Welcome guest. Before posting on our computer help forum, you must register. Click here it's easy and free.

Poll

Which do you believe?

Evolution (Charles Darwin)
7 (70%)
Creation (God)
3 (30%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Author Topic: Evolution or Creationism?  (Read 25158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Accessless

    Topic Starter


    Adviser
  • Thanked: 15
    • Yes
  • Computer: Specs
  • Experience: Experienced
  • OS: Windows 7
Evolution or Creationism?
« on: September 18, 2009, 01:24:48 PM »
An English film as just been released called Creation, however it has yet to be revealed in America because of controversy towards Cristian teachings (No one will publish it). So which do you believe? The theory of creation or evolution?

In case anyone is wondering personally I believe in evolution but I don't rule out divine intervention or even planing and execution of the end results of evolution (basically that things change over time but that's probably how god works).

Please Post comments because the poll is largely a meaningless eye catcher. You may change your vote at any time. (I think)

billrich

  • Guest
Re: Evolution or Creationism?
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2009, 01:45:05 PM »
Who created the Creator?

 ???

Salmon Trout

  • Guest
Re: Evolution or Creationism?
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2009, 01:54:30 PM »
Personally, I think that the fact that this film cannot get a release in the USA shows just what a backward country it is. And they have the colossal cheek to claim to be the world leader. Still, it seems their power is being cut down to size by world events. About time.

Accessless

    Topic Starter


    Adviser
  • Thanked: 15
    • Yes
  • Computer: Specs
  • Experience: Experienced
  • OS: Windows 7
Re: Evolution or Creationism?
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2009, 02:10:53 PM »
Personally, I think that the fact that this film cannot get a release in the USA shows just what a backward country it is. And they have the colossal cheek to claim to be the world leader. Still, it seems their power is being cut down to size by world events. About time.

Unless you believe Doctor Who then when did we say that we were masters of the world? What power? Maybe 100 years ago your statement would be valid but... it's 2009. These days England is that little bloke you see  pop up behind the big bloke that started the fight and says "Yeah!". Only to hide in the corner when fighting brakes out.

Who created the Creator?

 ???

His mother & father :P

Salmon Trout

  • Guest
Re: Evolution or Creationism?
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2009, 02:22:21 PM »
At least we can spell "break". As to the other thing, come on! What planet have you been living on lately? Americans are always saying they are the world's "only superpower" and that they think they have a God given right to boss everybody else around. All that "shining beacon on a hill" crap. But all you can do is make fun of "England". As for hiding in the corner, we didn't do that either in Iraq or Afghanistan, or when fighting the Irish terrorists the USA funded in the 1970s 80s and 90s.

876543219



    Beginner

    Thanked: 3
    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
    « Reply #5 on: September 18, 2009, 02:23:16 PM »
    What created Anything one day nothing Exploded there have always have being something Nothing can't explode the creator wasn't created he was here forever.


     
    Things change dogs turn into different kinds of dogs cats turn into different kinds of cats

    but cats don't change into birds


    if a Beagle labrador border collie Poodle black labs great dane  Chihuahua Golden Retriever Siberian Husky
    Rottweilers pitbull dalmation doberman,   and all the other dogs, and cats, and all the different kinds of all the Animals went on the ark it would of sank if they all could of even fitted in the Boat  only two of every kind  but not over the 660 estimated kinds of Dogs and the millions of kinds of animals

    The ark did not look like this
    http://www.beginningingenesis.com/fake%20ark.jpg

    The ark was eprox 450 feet long 150 feet longer than a football field




    More than 50 percent of Americans believe that God created people  according to this cbs poll

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/opinion/polls/main657083.shtml


     


    « Last Edit: September 18, 2009, 03:47:10 PM by 876543219 »
    Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

    Salmon Trout

    • Guest
    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
    « Reply #6 on: September 18, 2009, 04:01:20 PM »

    The ark was eprox 450 feet long 150 feet longer than a football field


     ::)

    harry 48



      Egghead

    • lay back , relax and chill out
    • Thanked: 129
      • Yes
      • Yes
      • Yes
      • Dribbling Pensioner
    • Certifications: List
    • Experience: Familiar
    • OS: Windows 7
    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
    « Reply #7 on: September 18, 2009, 04:22:32 PM »
    At least we can spell "break". As to the other thing, come on! What planet have you been living on lately? Americans are always saying they are the world's "only superpower" and that they think they have a God given right to boss everybody else around. All that "shining beacon on a hill" crap. But all you can do is make fun of "England". As for hiding in the corner, we didn't do that either in Iraq or Afghanistan, or when fighting the Irish terrorists the USA funded in the 1970s 80s and 90s.


    you go for it salmon trout , we here in northern ireland had to live with the murders and bombers for 30 years

    back to the topic , what was it , o yes , i believe in evolution i have asked a lot of christians to work out when they think by the bible when adam and eve where created and the answer was only in the very high 1000s , but the earth and its animals go back millions of years , the latest animal to be found is 64 million years old

    876543219



      Beginner

      Thanked: 3
      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
      « Reply #8 on: September 18, 2009, 04:24:53 PM »
      the bible tells us how big the ark was

      Noah's Ark was huge! If you wrongly imagine the Ark looked like some of those little cartoon boats in children's story books, with a couple of elephants' trunks and giraffes' necks sticking out the top, think again.

      Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger, because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

      (A cubit was the length of a man's arm from fingertips to elbow.)


      carbon dating and other methods of determening the age of something are wrong
      evulutionist don't have one good inbetween fossil
      Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

      Salmon Trout

      • Guest
      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
      « Reply #9 on: September 18, 2009, 04:28:11 PM »
      Bull. Such a boat built out of the material available (wood) would collapse under its own weight. Do you really believe that BS?

      876543219



        Beginner

        Thanked: 3
        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
        « Reply #10 on: September 18, 2009, 04:41:39 PM »
        and these wooding ships were designed by humans

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world's_largest_wooden_ships

        The dimensions of the Ark are convincing for two reasons: the proportions are like that of a modern cargo ship, and it is about as large as a wooden ship can be built. The cubit gives us a good indication of size.1 With the cubit’s measurement, we know that the Ark must have been at least 450 feet (137 m) long, 75 feet (23 m) wide, and 45 feet (14 m) high. In the Western world, wooden sailing ships never got much longer than about 330 feet (100 m), yet the ancient Greeks built vessels at least this size 2,000 years earlier. China built huge wooden ships in the 1400s that may have been as large as the Ark. The biblical Ark is one of the largest wooden ships of all time—a mid-sized cargo ship by today’s standards.
         

        did you even look up anything to back up your thinking 


        Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

        billrich

        • Guest
        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
        « Reply #11 on: September 18, 2009, 04:50:44 PM »
        Who created the Creator.
        His mother & father :P

        The creator created everything. Did the creator create his own Mother and Father?  Your reason is circular. 
        No one can answer the question:  Who created the creator?

        We don't know, we cannot know and it does not matter.

        harry 48



          Egghead

        • lay back , relax and chill out
        • Thanked: 129
          • Yes
          • Yes
          • Yes
          • Dribbling Pensioner
        • Certifications: List
        • Experience: Familiar
        • OS: Windows 7
        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
        « Reply #12 on: September 18, 2009, 04:57:58 PM »
        there's no way they could build a boat that size in the time they had

        reddevilggg



          Expert

          Thanked: 69
        • Experience: Beginner
        • OS: Windows 7
        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
        « Reply #13 on: September 18, 2009, 05:02:11 PM »

        God is in all of us, how you understand God is a different story
        11 cheers for binary !

        876543219



          Beginner

          Thanked: 3
          Re: Evolution or Creationism?
          « Reply #14 on: September 18, 2009, 05:04:03 PM »
          How Could Noah Build the Ark?
          The Bible does not tell us that Noah and his sons built the Ark by themselves. Noah could have hired skilled laborers or had relatives, such as Methuselah and Lamech, help build the vessel. However, nothing indicates that they could not—or that they did not—build the Ark themselves in the time allotted. The physical strength and mental processes of men in Noah’s day was at least as great (quite likely, even superior) to our own.2 They certainly would have had efficient means for harvesting and cutting timber, as well as for shaping, transporting, and erecting the massive beams and boards required.
          If one or two men today can erect a large house in just 12 weeks, how much more could three or four men do in a few years? Adam’s descendants were making complex musical instruments, forging metal, and building cities—their tools, machines, and techniques were not primitive.

          it's not even a foot a day
          Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

          reddevilggg



            Expert

            Thanked: 69
          • Experience: Beginner
          • OS: Windows 7
          Re: Evolution or Creationism?
          « Reply #15 on: September 18, 2009, 05:06:12 PM »
          I cant actually believe, in this day and age, that people are discussing this question as if it was real. 

          This is going to lead nowhere good. it's religion. Not a good topic subject.
          11 cheers for binary !

          876543219



            Beginner

            Thanked: 3
            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
            « Reply #16 on: September 18, 2009, 05:10:13 PM »
            60 percent of americans believe in noah's ark


            like you none believed the flood was even coming


            over 80 percent of people believe in god i find that intrusting because
            only half the people believe in creation so 30 percent think that god is lying
            « Last Edit: September 18, 2009, 05:22:28 PM by 876543219 »
            Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

            reddevilggg



              Expert

              Thanked: 69
            • Experience: Beginner
            • OS: Windows 7
            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
            « Reply #17 on: September 18, 2009, 05:20:58 PM »

            wow, cosmic.  ::)
            11 cheers for binary !

            876543219



              Beginner

              Thanked: 3
              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
              « Reply #18 on: September 18, 2009, 05:29:03 PM »
              those stats are real look at the cbs poll in my precvious post and google percent of people who believe in god most of the polls i read say more 75 percent

              i was surprised to see the polls that asks people if they believe in evulution none i saw were above 35 percent and they showed this is how it happend in schools as if it's a fact it happend that way



              i didn't make this but i agree with it


              Scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to estimate the ages of rocks, fossils, and the earth. Many people have been led to believe that radiometric dating methods have proved the earth to be billions of years old. This has caused many in the church to reevaluate the biblical creation account, specifically the meaning of the word “day” in Genesis 1. With our focus on one particular form of radiometric dating—carbon dating—we will see that carbon dating strongly supports a young earth. Note that, contrary to a popular misconception, carbon dating is not used to date rocks at millions of years old.

              Basics
              Before we get into the details of how radiometric dating methods are used, we need to review some preliminary concepts from chemistry. Recall that atoms are the basic building blocks of matter. Atoms are made up of much smaller particles called protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and neutrons make up the center (nucleus) of the atom, and electrons form shells around the nucleus.

              The number of protons in the nucleus of an atom determines the element. For example, all carbon atoms have 6 protons, all atoms of nitrogen have 7 protons, and all oxygen atoms have 8 protons. The number of neutrons in the nucleus can vary in any given type of atom. So, a carbon atom might have six neutrons, or seven, or possibly eight—but it would always have six protons. An “isotope” is any of several different forms of an element, each having different numbers of neutrons. The illustration below shows the three isotopes of carbon.

              Some isotopes of certain elements are unstable; they can spontaneously change into another kind of atom in a process called “radioactive decay.” Since this process presently happens at a known measured rate, scientists attempt to use it like a “clock” to tell how long ago a rock or fossil formed. There are two main applications for radiometric dating. One is for potentially dating fossils (once-living things) using carbon-14 dating, and the other is for dating rocks and the age of the earth using uranium, potassium and other radioactive atoms.

