank Him for what He has done on the cross for everyone, even me unworthy as I am.
CORRECT!
To me the term “self-aware” evokes internal knowledge that one is a living entity, a being with consciousness and taking that further a consciousness with the ability to choose and make moral choices or decisions if you like, whereas I see AI as mimicking “self-awareness” without actually having it as AI is not a living entity or living soul, it is ultimately just a very sophisticated adding machine or calculator. Sure AI may have the appearance of being “self-aware” and in the not too distant future, even to the point that it is impossible to tell, but in all honesty, it will NOT be truly self-aware as living beings such as God, the angels and us humans and are.
Hi Mitchell,
I must admit that I am at a complete loss as to why you have made what appear to me to be deceitful statements.
Are they meant to intimidate me. It is not I, that is peddling a litany of lies here.
If you are so very sure of your words, please let me know exactly WHERE I have ever: 1.) “complain[ed] that science doesn’t make room for God”? 2.) made an, "unreasonable attack upon science?
3.) What role do you think I “have decided to give God”?
It would be very helpful if you would please provide precise examples of what in the world you are talking about here, because from where I sit, these accusations that unfortunately you have decided to make are entirely baseless and more seriously are deceptive.
Rather, you should be stating, Yes, that is Dr Jonathan Sarfati.
It’s clear that thoroughly accurate information is needed here, thus these excerpts from Jonathan’s biography (at Speaker: Dr Jonathan Sarfati · Creation.com) are the following FACTS:
Dr Sarfati holds citizenship’s of Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. He earned a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from a secular NZ university. Dr Sarfati co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals including one on high-temperature superconductors published in Nature when he was 22.
Jonathan was a co-founder of an Apologetics Society in New Zealand, then joined Creation Ministries International in Australia in 1996. In 2010, he and his American wife transferred from the Australian office to the USA office near Atlanta.
Dr Sarfati has authored some of the most popular and powerful books on the issues of origins, strongly defending biblical (‘young earth’) creation and refuting the strongest arguments for evolution and millions of years. His first book, Refuting Evolution, has sold half a million copies, making it the best-selling creationist book of all time (apart from the Bible!). His latest and most important book is The Genesis Account, a thorough 800-page theological and scientific commentary on Genesis 1–11.
Jonathan is also a chess master and former New Zealand chess champion, and drew a tournament game with former world champion Boris Spassky. One specialty is playing simultaneous chess games with multiple players, sometimes ‘blindfold’, i.e. from memory.
Jonathan holds a:
B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry (with condensed matter and nuclear physics papers substituted)
Ph.D. in Spectroscopy (Physical Chemistry)
Jonathan was awarded in:
1988: New Zealand Chess Champion
1988: F.I.D.E. Master title, The International Chess Federation
and I would add, Jonathan is a very diligent hard working, honest and devout Messianic Jew who has written and produced a prodigious volume of scientifically accurate, and theologically consistent apologetic material in most media formats for the proclaiming of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ here on Earth.
Please tell me Mitchell, how in the world are you able to actually believe what you have written here, "Not even close. God saw how evolution (as he had set up for living things to develop) demonstrated that cooperation was the most effective survival strategy and thus He said “it is good.”
I understand that you are reciting a view that’s consistent with your worldview, but why don’t you understand you’re making MASSIVE ASSUMPTIONS here:
1.) You state that God set up evolution, as though it is a fact, when truthfully, it is only yourASSUMPTION!
There NEVER, EVER WAS ANY EVOLUTION, that is and always has been a rebellious belief edifice that does NOT BELIEVE, the plain words of the Holy Scripture.
The ERROR of evolution is an extraordinarily WEAK EXCUSE for those in the secular world who wholeheartedly believe that God does NOT exist because they assume that everything we see in the universe can be explained materialistically through natural processes.
Then most unfortunately, there are the COMPROMISING Christians, the Theistic evolutionists who attempt to marry the secular, atheist evolution nonsense with the Holy Bible and in doing so, unwittingly and it appears unknowingly, tie themselves in knots, by forcing onto the Holy Bible false words and meanings to support the multi billions of years since creation that allows evolution the enormous length of time it needs for those faithful to believe it, to completely swallow the lie, despite the obvious contradictions it has with the Holy Scriptures. The Holy Scriptures must must always take precedence over mans imperfect speculations.