               
              The atomic number corresponds to the number of protons in an atom. Atomic mass is a combination of the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. (The electrons are so much lighter that they do not contribute significantly to the mass of an atom.)
              Carbon-14 Dating
              Carbon-14 (14C), also referred to as radiocarbon, is claimed to be a reliable dating method for determining the age of fossils up to 50,000 to 60,000 years. If this claim is true, the biblical account of a young earth (about 6,000 years) is in question, since 14C dates of tens of thousands of years are common.1

              When a scientist’s interpretation of data does not match the clear meaning of the text in the Bible, we should never reinterpret the Bible. God knows just what He meant to say, and His understanding of science is infallible, whereas ours is fallible. So we should never think it necessary to modify His Word. Genesis 1 defines the days of creation to be literal days (a number with the word “day” always means a normal day in the Old Testament, and the phrase “evening and morning” further defines the days as literal days). Since the Bible is the inspired Word of God, we should examine the validity of the standard interpretation of 14C dating by asking several questions:

              Is the explanation of the data derived from empirical, observational science, or an interpretation of past events (historical science)?
              Are there any assumptions involved in the dating method?
              Are the dates provided by 14C dating consistent with what we observe?
              Do all scientists accept the 14C dating method as reliable and accurate?
              All radiometric dating methods use scientific procedures in the present to interpret what has happened in the past. The procedures used are not necessarily in question. The interpretation of past events is in question. The secular (evolutionary) worldview interprets the universe and world to be billions of years old. The Bible teaches a young universe and earth. Which worldview does science support? Can carbon-14 dating help solve the mystery of which worldview is more accurate?

              The use of carbon-14 dating is often misunderstood. Carbon-14 is mostly used to date once-living things (organic material). It cannot be used directly to date rocks; however, it can potentially be used to put time constraints on some inorganic material such as diamonds (diamonds could contain carbon-14). Because of the rapid rate of decay of 14C, it can only give dates in the thousands-of-year range and not millions.

              There are three different naturally occurring varieties (isotopes) of carbon: 12C, 13C, and 14C.

              Carbon-14 is used for dating because it is unstable (radioactive), whereas 12C and 13C are stable. Radioactive means that 14C will decay (emit radiation) over time and become a different element. During this process (called “beta decay”) a neutron in the 14C atom will be converted into a proton. By losing one neutron and gaining one proton, 14C is changed into nitrogen-14 (14N = 7 protons and 7 neutrons).

                If 14C is constantly decaying, will the earth eventually run out of 14C? The answer is no. Carbon-14 is constantly being added to the atmosphere. Cosmic rays from outer space, which contain high levels of energy, bombard the earth’s upper atmosphere. These cosmic rays collide with atoms in the atmosphere and can cause them to come apart. Neutrons that come from these fragmented atoms collide with 14N atoms (the atmosphere is made mostly of nitrogen and oxygen) and convert them into 14C atoms (a proton changes into a neutron).

              Once 14C is produced, it combines with oxygen in the atmosphere (12C behaves like 14C and also combines with oxygen) to form carbon dioxide (CO2). Because CO2 gets incorporated into plants (which means the food we eat contains 14C and 12C), all living things should have the same ratio of 14C and 12C in them as in the air we breathe.

              How the Carbon-14 Dating Process Works
              Once a living thing dies, the dating process begins. As long as an organism is alive it will continue to take in 14C; however, when it dies, it will stop. Since 14C is radioactive (decays into 14N), the amount of 14C in a dead organism gets less and less over time. Therefore, part of the dating process involves measuring the amount of 14C that remains after some has been lost (decayed). Scientists now use a device called an “Accelerator Mass Spectrometer” (AMS) to determine the ratio of 14C to 12C, which increases the assumed accuracy to about 80,000 years. In order to actually do the dating, other things need to be known. Two such things include the following questions:

              How fast does 14C decay?
              What was the starting amount of 14C in the creature when it died?
              The decay rate of radioactive elements is described in terms of half-life. The half-life of an atom is the amount of time it takes for half of the atoms in a sample to decay. The half-life of 14C is 5,730 years. For example, a jar starting with all 14C atoms at time zero will contain half 14C atoms and half 14N atoms at the end of 5,730 years (one half-life). At the end of 11,460 years (two half-lives) the jar will contain one-quarter 14C atoms and three-quarter 14N atoms.

              Since the half-life of 14C is known (how fast it decays), the only part left to determine is the starting amount of 14C in a fossil. If scientists know the original amount of 14C in a creature when it died, they can measure the current amount and then calculate how many half-lives have passed.

              Since no one was there to measure the amount of 14C when a creature died, scientists need to find a method to determine how much 14C has decayed. To do this, scientists use the main isotope of carbon, called carbon-12 (12C). Because 12C is a stable isotope of carbon, it will remain constant; however, the amount of 14C will decrease after a creature dies. All living things take in carbon (14C and 12C) from eating and breathing. Therefore, the ratio of 14C to 12C in living creatures will be the same as in the atmosphere. This ratio turns out to be about one 14C atom for every 1 trillion 12C atoms. Scientists can use this ratio to help determine the starting amount of 14C.

              When an organism dies, this ratio (1 to 1 trillion) will begin to change. The amount of 12C will remain constant, but the amount of 14C will become less and less. The smaller the ratio, the longer the organism has been dead. The following illustration demonstrates how the age is estimated using this ratio.

              Percent 14C Remaining Percent 12C Remaining  Ratio Number of Half-Lives Years Dead(Age of Fossil)
              100 100 1 to 1T 0 0
              50 100 1 to 2T 1 5,730
              25 100 1 to 4T 2 11,460
              12.5 100 1 to 8T 3 17,190
              6.25 100 1 to 16T 4 22,920
              3.125 100 1 to 32T 5 28,650

              T = Trillion

              A Critical Assumption
              A critical assumption used in carbon-14 dating has to do with this ratio. It is assumed that the ratio of 14C to 12C in the atmosphere has always been the same as it is today (1 to 1 trillion). If this assumption is true, then the AMS 14C dating method is valid up to about 80,000 years. Beyond this number, the instruments scientists use would not be able to detect enough remaining 14C to be useful in age estimates. This is a critical assumption in the dating process. If this assumption is not true, then the method will give incorrect dates. What could cause this ratio to change? If the production rate of 14C in the atmosphere is not equal to the removal rate (mostly through decay), this ratio will change. In other words, the amount of 14C being produced in the atmosphere must equal the amount being removed to be in a steady state (also called “equilibrium”). If this is not true, the ratio of 14C to 12C is not a constant, which would make knowing the starting amount of 14C in a specimen difficult or impossible to accurately determine.

              Dr. Willard Libby, the founder of the carbon-14 dating method, assumed this ratio to be constant. His reasoning was based on a belief in evolution, which assumes the earth must be billions of years old. Assumptions in the scientific community are extremely important. If the starting assumption is false, all the calculations based on that assumption might be correct but still give a wrong conclusion.

              In Dr. Libby’s original work, he noted that the atmosphere did not appear to be in equilibrium. This was a troubling idea for Dr. Libby since he believed the world was billions of years old and enough time had passed to achieve equilibrium. Dr. Libby’s calculations showed that if the earth started with no 14C in the atmosphere, it would take up to 30,000 years to build up to a steady state (equilibrium).

              If the cosmic radiation has remained at its present intensity for 20,000 or 30,000 years, and if the carbon reservoir has not changed appreciably in this time, then there exists at the present time a complete balance between the rate of disintegration of radiocarbon atoms and the rate of assimilation of new radiocarbon atoms for all material in the life-cycle.2
              Dr. Libby chose to ignore this discrepancy (nonequilibrium state), and he attributed it to experimental error. However, the discrepancy has turned out to be very real. The ratio of 14C /12C is not constant.

              The Specific Production Rate (SPR) of C-14 is known to be 18.8 atoms per gram of total carbon per minute. The Specific Decay Rate (SDR) is known to be only 16.1 disintegrations per gram per minute.3
              What does this mean? If it takes about 30,000 years to reach equilibrium and 14C is still out of equilibrium, then maybe the earth is not very old.

              Magnetic Field of the Earth
              Other factors can affect the production rate of 14C in the atmosphere. The earth has a magnetic field around it which helps protect us from harmful radiation from outer space. This magnetic field is decaying (getting weaker). The stronger the field is around the earth, the fewer the number of cosmic rays that are able to reach the atmosphere. This would result in a smaller production of 14C in the atmosphere in earth’s past.

              The cause for the long term variation of the C-14 level is not known. The variation is certainly partially the result of a change in the cosmic ray production rate of radiocarbon. The cosmic-ray flux, and hence the production rate of C-14, is a function not only of the solar activity but also of the magnetic dipole moment of the Earth.4
              Though complex, this history of the earth’s magnetic field agrees with Barnes’ basic hypothesis, that the field has always freely decayed.... The field has always been losing energy despite its variations, so it cannot be more than 10,000 years old.5
              Earth’s magnetic field is fading. Today it is about 10 percent weaker than it was when German mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss started keeping tabs on it in 1845, scientists say.6
              If the production rate of 14C in the atmosphere was less in the past, dates given using the carbon-14 method would incorrectly assume that more 14C had decayed out of a specimen than what has actually occurred. This would result in giving older dates than the true age.

              Genesis Flood
              What role might the Genesis Flood have played in the amount of carbon? The Flood would have buried large amounts of carbon from living organisms (plant and animal) to form today’s fossil fuels (coal, oil, etc.). The amount of fossil fuels indicates there must have been a vastly larger quantity of vegetation in existence prior to the Flood than exists today. This means that the biosphere just prior to the Flood might have had 500 times more carbon in living organisms than today. This would further dilute the amount of 14C and cause the 14C/12C ratio to be much smaller than today.

              If that were the case, and this C-14 were distributed uniformly throughout the biosphere, and the total amount of biosphere C were, for example, 500 times that of today’s world, the resulting C-14/C-12 ratio would be 1/500 of today’s level....7
              When the Flood is taken into account along with the decay of the magnetic field, it is reasonable to believe that the assumption of equilibrium is a false assumption.

              Because of this false assumption, any age estimates using 14C prior to the Flood will give much older dates than the true age. Pre-Flood material would be dated at perhaps ten times the true age.

              The RATE Group Findings
              In 1997 an eight-year research project was started to investigate the age of the earth. The group was called the RATE group (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth). The team of scientists included:

              Larry Vardiman, PhD Atmospheric Science
              Russell Humphreys, PhD Physics
              Eugene Chaffin, PhD Physics
              John Baumgardner, PhD Geophysics
              Donald DeYoung, PhD Physics
              Steven Austin, PhD Geology
              Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology
              Steven Boyd, PhD Hebraic and Cognate Studies
              The objective was to gather data commonly ignored or censored by evolutionary standards of dating. The scientists reviewed the assumptions and procedures used in estimating the ages of rocks and fossils. The results of the carbon-14 dating demonstrated serious problems for long geologic ages. For example, a series of fossilized wood samples that conventionally have been dated according to their host strata to be from Tertiary to Permian (40-250 million years old) all yielded significant, detectable levels of carbon-14 that would conventionally equate to only 30,000-45,000 years “ages” for the original trees.8 Similarly, a survey of the conventional radiocarbon journals resulted in more than forty examples of supposedly ancient organic materials, including limestones, that contained carbon-14, as reported by leading laboratories.9

              Samples were then taken from ten different coal layers that, according to evolutionists, represent different time periods in the geologic column (Cenozoic, Mesozoic, and Paleozoic). The RATE group obtained these ten coal samples from the U.S. Department of Energy Coal Sample Bank, from samples collected from major coalfields across the United States. The chosen coal samples, which dated millions to hundreds of millions of years old based on standard evolution time estimates, all contained measurable amounts of 14C. In all cases, careful precautions were taken to eliminate any possibility of contamination from other sources. Samples, in all three “time periods”, displayed significant amounts of 14C. This is a significant discovery. Since the half-life of 14C is relatively short (5,730 years), there should be no detectable 14C left after about 100,000 years. The average 14C estimated age for all the layers from these three time periods was approximately 50,000 years. However, using a more realistic pre-Flood 14C /12C ratio reduces that age to about 5,000 years.

              These results indicate that the entire geologic column is less than 100,000 years old—and could be much younger. This confirms the Bible and challenges the evolutionary idea of long geologic ages.

              Because the lifetime of C-14 is so brief, these AMS [Accelerator Mass Spectrometer] measurements pose an obvious challenge to the standard geological timescale that assigns millions to hundreds of millions of years to this part of the rock layer.10
              Another noteworthy observation from the RATE group was the amount of 14C found in diamonds. Secular scientists have estimated the ages of diamonds to be millions to billions of years old using other radiometric dating methods. These methods are also based on questionable assumptions and are discussed elsewhere11. Because of their hardness, diamonds (the hardest known substance) are extremely resistant to contamination through chemical exchange. Since diamonds are considered to be so old by evolutionary standards, finding any 14C in them would be strong support for a recent creation.

              The RATE group analyzed twelve diamond samples for possible carbon-14 content. Similar to the coal results, all twelve diamond samples contained detectable, but lower levels of 14C. These findings are powerful evidence that coal and diamonds cannot be the millions or billions of years old that evolutionists claim. Indeed, these RATE findings of detectable 14C in diamonds have been confirmed independently.12 Carbon-14 found in fossils at all layers of the geologic column, in coal and in diamonds, is evidence which confirms the biblical timescale of thousands of years and not billions.

              Because of C-14’s short half-life, such a finding would argue that carbon and probably the entire physical earth as well must have a recent origin.13
              Conclusion
              All radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age. In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages have been censored. When the assumptions were evaluated and shown faulty, the results supported the biblical account of a global Flood and young earth. Christians should not be afraid of radiometric dating methods. Carbon-14 dating is really the friend of Christians, and it supports a young earth.

              The RATE scientists are convinced that the popular idea attributed to geologist Charles Lyell from nearly two centuries ago, “The present is the key to the past,” is simply not valid for an earth history of millions or billions of years. An alternative interpretation of the carbon-14 data is that the earth experienced a global flood catastrophe which laid down most of the rock strata and fossils.... Whatever the source of the carbon-14, its presence in nearly every sample tested worldwide is a strong challenge to an ancient age. Carbon-14 data is now firmly on the side of the young-earth view of history.14
              « Last Edit: September 18, 2009, 06:44:45 PM by 876543219 »
              Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

              patio

              • Moderator


              • Genius
              • Maud' Dib
              • Thanked: 1769
                • Yes
              • Experience: Beginner
              • OS: Windows 7
              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
              « Reply #19 on: September 18, 2009, 06:53:49 PM »
              Don't even bring up Irish terrorists...
              " Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist should have his head examined. "

              876543219



                Beginner

                Thanked: 3
                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                « Reply #20 on: September 18, 2009, 06:57:13 PM »
                Why can't i delete my post like i could before i can only modify
                Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                quaxo



                  Guru
                • Thanked: 127
                  • Yes
                • Computer: Specs
                • Experience: Guru
                • OS: Windows 11
                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                « Reply #21 on: September 18, 2009, 07:43:34 PM »
                How Could Noah Build the Ark?

                Aliens helped him.  ;D

                Helpmeh



                  Guru

                • Roar.
                • Thanked: 123
                  • Yes
                  • Yes
                • Computer: Specs
                • Experience: Familiar
                • OS: Windows 8
                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                « Reply #22 on: September 18, 2009, 08:37:39 PM »
                Personally, I think this thread was a very bad idea. Too many people believe in one thing or another to get along. Once friends, now separated by religion (or lack thereof). This thread should be deleted, people will argue for far too long.
                Where's MagicSpeed?
                Quote from: 'matt'
                He's playing a game called IRL. Great graphics, *censored* gameplay.

                876543219



                  Beginner

                  Thanked: 3
                  Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                  « Reply #23 on: September 18, 2009, 08:38:54 PM »
                  I agree to disagree it doesn't bug me that people believe something else.
                  Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                  BC_Programmer


                    Mastermind
                  • Typing is no substitute for thinking.
                  • Thanked: 1140
                    • Yes
                    • Yes
                    • BC-Programming.com
                  • Certifications: List
                  • Computer: Specs
                  • Experience: Beginner
                  • OS: Windows 11
                  Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                  « Reply #24 on: September 18, 2009, 09:22:38 PM »
                  Actually, the way you poised the poll makes it obvious that you believe in some cosmic deity that has no form and no shape and is merely a human concept invented to help ease their lives by thinking that something is vouching for them, because they cannot face the inevitable truth that the universe operates in disorder under the rules of order. So of course instead of actually accepted widely publicized, and bleeding obviously true theories they instead argue them with broken arguments that generally involve quotes of bible stories, which I find nothing short of ironic because they combat "theories" on the premise of being unproven and yet do so with fictitious literature, what's more unbelievable still is that they don't seem to notice that what they are doing has been done before.

                  Remember Galileo and the Spanish inquisition?


                  Oh, and let's remember to start a poll!

                  do you believe that:

                  A:) the Earth orbits around the sun (Galileo,Copernicus)
                  B:) The Sun rotates around the Earth (God)

                  Humans thrive on structure, and on order. Since the universe at large operates on a level of increasing entropy, Man created a fictitious being that would augment this disorderly Universe and thus make the entropy easier to accept "will of god" is far easier to accept for some then "Random chance"

                  But fantastic Faith has wondrous powers of "accommodation" and specious tenacity of false pretense of being forever inspiredly right. The process of adjustment has throughout a thousand instances has been the same: Faith is confronted with a discrediting Fact; it curses it and denies it. When the fact is crammed down its throat and it is forced to recognize it, it lyingly denies that it had ever denied it. Then when all mankind has united in joyful acceptance of the new fact, the arch hypocrite declares that it is entirely in accord with its "sacred science," and tries to steal all credit for it as one of its very own grand contributions to "Christian civilization," and sanctimoniously wheezes, "How much grander a concept it gives of the infinite knowledge and glory of Gawd in His wonderful process of Nature"! Oh, Hypocrisy! Thou art the Church of God!

                  The Catholic Church now admits the "Galileo Incident" was a "mistake". According to the Catholic Encyclopedia the Church is only infallible in matters of religious dogma, and its current definition of religious dogma extends only to matters of faith and morals. Thus the Catholic Church made a "mistake" with Galileo because the Church confused religious dogma with a matter of science. However the Church's claim of papal infallibility is still intact because the pope never invoked his infallibility and explicitly claimed that the universe was geocentric, and even if he did it wouldn't count because according to the Church the pope's infallibility only extends to matters of religious dogma and not to matters of science.

                  However it is quite clear that at the time of Galileo the Church's infallible religious dogma did extend to all matters of science including astronomy, biology, geology, geography, and archaeology. Even today religious fundamentalists still insist the Bible is the literal infallible Word of God, inerrant, without contradiction, correct in all matters of Faith and all matters of science. They force the Bible to fit in with today's knowledge of science, like forcing a square peg into a round hole, or they attack any science they can not yet force the Bible to conform to.

                  The priestly principle of the subordination of scientific fact to dogmatic faith is thus naïvely posed by the Catholic Encyclopedia itself which I quote, "When a clearly defined dogma contradicts a scientific assertion, the latter has to be revised." A more palpable and ridiculous untruth has never been uttered by those who still insist on Biblical literalness. No single scientific fact ever discovered and proclaimed, in all the struggling history of Science in defiance of Church, has ever been "revised," altered or withdrawn in deference to religious Dogma. Every fact of science has proudly and triumphantly defied and refuted Dogma and Church, and made them both cheap and ridiculous. Faith hates facts; they are forever divorced on grounds of congenital incompatibility. The Church, True Church, and Protestant, has screamed and reviled at every truth of Science which was ever discovered; with high priestly anathema, the curse of God, with prison, rack, and stake, it has sought to suppress and kill every thought of the human mind, every bold thinker, whose truths for the benefit of mankind have contradicted and ridiculed it and its holy dogmas.

                  Even today there are those trying to prevent the teaching of Evolution in our schools, not for any scientific reason, but simply because Darwin's theory of Evolution conflicts with their current religious dogma. But I do not believe the science of Evolution will be the last nail in the coffin of Biblical literalness, just as the undeniable proof of a heliocentric universe did not end it hundreds of years ago.

                  When it was finally accepted that the Catholic Church was wrong about the structure of our solar system the Catholic Church changed its religious dogma to not include science, claimed that its infallibility never extended to matters of science and therefore is still intact, and now claims the Bible all along agreed with everything science has now proven.
                  I was trying to dereference Null Pointers before it was cool.

                  Helpmeh



                    Guru

                  • Roar.
                  • Thanked: 123
                    • Yes
                    • Yes
                  • Computer: Specs
                  • Experience: Familiar
                  • OS: Windows 8
                  Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                  « Reply #25 on: September 18, 2009, 09:26:58 PM »
                  I agree to disagree it doesn't bug me that people believe something else.

                  I don't care if you believe in somethin I don't or whatever, but sone people get very crazy. Wars happen over things like kids asking eachother who's god is better, then one telling his family that Whatshisface says his god is better bla bla someone gets shot. 
                  Where's MagicSpeed?
                  Quote from: 'matt'
                  He's playing a game called IRL. Great graphics, *censored* gameplay.

                  876543219



                    Beginner

                    Thanked: 3
                    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                    « Reply #26 on: September 18, 2009, 09:29:58 PM »
                    and you say my post are hard to understand i could understand what you were trying to get at there

                    were in the bible does it say that the sun orbits the earth

                    the bible told us the earth was round before it was proven to be round by scentists

                    Consider Isaiah 40:22 which mentions the “circle of the earth.” This description is certainly fitting—particularly when the earth is viewed from space; the earth always appears as a circle, since it is round.

                    Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C.

                    The secular astronomers before the time of Pythagoras must have thought the Bible was wrong about its teaching of a round earth, yet the Bible was exactly right.

                    The earth floats in space
                    A very interesting verse to consider is Job 26:7 which states that God “hangs the earth on nothing.” This verse expresses (in a poetic way) the fact that the earth is unsupported by any other object—something quite unnatural for ancient writers to imagine.

                    Indeed, the earth does float in space. We now have pictures of the earth taken from space that show it floating in the cosmic void.
                    Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                    Aegis



                      Expert

                      Thanked: 67
                      • Yes
                      • Yes
                      • Brian's Mess Of A Web Page
                    • Experience: Experienced
                    • OS: Windows 10
                    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                    « Reply #27 on: September 18, 2009, 09:54:21 PM »
                    Bill Cosby sorted out all this about forty years ago!   ;D

                    "Noah..."
                    "What??!!"
                    "I want you to build me an ark."
                    "What's an ark?"


                    "For you, a thousand times over." - "The Kite Runner"

                    876543219



                      Beginner

                      Thanked: 3
                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                      « Reply #28 on: September 18, 2009, 10:20:03 PM »
                      Noah knew what an ark was
                      Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                      BC_Programmer


                        Mastermind
                      • Typing is no substitute for thinking.
                      • Thanked: 1140
                        • Yes
                        • Yes
                        • BC-Programming.com
                      • Certifications: List
                      • Computer: Specs
                      • Experience: Beginner
                      • OS: Windows 11
                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                      « Reply #29 on: September 18, 2009, 10:25:05 PM »
                      Noah knew what an ark was

                      were you there?
                      I was trying to dereference Null Pointers before it was cool.