It is ever so clear to me that a faithful and honest, plain reading of the Holy Scriptures by even a child in the original languages will still understand the Truth as written in the Words from God of HOW He Created everything that exists, and that is HE SPOKE IT ALL INTO EXISTENCE, just as the SAME CREATOR did when incarnate on Earth, Jesus, did when He performed many of His miracles here on Earth. The RESULT WAS IMMEDIATE!
Please Mitchell, JUST STOP HERE A MOMENT, AND REFLECT ON THAT CLEAR AND SIMPLE FACT. IMMEDIATE!
THAT MEANS INSTANTLY! NO DELAY, no billions of years, not even one year, GOD SPOKE AND IT WAS SO!
What you are not appearing to be understanding here is the ABSOLUTE CHARACTER of God Himself, He is PURE LOVE, He is PERFECTLY JUST, He does not want there to be any suffering or pain or tears or grief or sorrow. And in the coming age, He will wipe away every tear for ever and ever.
It is utterly beyond my comprehension how anyone can read the Bible, know Jesus though the Holy Spirit and then believe that our Gracious, Loving, Righteous and Just Creator used evolution.
Words fail me as to how massively inane that belief actually is.
God isn’t limited by anything and He is ABSOLUTELY HOLY.
God is not also incompetent, He is the Master Designer and He is the One and Only perfect Creator WHO creates by SPEAKING Words from His mouth, and IT IS SO, IMMEDIATELY.
Evolution is a lie straight from the pit, and it is leading millions away from the truth.
I have seen many claims here on this website ACCUSING faithful, honest Christian brothers and sisters, (who know the Holy Bible is faithful and true, who believe that God SPOKE ALL of Creation into existence,) OF deceit and of telling lies and of distorting the truth. These shameful accusations profusely emanate from those who have given themselves over to the LIE OF EVOLUTION; “you shall know them by their fruit”.
I apologise if my words have hurt anyone, but the Truth must be proclaimed with BOLDNESS. I wish and hope for all to understand that not only did God not use evolution, HE would NEVER use such an egregiously awful process to create, everything about evolution is precisely the EXACT OPPOSITE of WHO God IS. Again He is HOLY, PURE JUSTICE, PERFECT LOVE, COMPLETE RIGHTEOUSNESS.
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
God Bless,
Your brother in Jesus Christ our Lord,
jon
Rubbish. Much of the best work in ToE has come from Christians and Jews.
That’s exactly the problem with YEC: it doesn’t rest on scripture, it rests on a priori rationalistic assumptions which by necessity require ignoring what scripture actually is, namely ancient literature written to ancient people.
That’s not in the text.
There’s room in the text, as devout scholars down the ages have noted, for even a trillion years, however silly I think that is.
You still haven’t ever addressed – nor has any YECer here – the fact that at least as far back as the eighth century scholars who grew up learning Hebrew concluded that the earth is uncountably old and the universe unimaginably older, just from analyzing the Hebrew. If they had any scientific assumptions at all, it was a belief that all Creation was made of just four elements and that the earth was at the center of the universe.
They’re not shameful when they’re true, and if they aren’t true then refute them – do the science, do the math, show the problems.
And posting videos from sources that can’t manage to write a single article without lying doesn’t count.
Yes, it must, which is why there have been repeated calls here for YEC types to repent of the falsehoods. It isn’t just science they post lies about, it’s scripture and it’s what others have written here.
Honesty is not compromise, it is obedience to the commandment to not bear false witness.
If the shoe fits, wear it. When you delve into YEC articles, read the references and sources, examine the data, verify the terms and definitions, check for self consistency, and contextualize the quotations, what always emerges is deceit, fabrication, or at least distortion by people willing to compromise the truth.
Utterly irrelevant nonsense!
Nothing whatsoever is invented!
The “INCONVENIENT REALITY” to which I was referring, was no “invention” whatsoever, I was referring to the utterly impossible improbability of the ‘assumed’ very first living cell having by sheer chance an efficient functioning means of producing energy for cellular functions to keep it alive long enough to grow strong and flourish to then expend the relatively enormous amount of its energy and resources to reproduce itself in a manner that allowed the offspring to grow and do the same, hence an information drafting, coding, writing, reading, and transferring system and structure was obviously of necessity required.
As you’re insisting on “the math to back it up”, perhaps it’s incumbent upon you, to provide the ‘math’ that supports your denial of what is so clearly obvious to me and many others.
What absolute nonsense once again.
There is nothing untrue about the fact that all living cells have amazing biological machinery operating at efficiencies that human made machine designers can only ever dream about. Whether you call those nano-machines or robots or microscopic cellular machines, or biological robots or whatever, all of them are accurate for the amazing tiny machines that keep living cells operating and more importantly ALIVE!