                      876543219



                        Beginner

                        Thanked: 3
                        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                        « Reply #30 on: September 18, 2009, 10:28:17 PM »

                        it was a comedy routine

                        you don't hear noah interupting god

                        genesis 6 14Make yourself an ark of gopher wood.[a] Make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch. 15This is how you are to make it: the length of the ark 300 cubits, its breadth 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits. 16Make a roof[c] for the ark, and finish it to a cubit above, and set the door of the ark in its side. Make it with lower, second, and third decks.


                        were were you when monkeys changed into man


                        « Last Edit: September 18, 2009, 10:46:06 PM by 876543219 »
                        Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                        Aegis



                          Expert

                          Thanked: 67
                          • Yes
                          • Yes
                          • Brian's Mess Of A Web Page
                        • Experience: Experienced
                        • OS: Windows 10
                        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                        « Reply #31 on: September 18, 2009, 10:32:48 PM »
                        Geez, it was a comedy routine!

                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0KHt8xrQkk

                         ;D


                        "For you, a thousand times over." - "The Kite Runner"

                        Geek-9pm


                          Mastermind
                        • Geek After Dark
                        • Thanked: 1026
                          • Gekk9pm bnlog
                        • Certifications: List
                        • Computer: Specs
                        • Experience: Expert
                        • OS: Windows 10
                        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                        « Reply #32 on: September 18, 2009, 10:45:42 PM »
                        It would help if we could focus on one idea. To make it a choice of just one thing or the other limits the intellect. Many Evolutionists no longer view Darwin's work as a goo d explanation of the current viewpoint in the present day thinking of Evolutionists.
                        And to say that simply that the creation was by God tends to over simply things.
                        Quote
                        In case anyone is wondering personally I believe in evolution but I don't rule out divine intervention or even planing and execution of the end results of evolution (basically that things change over time but that's probably how god works).
                        A number or religions do not believe in a personal God. They teach that God is a power in the earth, the sky, the animals and unseen spirits. Many teach there are many Gods.
                        The physical evidence is that the earth has been here a long, long time. As well as the Sun, Moon and stars. That fact, by itself, does not prove anything as to how life originated. It does not even answer the question "Did like begin on earth?"

                        I once read a book by Fred Hoyle many years ago. He thought, at that time, that Evolution did not begin on the earth. But  Hoyle was a star-gazer, not a biologist. And he was know to be very wrong on some things. Still, his books are still a good read. I do not really believe all the things he wrote, but it was stimulating to read because he stood up and challenged popular ideas.

                        IMO, it is a mistake to put biology ahead of physics. We have to understand the laws of physics and chemistry first before we can assume how living things can change from one form into another.

                        And to believe in something just because others believe it is a fallacy. I used to read Scientific American. But later I found the ideas they put forth were hogwash. I embarrassed myself later when I repeated the idea of 'poly-water', the theory that water can be a polymer in some conditions, int a conversion with a chemist who kindly just smiled at me. Then I realized I have been had. That magazine would print whatever they liked, not what is really true.

                        Then years later I learned that the same rag had fired on of the best amateur astronomers that did articles for them. Because in his private life he expressed a certain conviction found among some fundamentalists. That had nothing to do with the quality of his writing!

                        So now I am very skeptical of any ideas anybody has about almost anything. People claim that have proof and them they fail to show the proof.

                        So, I do not accept the ides that came from Darwin. Nut neither will I tell you not to read it. Do you know what he really said? And why he said it?  Go ahead. Read it. You might be amazed at what he said and did not say!
                        And the Fundamentalists? It is hard for me to say a good word about them. Their attitudeis something like this. "I am ignorant and proud of it because that is the way the LORD made me!"  -Gag me with a spoon!  ::)

                        So do I believe in Evolution?  The teaching that became the tool of Communism? And the vehicle of Racism?  The doctrine that teaches children never to question anything? No way.I do not support that kind of thing!

                        So now you want to ask me if I believe in God? It is so easy to say you believe in something. But when it is so vague and poorly defined it has little meaning. Lets keep the focus on Evolution. Is it true? What is it? Who has the best definition? Can you prove it? Can you observe it. (Proof and observation are not always the same.)

                        « Last Edit: September 18, 2009, 10:56:02 PM by Geek-9pm »

                        BC_Programmer


                          Mastermind
                        • Typing is no substitute for thinking.
                        • Thanked: 1140
                          • Yes
                          • Yes
                          • BC-Programming.com
                        • Certifications: List
                        • Computer: Specs
                        • Experience: Beginner
                        • OS: Windows 11
                        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                        « Reply #33 on: September 18, 2009, 10:54:45 PM »
                        had to thank you for that one Geek, great post.  ;D
                        I was trying to dereference Null Pointers before it was cool.

                        876543219



                          Beginner

                          Thanked: 3
                          Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                          « Reply #34 on: September 18, 2009, 11:05:39 PM »
                          Evolution                                                                                                        Genesis
                          Sun before earth                                                                                            Earth before sun 

                          land before sea                                                                                              Sea before dry land

                          Atmosphere before sea                                                                                  Sea before atmosphere

                          Sun before light on earth                                                                                Light on earth before sun

                          Stars before earth                                                                                           Earth before stars

                          Earth at same time as planets                                                                        Earth before other planets

                          Sea creatures before land plants                                                                    Land plants before sea creatures

                          Earthworms before starfish                                                                             Starfish before earthworms

                          Land animals before trees                                                                              Trees before land animals

                          Death before man                                                                                           Man before death

                          Thorns and thistles before man                                                                      Man before thorns and thistles

                          TB pathogens & cancer before man (dinosaurs had TB and cancer)               Man before TB pathogens and cancer

                          Reptiles before birds                                                                                      Birds before reptiles

                          Land mammals before whales                                                                       Whales before land animals

                          Simple plants before fruit trees Fruit                                                              trees before other plants*

                          Insects before mammals                                                                                 Mammals (cattle) before “creeping things”*

                          Land mammals before bats                                                                           Bats before land animals

                          Dinosaurs before birds                                                                                 Birds before dinosaurs

                          Insects before flowering plants                                                                   Flowering plants before insects

                          Sun before plants                                                                                         Plants before sun 

                          Dinosaurs before dolphins                                                                           Dolphins before dinosaurs

                          Land reptiles before pterosaurs                                                                 Pterosaurs before land reptiles

                          Land insects before flying insects                                                               Flying insects before land insects
                          Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                          Aegis



                            Expert

                            Thanked: 67
                            • Yes
                            • Yes
                            • Brian's Mess Of A Web Page
                          • Experience: Experienced
                          • OS: Windows 10
                          Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                          « Reply #35 on: September 18, 2009, 11:10:24 PM »
                          Quote
                          were were you when monkeys changed into man

                          I cited a comedy routine to keep this light, so that maybe the thread won't be locked.  You're so afraid of your "God" that you're offended.  Maybe Noah didn't interrupt God, but Moses argued with Him.  Go, Moses.  No, send Aaron.  Go, Moses.  No, Aaron's a better choice.  Finally, God puts down his foot, and Moses goes.

                          You presume to understand "god," who dances his creation, who is creator and his created at the same time, who is part of all of us, whose name we don't even know.  Yahweh?  Jehovah?  "God"?

                          Richard Buckminster Fuller once wrote that God is not a noun.  God is a verb...and goes on to praise God as the dynamic creative force of Universe.

                          I'll have to see if I can find the quote.

                          I don't know why we bother with the old Testament, when the new Covenant was supposed to replace all that, anyway, and when the teachings of Jesus were supposed to be the way to live?

                          What does God say in Genesis?  Let there be light!  (The quantum sea of energy on which we dance.)


                          "For you, a thousand times over." - "The Kite Runner"

                          876543219



                            Beginner

                            Thanked: 3
                            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                            « Reply #36 on: September 18, 2009, 11:23:39 PM »
                             by ken ham i am not ken ham

                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siJVuVfett0&feature=PlayList&p=098AA20033FC4DDF&index=0&playnext=1



                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miIYs3SeoUQ

                            Chapter 6

                            Let us look in detail at some important Christian doctrines, to show why this emphasis on a literal Genesis must be accepted.

                            Suppose that we are being questioned concerning the doctrines Christians believe. Think carefully how you would answer in detail.

                            Why do we believe in marriage?

                            Why do we promote the wearing of clothes?

                            Why are there rules—right and wrong?

                            Why are we sinners—what does that mean?

                            Why is there death and suffering in the world?

                            Why is there to be a new heaven and a new earth?

                            We will consider each one carefully, as it is important to have reasons for what we believe. In fact, God expects His children to be ready to give answers—to give reasons for what they believe. In 1 Peter 3:15 we read, “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.”

                            Christianity, as distinct from atheism, is not a “blind” faith, but an objective one … our object is Jesus Christ. He does reveal himself to those who come by faith believing that He is. John 14:21 says, “And I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.” Hebrews 11:6: “For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.”

                            If reasons for the validity of the Christian’s faith are not forthcoming, his witness is weakened and open to ridicule. Christians must be prepared to make an intelligent defense of the gospel by arming themselves with knowledge and an understanding of the forms unbelief takes in these days. Many Christians do not know how to communicate the fact that God’s Word and God’s laws are true. The net result is generations of wishy-washy Christians who believe in many things, but are not sure why. Personal witnessing can lose its impact if the Christian fails to share intelligent reasons for his faith. This must be avoided, lest ridicule and dishonor come to the name of Christ.

                            A good example of what happens when we do not give reasons for what we believe can be seen in a letter to the editor of an Arizona newspaper. It reads as follows: “When I was a youngster, we all believed that men had one less rib than women because God created Eve with one of Adam’s ribs. When the story was written five to ten thousand years later after Noah and the world flood, how many people could read, much less write? … You say you are a teacher of creationism in school classes. How would you answer these questions? If Noah took two of each animal on the ark, where did he get polar bears, bison, and kangaroos? You might answer that those animals lived in the Eastern Mediterranean area back then. The next question would be, how did the various colors of humans evolve from one white (deeply tanned) family in 5,000 or even 50,000 years? … When I was growing up in a deeply religious family, I was told not to question the Bible and other religious writings. I got no answer then, and 70 years later I am still waiting for a reasonable explanation.”

                            I personally spoke to the writer of this letter. As we talked, it became obvious that he had been told to accept the Bible by blind faith and was never given any useful answers. Omission caused him to reject evangelical Christianity. How sad! And the answers to these sorts of questions are available today. So, let us “give reasons for what we believe” as we discuss the subjects mentioned above.

                            Marriage
                            When Jesus was asked questions concerning divorce in Matthew 19, He immediately referred to the origin, and thus the foundation, of marriage. He said, “Have ye not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female? And said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?” And from where did Jesus quote? Genesis! (In fact, He quoted from Genesis, chapters 1 and 2, in the same verse. Those who wrongly say Genesis 1 and 2 are two different accounts of creation should refer to Appendix 1.) Jesus was saying: “Don’t you understand there is a historical basis for marriage?” If we did not have this historical basis, we would not have marriage. The only basis is in the Scriptures. You can say it is convenient for you, but you cannot tell your son he cannot marry Bill or, for that matter, marry Julie and Susan. Likewise, extramarital relationships would be a tolerable alternative. You would have no justification for thinking otherwise.

                            Now, if we go back to Genesis, we read how God took dust and made a man. From the man’s side, He made a woman. Adam’s first recorded words were: “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.” They were one flesh. When a man and a woman marry, they become one. This is the historical basis. Also, we are to cleave to one another as if we had no parents—just like Adam and Eve who had no parents. We know it is to be a heterosexual relationship. Why? Because, as stated before, God made Adam and Eve (a man and a woman—not a man and a man). That is the only basis for marriage, and that is why we know that homosexual behavior and desire is an evil, perverse, and unnatural deviation. It is time the church stood its ground against the increasing acceptance of homosexuality as something natural or normal or as an “acceptable alternative.” Paul would not have written about homosexuality in the way that he did in Romans if he did not have that historical basis. (Please note that although as Christians we condemn the sin of homosexuality, we are to be grace-oriented toward the homosexual and seek his or her deliverance from bondage.)

                            What about the rest of the teaching on marriage? There is another aspect which has to do with the family. It is the reason many Christian families go to pieces or the offspring go astray. In the majority of Christian homes today, it is usually the mother who teaches the children spiritually. What an unfortunate thing it is that fathers have not embraced their God-given responsibility. When one looks at the biblical roles given to fathers and mothers, it is the fathers who are allocated the responsibility of providing for their children, and providing the family’s spiritual and physical needs (Isaiah 38:19, Proverbs 1:8, Ephesians 6:4). One result of this role reversal is that the sons often stop coming to church. Christian girls who have not been trained properly by their fathers concerning the marriage relationship often disobey the Lord by dating and marrying non-Christian men.

                            A young woman approached me and said that she was married to a non-Christian. She explained that when she was dating this man, she compared him to her father and saw no real difference. Yet, her father was a Christian. Because her father was not the spiritual head of the house, she did not see any real difference between him and the person she was dating. She saw no reason to make sure that her husband-to-be was a Christian. Now that she is married and has children, there are some extreme problems with their marriage regarding the bringing up of their children.

                            A major reason for so many problems in Christian families today is that fathers have not taken their God-commanded responsibility of being priest in their household. As a husband and a father, he is also a priest to his wife and children. It is not, however, a “boss” relationship where men despotically lord it over women. Female liberationists think the Bible teaches a tyrannical relationship in marriage. Unfortunately, many Christians think like this, also. However, the Bible does not say this at all. Anyone who uses these biblical role absolutes to justify one person’s seeking power over another has completely missed the whole message of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:22-33, John 13:5). The Bible also says we are to submit one to another (Eph. 5:21). If you do not adopt the God-given roles set out in Scripture, you will find that your family will not function as intended, and problems usually follow. The Bible also tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church (Eph. 5:25). In many instances, if husbands loved their wives this way it would make it easier for many women to be submissive to them.

                            Why clothes?
                            Consider why we wear clothes. Is it to keep warm? What then if we lived in the tropics? Is it to look nice? If these are our only reasons, why wear clothes? Why not take them off when we want to, where we want to? Does it really matter if one goes *censored* publicly? Ultimately, the only reason for insisting that clothes must be worn is a moral one. If there is a moral reason, it must have a basis somewhere; therefore, there must be standards connected to the moral reason. What then are the standards? Many in our culture (including Christians) just accept the fashions of the day. Parents, what about the training of your children? What do you say to them about clothes?

                            In her paper “Greek Clothing Regulations: Sacred and Profane,” Harrianne Mills has this to say: “Since the demise, roughly one hundred years ago, of the biblically based theory that clothes are worn because of modesty, various theories have been put forward by anthropologists concerned with the origins and functions of clothing.”1

                            Why do we wear clothes? There is a moral basis if you go back to the Scriptures. We read in Genesis that when God made Adam and Eve they were naked. But sin came into the world, and sin distorts everything. Sin distorts nakedness. Immediately Adam and Eve knew they were naked, and they tried to make coverings out of fig leaves. God came to their rescue, providing garments by killing an innocent animal. This was the first blood sacrifice; it was a covering for their sin.

                            Men are very easily aroused sexually. That is why semi-naked women are used in television and magazine advertisements. Parents need to explain to their daughters how easily a man is aroused sexually by a woman’s body. They need to know, because many of them do not understand what happens to a man. At one church, after I had spoken on the topic of clothing, a young woman came up and told me that she had only been a Christian for six months. She was dating a young Christian man and was perplexed as to why he often told her not to wear certain things. Every time she asked him why, he started to feel embarrassed. She had not realized before that what she wore (or did not wear) could put a stumbling block in a man’s way by causing him to commit adultery in his heart.

                            Fathers need to explain to their daughters about how men react to a woman’s body. They also need to explain to their sons that although women’s clothes, or lack of them, can be a stumbling block to a male, it is not an excuse for them in relation to what their mind does with what they see. Job had an answer for this problem: “I made a covenant with mine eyes; why then should I think upon a maid?” (Job 31:1). As Christians, males should have a covenant with their eyes and be reminded of this when lustful thoughts come as a result of what they see or hear.

                            Jesus states that if a man lusts after a woman in his heart, he commits adultery in his heart: “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Sin distorts nakedness. Even the perfect relationship experienced by Adam and Eve before the Fall degenerated. After the Fall, they hid from God and were ashamed of their nakedness. Many Christian women wear clothes that really accentuate their sexuality. And many a roving eye follows every movement. But what is happening? Men are committing adultery in their hearts. Adultery for which they and the women will have to answer.

                            In many Christian homes the parents have certain beliefs about clothing. They say to their teenager, “You can’t wear that.”

                            The teenagers reply, “But why not?”

                            “Because it is not the Christian thing,” answer the parents.

                            “Why not?” ask the teenagers again.

                            “Because Christians don’t wear that,” the parents insist.

                            “Why not?” the reply comes.

                            Then you often hear daughters saying, “You’re old-fashioned, Mom and Dad.” They are saying that their parents have one opinion but they have another opinion. For the most part, children are going to stick with their own opinion. However, it is not a matter of the parents’ opinion or the child’s opinion. In order for the parents to “save face,” they often resort to an imposed legalism. What a difference it makes when the parents use Genesis as a basis to explain to their children why they must do this or that with regard to clothing, particularly if they have already solidly trained their children that God is Creator, He sets the rules, and Genesis is foundational to all doctrine. It is infinitely better than parents saying, “This is what you will do,” and imposing this standard on their children with no basis. However, as we read in Ephesians 6:1, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: For this is right.” Children must obey their parents, and that is not a matter of their opinion, either.

                            There is a moral basis for wearing clothes because of what sin has done to nakedness. We must understand how men are created. Man was designed to be easily aroused sexually and to respond to one woman (his wife). This was, and is, necessary for procreation in marriage. However, sin distorts this, and it is wrong for a man to look lustfully on any woman other than his wife. Therefore, clothing should minimize to the greatest extent any stumbling block laid in a man’s way. But a man is no less guilty if he succumbs to the “second look.” One should not simply accept the fashions of the day. There is a moral basis for clothing; therefore, there are standards. Knowing what men are like and knowing what sin does to nakedness, we thus have a basis for understanding what the standards should be.

                            Why law and morality?
                            What do you tell your children about laws? Perhaps you tell them some things are right and some are wrong, but do you ever explain to them the origin of right and wrong? Would you say we have right and wrong because God has given us laws? If so, why is that? Why does He have a right to say what is right and what is wrong?

                            Why is there right and wrong (e.g., the Ten Commandments)? Remember the story in Matthew 19:16–17 when the man came to Jesus and said to Him: “Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou Me good? There is none good but one, that is, God.” How do you decide if something is right or wrong or good or bad? God, the only One who is good, created us, and therefore owns us. Thus, we are obligated to Him, and we must obey Him. He has the right to set the rules. He knows everything there is to know about everything (i.e., has absolute knowledge), and therefore we must obey. That is why we have absolutes, why there are standards, and why there is right and wrong.

                            Now, if you are not a Christian and you think some things are right and some are wrong, why do you think like that? You have no basis for such a decision. How do you arrive at your standards? How do you decide what is good and bad? Most non-Christians who believe there is a right and wrong are practicing the Christian ethic.

                            Atheistic evolutionary philosophy says: “There is no God. All is the result of chance and randomness. Death and struggle are the order of the day, not only now, but indefinitely into the past and future.” If this is true, there is no basis for right and wrong. The more people believe in evolution, the more they are going to say, “There is no God. Why should I obey authority? Why should there be rules against aberrant *censored* behavior? Why should there be rules concerning abortion? After all, evolution tells us we are all animals. So, killing babies by abortion is no worse than chopping the head off a fish or a chicken.” It does matter whether you believe in evolution or creation! It affects every area of your life.

                            “For by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20)
                            This issue comes down to the simple fact explained by Paul in Romans 3:20, “For by the law is the knowledge of sin.” In Romans 7:7 he continues: “I had not known sin, but by the law.”

                            The existence of God is nowhere defended by Scripture. This fact is taken as being obvious. Who He is and what He has done is clearly explained. Neither is there any doubt as to His sovereign authority over His creation or what our attitude should be toward Him as Creator. He has the right to set the rules. We have the responsibility to obey and rejoice in His goodness, or disobey and suffer His judgment.

                            Adam, the first man, made this choice. He chose to rebel. Sin is rebellion against God and His will. Genesis tells us that this first act of human rebellion took place in the Garden of Eden.

                            To understand what sin is all about—that all mankind are sinners—and how to recognize sin, God gave us the Law. He had the right and the loving concern to do this. He is Creator, and His character allows for no less. All-powerful, all-loving, all-gracious, He has laid down for us the rules by which we must live if our lives are to develop in the way they should. As Paul says in Romans 7:7, “For I had not known lust, except the law had said thou shalt not covet.”

                            The Bible clearly teaches that each human being is a sinner, in a state of rebellion against God. Initially, the Law was given, as Paul states, to explain sin. But, knowing about sin was not a solution to the problem of sin. More was needed. The Creator had not forgotten His commitment to and love of His creation, for He set the payment and paid the price—himself. God’s Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is God, suffered the curse of death on a cross and became sin for us so that God could pour out His judgment upon sin. But, just as all die in Adam, so all who believe in Christ’s atoning death and resurrection live in Him.

                            Those who oppose the Creator are opposing the One who is the absolute authority—the One who sets the rules and keeps them.

                            In the Book of Judges it is stated: “In those days there was no king in Israel; but every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6). People today are little different. They want evolution taught as fact and the belief in creation banished because they, too, want to be a law unto themselves. They want to maintain the rebellious nature they have inherited from Adam, and they will not accept the authority of the One who, as Creator and law-giver, has the right to tell them exactly what to do. This really is what the creation/evolution conflict is all about. Does God the Creator have the right to tell a person what he must do with his life? Or, can man decide for himself what he wants to do without suffering the consequences? These are not rhetorical questions. Their very nature demands an answer from every individual. Thus, it comes down to whether or not man is autonomous, and therefore can decide everything for himself, or whether he is owned by God. Most want to be autonomous and believe they can act according to their own desires and understanding. But, man is not autonomous, and there the battle rages.

                            The Bible tells us that those who trust in the Lord, and are indwelt by His Holy Spirit, will show the fruit of the Spirit: “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance” (Galatians 5:22–23). Those who are not indwelt by the Spirit of God, and who reject the God of creation, will reflect the fruit of this rejection: “adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Galatians 5:19–21). The Bible states clearly that corrupt roots bring forth evil fruit. Pornography, abortion, homosexuality, lawlessness, euthanasia, infanticide, loose morals, unfaithfulness in marriage, and other such things—practices which are becoming more and more prevalent in today’s society—are certainly fruit of corrupt roots. They are the corrupt roots of evolution firmly entrenched in the compost of humanistic thinking.

                            Evolution is an anti-God religion held by many people today as justification for their continued pursuit of self-gratification and their rejection of God as Creator.

                            Many today will not accept that they are sinners. They do not want to accept that they must bow their knees before the God of creation. They do not want to accept that anyone has authority over them with the right to tell them what to do.

                            Even many in our churches do not understand what is meant when man is described as “sinful.” Many preachers (even many who consider themselves evangelical) think that the definition of sin can be limited to such things as adultery, alcoholism, heroin addiction, nudity, x-rated movies, and bad language. However, sin does not stop here. We must understand that sin affects every area of our lives. Sin has an influence on every aspect of our culture. We must understand that sin pervades the whole of our thinking, and will, therefore, affect the whole of our actions. Jesus said, “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” (Matthew 15:19).