More importantly, the CMI video title “AMAZING ROBOTICS IN ALL LIVING CELLS” is an accurate summation of what exists in the real world, and fairly describes what the video content is about.
Unfortunately, it’s most certainly not the now familiar claim of being a “lie” as you predictably make, as also some others do regularly it seems on this website to matters that are in fact honest and truthful. The downright disgraceful denigration of Bible believing Christians who accept the creation account as real history by some on this site needs to be called out for what it is: 'Dishonest.
The unbiblical COMPROMISE of the Holy Bible known as Theistic evolution is as I have previously stated, causing many millions of people to leave the faith.
Here in Australia, thousands of churches that only forty to fifty years ago were packed full with honest, faithful Christians are now in many cases, particularly in some regional areas, almost empty with only a handful of faithful believers left.
Young people who have been indoctrinated into the false belief that evolution is real, see no point in Christianity anymore, as they believe Darwin has explained how we came to exist, and thus are not becoming Christians, hence Churches are dying year by year as the atheist and agnostic populations in Australia grow.
The false claims that I’ve seen expressed here on this site all too often that belief in the Holy Bible’s plain teaching of creation by God in six ordinary days ex nihilo is causing people to leave the church is egregiously wrong and is one of the lies that I see repeated on this website with monotonous regularity.
Dear Roymond,
why do you make such egregiously false statements?
What biased sampling are you referring to?
How could you possibly know what sampling I have conducted?
It is very clear here for all to see that:
First you make an assumption that you could not possibly know.
Second, you make a statement predicated upon your assumption; a practice that is not reasonable nor is it logical. It appears to be based solely upon your worldview, as far as I can discern from what you have written
I am saddened that you have such a jaded and low view of Christians who don’t believe exactly what you believe to be true.
You may choose to believe what you have written, but if you are completely honest, you will freely admit that your claim of 7,000 BC is wholly based on a secular dating methodology that in all honesty cannot be accurately calibrated, at all, and relies on spurious assumptions to achieve that date that conflicts with the genealogies as set out in the Holy Bible. Trusting God’s Word to man, the Holy Bible is not foolish.
Of course science requires honesty!
I would have thought that was a given!
Archaeology is a forensic science that by its very nature is not capable of anywhere near the same degree of certainty as practical operational science can determine from performing an experiment in the lab over and over again and achieving the same results.
Much is not known about events of the distant past, particularly with regard to specific dates of events in the distant past.
The exception to this is eyewitness historical accounts, as we have recorded in the Holy Bible, that faithfully tell us the sequence and approximately when events occurred.
I will trust the Holy Bible always, and where results from the forensic sciences are contrary to the Holy Scriptures, I will always trust God’s Word over mankind’s fallible speculations.
Well of course that particular Holy Bible verse from Genesis 1 does NOT have any bearing on ‘evolution’, simply because evolution is a man made construct, a false edifice leading many people astray from the truth written in God’s Holy Word.
Belief in evolution requires many assumptions that simply aren’t consistent with Scripture that’s written ever so clearly in the Holy Bible, nor does evolution fit with what we observe in the laboratory when performing rigorous operational science.
Sure, there are many who are performing science in the field and in the lab within an ‘evolution’ worldview, and they confirm what they believe, it’s called confirmation bias.
But I wonder how many of those scientists, if pressed without possible negative consequences of perhaps losing a large research funding grant, or losing the prestige of having one’s research paper published in say ‘Science’ or ‘Nature’ or any of 100 other journals, would still maintain that they aren’t making any assumptions about dates of say fossils for instance, or would still find the ages of soft tissue found in real unmineralised dinosaur bone to be 66+ million years old?
It’s quite amazing that evolutionists actually believe the soft tissue found in real unmineralised dinosaur bones are 66+ million years old when easily repeatable straightforward laboratory experiments clearly demonstrate that the established laws of both physics and chemistry are severely violated when the soft tissue found in real unmineralised dinosaur bone are loudly proclaimed to be 66+ million years old?
Unfortunately, such is the strength of the hold that belief in evolution has upon many people; I believe it to be a spiritual deception, that affects many otherwise intelligent men and women.
No, it’s not calibrated, it’s directly measured. And if it changed, then either God caused a pointless and deceptive miracle, atoms ceased to exist, or the Earth turned into a ball of radioactive plasma.
It relies on the assumptions that reality is real and is objectively knowable, that our senses give an accurate view of reality, and that measurable physical constants with observed effects on properties of the universe do not magically change with no evidence.
I don’t know of anyone who thought that pterotracheoids were closely related to littorinoids, and yet there are at least three research groups within the last five years who have found that based on statistical analysis of DNA sequences. I also don’t know of anyone who thought that Plesiotrochus had a Quaternary geographic range including the Carolinas, and yet I’ve seen two specimens of it from there.
Given that I work in a field (systematic invertebrate paleontology) where a big grant might be a few tens of thousands of dollars, and occasionally someone in the field will manage to get a grant, that’s not an issue. It’s also a slander against scientists in relevant fields.
I just stated the assumptions made, and each one is also required for knowing that anything in the past existed at all.
That’s still a lie; the bones and tissues have been mineralized.
What “established laws”? The same ones that say that radiometric decay can’t change speed?
This being Sunday, I neither believe nor disbelieve but am open to whatever God has in store.
Since there’s not enough in scripture to say one way or another, so I don’t have an opinion.
My gut feeling is that true artificial intelligence is impossible, but given how little we know about intelligence in the first place that’s not worth much. I wrote a short story once where humans out in the stars encountered a civilization of machine intelligences and wondered where their search for AI had gone wrong, only to learn that those intelligences had started out as an organic race who had learned to copy their minds to computers, an expression of my conviction that machine intelligence is a non-starter. Still, I won’t be crushed if it turns out differently.
Exactly – you invented an inconvenience. You didn’t do any science, you didn’t do the math, you just have a feeling and invented an inconvenience to fit it. As I stated–
“Unless you have the math to back it up, claiming an inconvenience in science is no different than complaining that your refrigerator won’t make dry ice for you.”
You haven’t put forth anything but your subjective feeling, and it is not incumbent on me to respond with any rigor – it is up to the one making a proposition to present it with sufficient rigor that there is something to respond to. If you’ll do some actual science and show the math so there’s something to refute, then we can talk about a rigorous response. But since all you gave was unsubstantiated opinion, the only response can be a request for something substantive.
I say there’s a lie when there’s a lie. To do otherwise would be to participate in the lie. Check Exodus 20:16.
I refuse to call anyone who imposes a modern scientific worldview onto the scriptures as a “Bible believing Christian”. The only way to conclude that the two Creations stories are meant as history is to require that they fit modern rationalistic conceptions of how things should be written – and that means that the foundation is not scripture but is rationalistic human philosophy.
It is both arrogant and idolatrous to approach the opening of Genesis as though one can know what kind of literature it is without having to actually study. I will not engage in that idolatry.
In eight years of university I never saw anyone leave the faith due to “Theistic evolution”, but I saw hundreds leave it because they discovered the very thing I pointed out: that AiG and Creation Ministries and all other YEC groups lie – and they lie not just about science, they lie about the scriptures. YEC was also the top reason people rejected the Gospel, followed by the astounding legalism of YEC Christians.
Of course – they’re just following what YEC teaches, that if there’s one scientific error in the text then the whole Bible is a loss.
That is very unChristian theology! “How we came to exist” has nothing to do with becoming a Christian (except insofar as some Christians tell this lie). Becoming a Christian has to do with Jesus, and Jesus only – not history and science as YEC would have it.
The Bible does not teach that. Moses didn’t write any such thing.
Moses took the Egyptian creation story and changed it, using one of the most powerful ways of teaching there is: taking something that is familiar but isn’t right and altering it; every alteration gets attention and sticks in the memory. Consider if someone telling the story of Cinderella said that the fairy godmother asked Cinderella for a show box and turned that into a coach – everyone listening would sit up and ask, “What!!!” That’s exactly what Moses does: the Israelites were familiar with the Egyptian creation story, and he alters it right in the second word, and then in the third, and over and over through the story, knocking down the Egyptian view of the universe, slapping down Egyptians gods, declaring YHWH-Elohim king of all, asserting that night and darkness are not the enemy of God but His servants, proclaiming that humans are the ‘statues’ of God in the temple that is the world – declaring that the world is YHWH-Elohim’s temple!, and more.
In the YEC view of Genesis 1, taking the first three (Hebrew) words, there’s hardly a short paragraph of theology. But read it as what it is and there’s easily a fifteen-minute homily! So my question is why does YEC insist we ignore what the scripture is and thus demand that all the theology Moses put there for us get thrown away?