                            We must understand that God is the Creator and law-giver, and every human must kneel in submission to Him. That there will come a time when all will do this is clearly recorded by Paul in Philippians 2:10–11: “That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

                            God’s Word (the infallible Word of the perfect Creator) has to be the basis of our thinking. God, the Creator, is the One who provides the blueprint for happy and stable human relationships. If His Word is heeded, He supplies the basis for a true Christian philosophy for every area of human existence—agriculture, economics, medicine, politics, law enforcement, arts, music, sciences, family relationships—every aspect of life. In other words, there is a whole Christian way of thinking. There are foundational biblical principles that govern every area of life. The Creator has not left His creatures without an instruction manual.

                            “Thy Word is true from the beginning” (Psalm 119:160)
                            Man’s rejection of God as Creator (not starting with His Word as a basis for thinking in every area and not being submissive to Him) has resulted in the problems we have in society. This was painfully highlighted in a letter to the editor of an Australian newspaper. Apparently, a country newspaper was approached for placement of an advertisement requesting a married couple for farm work. They were told there would be no printing of an advertisement that contained the words, “Married couple.” The problem was apparently one of “discrimination.” The term “married couple” had to be replaced with “two persons.” It didn’t matter which two persons applied for the job! The question: “On whose authority can’t this be printed?” The answer: “The Human Rights Commission.” The writer of the letter was justifiably horrified. However, this incident is the fruit of evolutionist thinking, and we can only expect similar instances to increase.

                            “Oh Lord—open our eyes that we may see” (Psalm 119:18)
                            Concerned and convinced Christians must pray that the Lord will make clear to everyone the frightening direction in which man’s rebellion is heading. Christians need to establish firmly the fact that God is Creator and that He has given us His law. We need to recognize what sin is and what the results of sinful existence are. We need to proclaim deliverance from sin through faith in Jesus Christ. Apart from this, there will be no rectifying the situation. An all-out attack on evolutionist thinking is possibly the only real hope our nations have of rescuing themselves from an inevitable social and moral catastrophe.

                            It is not easy for any human being to acknowledge that if there is a Creator we must be in submission to Him. However, there is no alternative. Man must recognize that he is in rebellion against the One who created him. Only then will man understand the law, understand what sin is, and understand the steps necessary to bring about the change in individual lives that can ultimately effect changes in society.

                            The more our society rejects the creation basis and God’s laws, the more it will degenerate spiritually and morally. This has happened many times throughout history and should stand as a warning. Let us consider a modern day example.

                            The consequences of rejecting God and His absolutes
                            Missionaries were sent to New Guinea because there were many so-called pagan and primitive people there. The story is told of one cannibal tribe, which has since ceased to be cannibalistic. Previously, men would race into a village, grab a man by the hair, pull him back, tense his abdominal muscles, use a bamboo knife to slit open his abdomen, pull out his intestines, cut up his fingers, and while he was still alive, eat him until he died. People hear that and say, “Oh, what primitive savages!” They are not “primitive” savages; their ancestor was a man called Noah. The Indians’ ancestor was a man called Noah; the Eskimos’ ancestor was a man called Noah; and our ancestor was a man called Noah. Noah had the knowledge of God and could build ships. His ancestors could make musical instruments and they practiced agriculture. What happened to those New Guinea natives is that, somewhere in history (as Rom. 1 tells us), they rejected the knowledge of God and His laws. And God turned them over to foolish, perverse, and degenerate things.2

                            However, this same degeneracy (this same rejection of God’s laws) can be seen in so-called civilized nations that cut people up alive all year long (one and a half million of them in the United States each year), and it is legalized. This is what abortion is—cutting up people alive and sucking out the bits and pieces. The so-called “primitive tribes” had ancestors who once knew the true God and His laws. As they rejected the true God of creation, their culture degenerated in every area. The more our so-called “civilized nations” reject the God of creation, the more they will degenerate to a “primitive culture.” Thus, a culture should not be interpreted according to whether they are primitive or advanced (as presupposed by the evolutionary scale), but every aspect of their culture must be judged
                            « Last Edit: September 19, 2009, 12:47:48 AM by 876543219 »
                            Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                            Geek-9pm


                              Mastermind
                            • Geek After Dark
                            • Thanked: 1026
                              • Gekk9pm bnlog
                            • Certifications: List
                            • Computer: Specs
                            • Experience: Expert
                            • OS: Windows 10
                            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                            « Reply #37 on: September 19, 2009, 12:49:14 AM »
                            Earlier I gave my personal rant. Now I would like to post a quotation of a book review. The purpose here is not to win an argument. Rather, to help others understand the issue with an open mind. That fact that religion is a mess does not prove we are all monkeys.   :P
                            The book here is
                            Why Evolution True
                             The quotation below is from the most popular review of the book
                            as found on http://www.amazon.com/
                            I have shorted this review to make it a quick read. Go to Amazon to read the whole thing.. Where i put ... it means I cut out some text.
                            Quote
                            February 2, 2009
                            By    Dr. Nicholas P. G. Davies (Halifax, UK) - See all my reviews
                            (REAL NAME)   
                            Jerry Coyne is a bit annoyed that it was necessary to write this book. I am glad he got annoyed enough to write it. In part he is writing against the intelligent design movement, and against creationism...

                            The book is a powerful and straightforward account of evolution showing the strength of the theory, its ability to make predictions, and giving many examples of the evidence on which evolution is based. ...

                            He is also clear (in his final chapter evolution redux) of the limits to evolutionary thinking. Good scientists know what they know, and also have some idea where their knowledge stops. Coyne demonstrates this ability well. By doing this he becomes a far better advocate for evolution than Dawkins.

                            Evolution is not an ontological or moral theory. You can derive no moral lesson from evolution- it just is (p253). David Hume pointed out that deriving an ought from an is is usually to make a specious argument. The fact that the idea of evolution as progress has been misused...  It is an argument against the misuse of ideas.

                            Coyne (p248)describes that, "There is an increasing (and disturbing) tendency of psychologists, biologists and philosophers to Darwinize every aspect of human behaviour, turning its study into a scientific parlour game." He liberates us (p250)from some of the genetic determinism that sometimes accompanies evolution...

                            Coyne liberates evolution from its role as chief evidence for atheism.(pxix) "Nor must it promote atheism, for enlightened religion has always found a way to accommodate the advances of science. In fact, understanding evolution should surely deepen and enrich our appreciation of the living world ....

                            This book does have one notable omission which arises because it sticks closely to the facts. There is no account of how the first cell ever got started, maybe because there is not yet any great evidence ...

                            876543219



                              Beginner

                              Thanked: 3
                              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                              « Reply #38 on: September 19, 2009, 12:52:22 AM »
                              1
                              Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                              Salmon Trout

                              • Guest
                              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                              « Reply #39 on: September 19, 2009, 12:54:27 AM »
                              What is the your proof that evulution is true

                              What is the your  ::) proof that it isn't? Apart from the Bible, which is not provably either true or untrue. Jesus what a dumb thread.

                              876543219



                                Beginner

                                Thanked: 3
                                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                « Reply #40 on: September 19, 2009, 12:59:40 AM »
                                i need proof to unproof
                                were's your proof that things evolved were are all these fossils in between from fish to amphibians then eventually to humans i heard of lucy  and all that but these aren't in between fossils



                                http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/video/ondemand/lucy/lucy-shes-no-lady
                                « Last Edit: September 19, 2009, 01:13:27 AM by 876543219 »
                                Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                Carbon Dudeoxide

                                • Global Moderator

                                • Mastermind
                                • Thanked: 169
                                  • Yes
                                  • Yes
                                  • Yes
                                • Certifications: List
                                • Experience: Guru
                                • OS: Mac OS
                                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                « Reply #41 on: September 19, 2009, 01:10:03 AM »
                                What do you guys hope to accomplish in this topic?


                                JJ 3000



                                  Egghead
                                • Thanked: 237
                                • Experience: Familiar
                                • OS: Linux variant
                                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                « Reply #42 on: September 19, 2009, 01:21:35 AM »
                                Save a Life!
                                Adopt a homeless pet.
                                http://www.petfinder.com/

                                876543219



                                  Beginner

                                  Thanked: 3
                                  Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                  « Reply #43 on: September 19, 2009, 01:25:03 AM »
                                  what heppend to your dog picture i liked that
                                  Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                  Ivy

                                  • CH Queen


                                  • Specialist

                                    Thanked: 50
                                    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                    « Reply #44 on: September 19, 2009, 01:26:16 AM »
                                    What do you guys hope to accomplish in this topic?
                                    I think it will accomplish a lock eventually but I hope it doesn't.

                                    I hate long posts but I actually read the posts here, quiet informative actually, If only one would not start fighting (which is not happening here yet I think...)these topics would be quiet interesting.

                                    We have the forum rule:
                                    Religion and politics

                                    Posts can be made in the off-topic section only about religion and politics as long as they're purely informative and contain no bias. This same rule applies to avatars, signatures, and private messages.

                                    If you follow this the topic will be fine.
                                    Use what talent you possess.
                                    The woods would be very silent
                                    If no birds sang except those that sang best-
                                    Henry Van Dyke

                                    JJ 3000



                                      Egghead
                                    • Thanked: 237
                                    • Experience: Familiar
                                    • OS: Linux variant
                                    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                    « Reply #45 on: September 19, 2009, 01:27:22 AM »
                                    what heppend to your dog picture i liked that
                                    You talkin' to me?
                                    Save a Life!
                                    Adopt a homeless pet.
                                    http://www.petfinder.com/

                                    876543219



                                      Beginner

                                      Thanked: 3
                                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                      « Reply #46 on: September 19, 2009, 01:28:29 AM »
                                      Yeah I'm talking to you
                                      Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                      Geek-9pm


                                        Mastermind
                                      • Geek After Dark
                                      • Thanked: 1026
                                        • Gekk9pm bnlog
                                      • Certifications: List
                                      • Computer: Specs
                                      • Experience: Expert
                                      • OS: Windows 10
                                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                      « Reply #47 on: September 19, 2009, 01:29:29 AM »
                                      Quote
                                      What do you guys hope to accomplish in this topic?

                                      It has become a game of
                                      Yes it is.
                                      No its not.
                                      You prove it.
                                      No, you un prove it.
                                      No I won't

                                      You have my permission to close this topic.  :)

                                      JJ 3000



                                        Egghead
                                      • Thanked: 237
                                      • Experience: Familiar
                                      • OS: Linux variant
                                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                      « Reply #48 on: September 19, 2009, 01:32:11 AM »
                                      It's still there. I never changed it. Can't you see it?
                                      Save a Life!
                                      Adopt a homeless pet.
                                      http://www.petfinder.com/

                                      Ivy

                                      • CH Queen


                                      • Specialist

                                        Thanked: 50
                                        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                        « Reply #49 on: September 19, 2009, 01:34:31 AM »
                                        Before we close this topic, I'd request all of you to stand still and maintain a moment of silence for them:
                                        Quote
                                        TB pathogens & cancer before man (dinosaurs had TB and cancer)
                                        :'(
                                        Use what talent you possess.
                                        The woods would be very silent
                                        If no birds sang except those that sang best-
                                        Henry Van Dyke

                                        lectrocrew



                                          Mentor

                                        • ole dog learning new tricks
                                        • Thanked: 21
                                          • Yes
                                          • Yes
                                          • My first self-built computer
                                        • Certifications: List
                                        • Computer: Specs
                                        • Experience: Familiar
                                        • OS: Windows 10
                                        Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                        « Reply #50 on: September 19, 2009, 01:35:01 AM »
                                        Did anyone see/like the movie Contact?

                                        Ivy

                                        • CH Queen


                                        • Specialist

                                          Thanked: 50
                                          Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                          « Reply #51 on: September 19, 2009, 01:35:48 AM »
                                          JJ your pic is still there, you look so cute in it with your tongue hanging on a side ;D ;)
                                          Use what talent you possess.
                                          The woods would be very silent
                                          If no birds sang except those that sang best-
                                          Henry Van Dyke

                                          876543219



                                            Beginner

                                            Thanked: 3
                                            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                            « Reply #52 on: September 19, 2009, 01:38:34 AM »
                                            jj 3000 i can see it now and when i said yes i'm talking to you i could see it but i couldn't see it in your previous post

                                            not my work again but i agree with it
                                            aig
                                            An aura of mystery surrounds the dinosaurs. Where did they come from? Did they evolve? Did they really live millions of years ago? What happened to them? Are there any living today? Has any human being ever seen a live dinosaur?

                                            Children and adults alike are absolutely fascinated by these mysterious monsters. Numerous books and movies have been produced to satisfy a seemingly insatiable hunger for information on these puzzling creatures. The truth of the matter, however, is that there are no real mysteries at all, once you have key information that is not generally known and is withheld from the public.

                                            Come with me as we take a walk through history and uncover some amazing facts that will answer many of your questions about these “terrible lizards.”

                                            Did Dinosaurs Really Exist?
                                            Dinosaurs certainly did roam the Earth in the ancient past! Fossils of dinosaurs have been found all over the world, and their bones are displayed in museums for all to see. Scientists have been able to reconstruct many of their skeletons, so we know much about how they may have looked.

                                            When Were Dinosaurs Found?
                                            The story of their discovery began back in the 1820s, when Gideon Mantell, an English doctor, found some unusual teeth and bones in a quarry. Dr Mantell realized there was something very different about these animal remains, and believed that he had found an entirely new group of reptiles. By 1841, about nine types of these different reptiles had been uncovered, including two called Megalosaurus and Iguanodon.

                                            At this time, a famous British scientist (and creationist), Dr Richard Owen, coined the name “Dinosauria,” meaning “terrible lizard,” for this is what the huge bones made him think of.

                                            What Makes Dinosaurs Different?
                                            Other than the huge size of some dinosaurs, the major feature that really distinguishes dinosaurs from other reptiles (such as crocodiles) is the position of their limbs. Dinosaurs had posture that was fully erect, similar to that in mammals. Most other reptiles have limbs in a sprawling position. For instance, compare the way a crocodile “walks” with that of, say, a cow. Dinosaurs would have moved like a cow, with the limbs supporting the body from beneath. Crocodiles “waddle,” as their limbs project sideways from their body.

                                            How Big Were Dinosaurs?
                                            Some were as small as chickens, and others were even smaller. Of course, some dinosaurs were very large, weighing in at an estimated 80 tons and standing 40 feet high! The average size of a dinosaur, however, was probably about that of a small horse.

                                            When Did Dinosaurs Live?
                                            The story we have all heard from movies, television, newspapers, and most magazines and textbooks is that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. According to evolutionists, the dinosaurs “ruled the Earth” for 140 million years, dying out about 65 million years ago. However, scientists do not dig up anything labeled with those ages. They only uncover dead dinosaurs (i.e., their bones), and their bones do not have labels attached telling how old they are. The idea of millions of years of evolution is just the evolutionists’ story about the past. No scientist was there to see the dinosaurs live through this supposed dinosaur age. In fact, there is no proof whatsoever that the world and its fossil layers are millions of years old. No scientist observed dinosaurs die. Scientists only find the bones in the here and now, and because many of them are evolutionists, they try to fit the story of the dinosaurs into their view.

                                            Other scientists, called creation scientists, have a different idea about when dinosaurs lived. They believe they can solve any of the supposed dinosaur mysteries and show how the evidence fits wonderfully with their ideas about the past, beliefs that come from the Bible.

                                            The Bible, God’s very special book (or collection of books, really), claims that each writer was supernaturally inspired to write exactly what the Creator of all things wanted him to write down for us so that we can know where we (and dinosaurs) came from, why we are here, and what our future will be. The first book in the Bible—Genesis—teaches us many things about how the universe and life came into existence. Genesis tells us that God created everything—the Earth, stars, sun, moon, plants, animals, and the first two people.

                                            Although the Bible does not tell us exactly how long ago it was that God made the world and its creatures, we can make a good estimate of the date of creation by reading through the Bible and noting some interesting passages:

                                            God made everything in six days. He did this, by the way, to set a pattern for mankind, which has become our seven day week (as described in Exodus 20:11). God worked for six days and rested for one, as a model for us. Furthermore, Bible scholars will tell you that the Hebrew word for day used in Genesis 1, can only mean an ordinary day in this context.

                                            We are told God created the first man and woman—Adam and Eve—on Day Six. Many facts about when their children and their children’s children were born are given in Genesis. These genealogies are recorded throughout the Old Testament, up until the time of Christ. They certainly were not chronologies lasting millions of years.

                                            As you add up all of the dates, and accepting that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to Earth almost 2000 years ago, we come to the conclusion that the creation of the Earth and animals (including the dinosaurs) occurred only thousands of years ago (perhaps only 6000!), not millions of years. Thus, if the Bible is right (and it is!), dinosaurs must have lived within the past thousands of years.

                                            Where Did Dinosaurs Come From?
                                            Evolutionists claim that dinosaurs evolved over millions of years. They imagine that one kind of animal slowly changed over long periods of time to become a different kind of animal. For instance, they believe that amphibians changed into reptiles (including dinosaurs) by this gradual process. This would mean, of course, that there would have been millions of creatures during that time that would be “in between,” as amphibians evolved into reptiles. Evidence of these “transitional forms,” as they are called, should be abundant. However, many fossil experts admit that not one unquestionable transitional form between any group of creatures and another has been found anywhere. If dinosaurs evolved from amphibians, there should be, for example, fossil evidence of animals that are part dinosaur and part something else. However, there is no proof of this anywhere. In fact, if you go into any museum you will see fossils of dinosaurs that are 100% dinosaur, not something in between. There are no 25%, 50%, 75%, or even 99% dinosaurs—they are all 100% dinosaur!

                                            The Bible tells us that God created all of the land animals on the sixth day of creation. As dinosaurs were land animals, they must have been made on this day, alongside Adam and Eve, who were also created on Day Six (Genesis 1:24–31). If God designed and created dinosaurs, they would have been fully functional, designed to do what they were created for, and would have been 100% dinosaur. This fits exactly with the evidence from the fossil record.

                                            Evolutionists declare that no man ever lived alongside dinosaurs. The Bible, however, makes it plain that dinosaurs and people must have lived together. Actually, as we will soon see, there is a lot of evidence for this.

                                            What Did Dinosaurs Eat?
                                            The Bible teaches (in Genesis 1:29–30) that the original animals (and the first humans) were commanded to be vegetarian. There were no meat eaters in the original creation. Furthermore, there was no death. It was an unblemished world, with Adam and Eve and animals (including dinosaurs) living in perfect harmony, eating only plants.

                                            Sadly, it did not stay this way for very long. Adam rebelled against his Creator, bringing sin into the world (Genesis 3:1–7; Romans 5:12). Because of this rebellion, Adam, and thus all of his descendants (you and me), gave up the right to live with a Holy (sinless) and just God. God therefore judged sin with death.

                                            The Bible plainly teaches from Genesis to Revelation that there was no death of animals or humans before Adam sinned. (Consider just a few of the many passages, such as: Romans 5:12; Genesis 2:17; Genesis 1:29–30; Romans 8:20–22; Acts 3:21; Hebrews 9:22; 1 Corinthians 15; Revelation 21:1–4; Revelation 22:3.) This means there could not have been any animal fossils (and no dinosaur bones) before sin.

                                            After Adam’s sin, animals and people started to die. It was now a different world, one of death and strife. A world that was once beautiful now suffered under the curse placed upon it by the Creator (Genesis 3:14–19). But a promise was given (Genesis 3:15) that God would provide a way for the penalty of sin to be paid so there would be a way for man to come back to God.

                                            Why Do We Find Dinosaur Fossils?
                                            In Genesis 6, we read that all flesh (man and animals) had “corrupted his way upon the Earth” (Genesis 6:12). Perhaps people and animals were killing each other; maybe dinosaurs had started killing other animals and humans. In any case, the Bible describes the world as “wicked.”

                                            Because of this wickedness, God warned a godly man named Noah that He was going to destroy the world with a Flood (Genesis 6:13). God therefore commanded him to build a great ship (the Ark) so that all the kinds of land animals (which must have included dinosaurs) and Noah’s family could survive on board while the Flood destroyed the entire Earth (Genesis 6:14–20).

                                            Some people think that dinosaurs were too big, or there were too many of them, to go on this Ark. However, there were not very many different kinds of dinosaurs. There are certainly hundreds of dinosaur names, but many of these were given to just a bit of bone or skeletons of the same dinosaur found in other countries. It is also reasonable to assume that different sizes, varieties, and sexes of the same kind of dinosaur have ended up with different names. For example, look at the many different varieties and sizes of dogs, but they are all the same kind—the dog kind! In reality, there may have been fewer than 50 kinds of dinosaurs.

                                            God sent two of every (seven of some) land animal into the Ark (Genesis 7:2–3; 7:8–9)—there were no exceptions. Therefore, dinosaurs must have been on the Ark. Even though there was ample room in the huge ship for large animals, perhaps God sent young adults into the Ark that still had plenty of room for them to grow.

                                            Well, what happened to all the land animals that did not go on the Ark? Very simply, they drowned. Many would have been covered with tons of mud as the rampaging water covered the land (Genesis 7:11–12,19). Because of this quick burial, many of the animals would have been preserved as fossils. If this happened, you would expect to find evidence of billions of dead things buried in rock layers (formed from this mud) all over the Earth. This is exactly what you do find.

                                            By the way, the Flood of Noah’s day probably occurred just over 4,500 years ago. Creationists believe that this event formed many of the fossil layers around the Earth. (Additional fossil layers were formed by other floods as the Earth settled down after the great Flood.) Thus, the dinosaur fossils which were formed as a result of this Flood were probably formed about 4,500 years ago, not millions of years ago.

                                            Have Dinosaurs Lived in Recent Times?
                                            If the different kinds of dinosaurs survived the Flood, then they must have come off the Ark and lived in the post-Flood world.

                                            In the Bible, in Job 40:15–24, God describes to Job (who lived after the Flood) a great beast with which Job was familiar. This great animal, called “behemoth,” is described as “the chief of the ways of God,” perhaps the biggest land animal God had created. Impressively, he moved his tail like a cedar tree! Although some Bible commentaries 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!

                                            Actually, very few animals are singled out in the Bible for such a detailed description. Contrary to what many may think, what we know now as dinosaurs get more mention in the Scriptures than most animals! So dinosaurs—all the different kinds—must have lived alongside of people after the Flood.

                                            Are Dinosaurs Mentioned in Ancient Literature?
                                            Interestingly, the word “dragon” is used a number of times in the Old Testament. In most instances, the word dinosaur could substitute for dragon and it would fit very nicely. Creation scientists believe that dinosaurs were called dragons before the word dinosaur was invented in the 1800s. We would not expect to find the word dinosaur in Bibles like the Authorized Version (1611), as it was translated well before the word dinosaur was ever used.

                                            Also, there are many very old history books in various libraries around the world that have detailed records of dragons and their encounters with people. Surprisingly (or not so surprisingly for creationists), many of these descriptions of dragons fit with how modern scientists would describe dinosaurs, even Tyrannosaurus. Unfortunately, this evidence is not considered valid by evolutionists. Why? Only because their belief is that man and dinosaurs did not live at the same time!

                                            However, the more we research the historical literature, the more we realize there is overwhelming evidence that dragons were real beasts, much like our modern reconstructions of dinosaurs, and that their existence has been recorded by many different people, even just hundreds of years ago.

                                            What Happened to Dinosaurs?
                                            Evolutionists use their imagination in a big way in answering this question. Because of their belief that dinosaurs “ruled” the world for millions of years, and then disappeared millions of years before man allegedly evolved, they have had to come up with all sorts of guesses to explain this “mysterious” disappearance.

                                            When reading evolutionist literature, you will be astonished at the range of ideas concerning their supposed extinction. The following is just a small list of theories:

                                            Dinosaurs starved to death; they died from overeating; they were poisoned; they became blind from cataracts and could not reproduce; mammals ate their eggs. Other causes include volcanic dust, poisonous gases, comets, sunspots, meteorites, mass suicide, constipation, parasites, shrinking brain (and greater stupidity), slipped discs, changes in the composition of air, etc.

                                            It is obvious that evolutionists don’t know what happened and are grasping at straws. In a recent evolutionary book on dinosaurs, “A New Look At the Dinosaurs,” the author made the statement:

                                            Now comes the important question. What caused all these extinctions at one particular point in time, approximately 65 million years ago? Dozens of reasons have been suggested, some serious and sensible, others quite crazy, and yet others merely as a joke. Every year people come up with new theories on this thorny problem. The trouble is that if we are to find just one reason to account for them all, it would have to explain the death, all at the same time, of animals living on land and of animals living in the sea; but, in both cases, of only some of those animals, for many of the land dwellers and many of the sea-dwellers went on living quite happily into the following period. Alas, no such one explanation exists (Alan Charig, p. 150).
                                            But, one such explanation does exist. If you remove the evolutionary framework, get rid of the millions of years, and then take the Bible seriously, you will find an explanation that fits the facts and makes perfect sense:

                                            At the time of the Flood, many of the sea creatures died, 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 that was no longer in abundance, (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. In fact, quite a number of animals become extinct each year. Extinction seems to be the rule in Earth history (not the formation of new types of animals as you would expect from evolution).

                                            Will We Ever See a Live Dinosaur?
                                            The answer is probably not … but, then again? There are some scientists who believe a few dinosaurs may have survived in remote jungles. We are still discovering new species of animals and plants today in areas that have been too difficult to explore until now. Even natives in some countries describe beasts that fit with what might be a dinosaur.

                                            Creationists, of course, would not be surprised if someone found a living dinosaur. However, evolutionists would then have to explain why they made dogmatic statements that man and dinosaur never lived at the same time. I suspect they would say something to the effect that this dinosaur somehow survived because it was trapped in a remote area that has not changed for millions of years. You see, no matter what is found, or how embarrassing it is to evolutionists’ ideas, they will always be able to concoct an “answer” because evolution is a belief. It is not science—it is not fact!

                                            What Lessons Can We Learn From the Dinosaur?
                                            When we see the bones of dinosaurs, we can be reminded that death was not a part of the original creation. Death is actually an intruder, entering when the first man disobeyed God. The Bible tells us that because we are all descendants of Adam, we too have sinned: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned” (Romans 5:12); “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). We need to recognize that the wickedness in the world is because of sin, because man rebelled against God.

                                            We can also be reminded that God, who made all things, including the dinosaurs, is also a judge of His creation. He judged Adam’s rebellion by cursing the world with death. Adam was warned about what would happen if he disobeyed God’s instruction not to eat the fruit of one particular tree. “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Genesis 2:17).

                                            Dinosaurs can also remind us that God judged the rebellion in Noah’s day by destroying the wicked world with water, resulting in the death of millions of creatures. The Bible teaches us that He will again judge the world, but next time by fire: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the Earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Peter 3:10).

                                            We can also be reminded that after this judgment by fire, God will make a new heaven and Earth: “Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new Earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13). And what will it be like in this new Earth? “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away” (Revelation 21:4).

                                            But we are also warned that many will not be allowed into this new Earth but will suffer for eternity: “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).

                                            Humans, who are all sinful from conception (Psalm 51:5), cannot live with a Holy God, but are condemned to separation from God. But, God provided a wonderful means of deliverance from sin. The Bible teaches that God offered the perfect sacrifice needed to pay the penalty for man’s sin. God’s own Son, the one who in fact created the world (Colossians 1:16), came to Earth as a man, as a descendant of Adam, to suffer the death penalty for sin. “But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:20–22).

                                            The Lord Jesus Christ died on a cross, but on the third day, rose again, conquering death, so that anyone who believes in Him and accepts Him into his or her life, is able to come back to God and live for eternity with the Creator. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16); “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9).

                                            For those who do not accept by faith what Christ has done for them and do not recognize their sinful nature and need for redemption, the Bible warns that such people will live forever, but will be separated from God in a place of torment that the Bible calls <censored>. But for those who commit their lives to the Lord—what a wonderful message! What a wonderful Savior! What a wonderful salvation in Christ the Creator!
                                            Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                            Salmon Trout

                                            • Guest
                                            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                            « Reply #53 on: September 19, 2009, 01:40:52 AM »
                                            Please, no more preaching. Save it for church.

                                            Carbon Dudeoxide

                                            • Global Moderator

                                            • Mastermind
                                            • Thanked: 169
                                              • Yes
                                              • Yes
                                              • Yes
                                            • Certifications: List
                                            • Experience: Guru
                                            • OS: Mac OS
                                            Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                            « Reply #54 on: September 19, 2009, 01:43:49 AM »
                                            This argument has been going on for centuries. I doubt some internet forum can solve the mystery.


                                            876543219



                                              Beginner

                                              Thanked: 3
                                              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                              « Reply #55 on: September 19, 2009, 01:47:26 AM »
                                              `
                                              Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                              Salmon Trout

                                              • Guest
                                              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                              « Reply #56 on: September 19, 2009, 01:50:58 AM »
                                              This argument has been going on for centuries.

                                              Not quite (yet) one century and a half. "On the Origin of Species" went on sale to booksellers on 22 November 1859.

                                              Quote
                                              I doubt some internet forum can solve the mystery.

                                              Broadly speaking, it's only in the USA that the "argument" is not regarded as definitively settled, and where it is still called a "mystery".



                                              Carbon Dudeoxide

                                              • Global Moderator

                                              • Mastermind
                                              • Thanked: 169
                                                • Yes
                                                • Yes
                                                • Yes
                                              • Certifications: List
                                              • Experience: Guru
                                              • OS: Mac OS
                                              Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                              « Reply #57 on: September 19, 2009, 01:53:01 AM »
                                              The mystery of why people continue to waste their time.

                                              876543219



                                                Beginner

                                                Thanked: 3
                                                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                « Reply #58 on: September 19, 2009, 01:54:57 AM »
                                                Quote
                                                The mystery of why people continue to waste their time 

                                                someone trying to figure out  what the truth is is a waste of time.
                                                Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                                JJ 3000



                                                  Egghead
                                                • Thanked: 237
                                                • Experience: Familiar
                                                • OS: Linux variant
                                                Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                « Reply #59 on: September 19, 2009, 01:56:34 AM »
                                                Quote
                                                TB pathogens & cancer before man (dinosaurs had TB and cancer)

                                                It's a little known fact that dinosaurs were heavy smokers. The preferred Camels - not the cigarette, the animal. The average allosaur would smoke up to two packs a day.  :o

                                                Quote
                                                dinosaurs and people must have lived together. Actually, as we will soon see, there is a lot of evidence for this.
                                                You mean like on the Flinstones?
                                                Save a Life!
                                                Adopt a homeless pet.
                                                http://www.petfinder.com/

                                                Fed

                                                • Moderator


                                                • Sage
                                                • Thanked: 35
                                                  • Experience: Experienced
                                                  • OS: Windows XP
                                                  Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                  « Reply #60 on: September 19, 2009, 02:00:00 AM »
                                                  Quote
                                                  dinosaurs and people must have lived together
                                                  Quote
                                                  You mean like on the Flinstones?
                                                  It was at a place called Jurassic Park, I saw them on TV.

                                                  876543219



                                                    Beginner

                                                    Thanked: 3
                                                    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                    « Reply #61 on: September 19, 2009, 02:04:29 AM »
                                                    What makes you think T. rex killed humans? Possibly you have been influenced, as many others have, by movies like Jurassic Park that show the fierce T. rex eating every dinosaur and human it encountered. From the fossil record, the stomach contents of dinosaurs that belonged to the same kind as T. rex have typically revealed juvenile dinosaurs, such as hadrosaurs and triceratops. In addition, some evolutionists have suggested that some members of the T. rex kind even ate plants.


                                                    There is also physical evidence that dinosaur bones are not millions of years old. Scientists from Montana State University found T. rex bones that were not totally fossilized. Sections of the bones were like fresh bone and contained what seems to be blood cells and hemoglobin. If these bones really were tens of millions of years old, then the blood cells and hemoglobin would have totally disintegrated.26 Also, there should not be “fresh” bones if they were really millions of years old.27 A report by these scientists stated the following:

                                                    A thin slice of T. rex bone glowed amber beneath the lens of my microscope ... . The lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I had focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had ever noticed before: tiny round objects, translucent red with a dark center ... . Red blood cells? The shape and location suggested them, but blood cells are mostly water and couldn’t possibly have stayed preserved in the 65-million-year-old tyrannosaur ... . The bone sample that had us so excited came from a beautiful, nearly complete specimen of Tyrannosaurus rex unearthed in 1990 ... . When the team brought the dinosaur into the lab, we noticed that some parts deep inside the long bone of the leg had not completely fossilized ... . So far, we think that all of this evidence supports the notion that our slices of T. rex could contain preserved heme and hemoglobin fragments. But more work needs to be done before we are confident enough to come right out and say, “Yes, this T. rex has blood compounds left in its tissues.”28
                                                    Unfossilized duck-billed dinosaur bones have been found on the North Slope in Alaska.29 Also, creation scientists collected such (unfossilized) frozen dinosaur bones in Alaska.30 Evolutionists would not say that these bones had stayed frozen for the many millions of years since these dinosaurs supposedly died out (according to evolutionary theory). Yet the bones could not have survived for the millions of years unmineralized. This is a puzzle to those who believe in an “age of dinosaurs” millions of years ago, but not to someone who builds his thinking on the Bible.
                                                    Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                                    Salmon Trout

                                                    • Guest
                                                    Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                    « Reply #62 on: September 19, 2009, 02:08:58 AM »
                                                    I have a killer argument! T. Rex rode a white swan around 1970!!!! How can the evolutionists explain that?

                                                    876543219



                                                      Beginner

                                                      Thanked: 3
                                                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                      « Reply #63 on: September 19, 2009, 02:14:34 AM »
                                                      It's a song it's not real like the boogey man
                                                      Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear                     microsoft windows xp professional  version 2002 service pack 3 celeron 2.80ghz 20gb hardrive 504mb ram

                                                      Salmon Trout

                                                      • Guest
                                                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                      « Reply #64 on: September 19, 2009, 02:17:49 AM »
                                                      It's a song it's not real like the boogey man

                                                      It's real! I heard it myself!

                                                      mroilfield



                                                        Mentor
                                                      • Thanked: 42
                                                        • Yes
                                                        • Yes
                                                      • Computer: Specs
                                                      • Experience: Experienced
                                                      • OS: Windows 11
                                                      Re: Evolution or Creationism?
                                                      « Reply #65 on: September 19, 2009, 02:20:43 AM »
                                                      I for one believe that there is a GOD and he created every thing.

                                                      I also feel that this thread should be locked as no good has or will come of it.
                                                      You can't fix Stupid!!!