PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Noah's Mythical Flood
       Physical impossibility of that flood

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The fact is that certain animals are found only in certain isolated location. For example, Kangaroos have never been found outside of Australia and New Guinea. Certain species of fresh water fish have been found nowhere outside of the Amazon Basin. Lemurs are only on the Island of Madascar in the last 20 million years. Emus, Koalas, Marsupial wolves, wombats, and marsupial lions are found only in Australia.  Many other animals while on the Eurasian mainland are found only at great distances from Palestine, Mt. Ararat, and Mesopotamia. These include: polar bears, tapirs, aardvarks, Meercats, Irish Elk, Reindeer/Caribou, Moose, the Ice loving Macaques of Northern Japan. There are a few thousand other animals found far from Mesopotamia.

These represent animals never found in Mesopotamia/Ararat. How did Noah and his sons gather all of these animals from the far reaches of the left and right hemispheres and polar areas? How did they fit in the approximately 3.8 million species into the Ark if it was the wee little boat described in Genesis? How could they store enough food for the entire long journey aboard the tiny boat? When it landed on Mt. Ararat how did they return all of these animals back to their places of origin?

How did they transport some 3000 species of delicate fresh water tropical fish back to the Amazon Basin across thousands of miles of salt sea?  How did they transport the Koalas, Wallabies, Kangaroos, Wombats, Marsupial wolves, Emus, and Marsupial lions back to the island continent of Australia? How did they get South American Tapirs back to South America along with Jaguars, sloths, prehensile tailed New World Monkeys, Armadillos, Alpacas, Llamas, as well as a million species of South American insects? (A fourth of all species live in the Amazon Basin.) How did they get the 9 types of Lemur back to Madagascar?

The amount of water needed to flood the Earths highest mountains would have to be enough to cover Mt. Everest at 29,000 plus feet or over 5 miles higher than present sea level. Can we even begin to imagine the immense quantity of water that would require? If Earth had been covered over 5 miles or 8 Km deep it would require 980 million cubic miles of water or 2.55 billion cubic kilometres of water. That water would have to be obtained and then carted away somehow. There are no empty spaces within the Earth for all of that water.

So, you see, it is a scientific, or really a physical impossibility that Noah’s Legend could be true. The size of the boat is far too small for the number of animals and their food supply. The gathering of the animals from all over the world and delivering them back to their places of origin would have taken many years and hundreds of ocean going vessels to accomplish that task. The obtaining and disposing of many hundred thousand or millions of cubic miles of water is impossible without divine magic, which I don’t accept.

If you postulate miracle, i.e. magic, you must show me proof that magic exists. You must prove that magic ever occurred in any time or place. Other than magic, the Noah’s Fable was not physically possible.

FreeAmerican



-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 8:38 PM on April 7, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Biblical mythology conflicts with proven science in many other ways beside biological evolution. The primitive shamans who wrote the Bible and invented God, thought the world was flat and the sun revolved around it in some inexplicable way. Some Biblical literalists deny the conflict. I post this for my claim.

The sun must have stood still about a day (Joshua 10:8 and 12,13) and even gone backwards ten degrees (2 Kings 20:9-11) at some time in the past. We know that this ridiculous fantasy if it actually happened would have disrupted the sun, dramatically. It would rip apart under such strain. If we admit that the Earth was the body really still, not the sun, then the Earth would have had centrifugal forces of immence power and likely fragmented.  Tidal waves would at least have spread across the Earth or been flung out into space.

Deuteronomy 13:7
" of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth;
(Flat earth)

Deuteronomy 28:64 "And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, [even] wood and stone.

Mathew 5:8 And the devil took him (Jesus) up to an exceedingly high mountain, where he shewed him all of the nations of the world;

This Matthew tale was told by superstitious Christians in the late 1st Century AD. But Greeks in 4th Century BC Egypt (Aristothenes, and even Ptolomy himself) measured the earth with a stick in uppper Egypt and one in lower Egypt and measured the solar shadow at Noon. Using trigonometry and geometry they correctly calculated that the Earth was a sphere and Ptolomy also calculated the circumference to within 25 miles.  And this was taught in the Greek philosophy schools like the one at Alexandria, Egypt, and Athens, Greece.

But Christians thought a spherical earth was pagan heresy, and that the Earth was flat, as the Bible said. Hypatia of Alexandria, a beautiful woman and scientist, taught about the spherical Earth, atomic theory (400 years old as well), and the likelihood of animal evoluton (Aristotle.) For teaching THE TRUTH, the Christian Church in Alexandia, lead by Bishop SAINT Cyril had the Christian mob take Hypatia. They beat and raped her, and dragged her through the streets. She was further tortured, disembowelled, and her 4 limbs torn off by 4 horses tied to each hand and foot.

And the official Christian teaching remained the Flat Earth at the center of the universe until Columbus, Magellan, and Copernicus a millenium later.

Science was effectively stiffled by the Christian Church for a millenium.

FreeAmerican




-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 9:34 PM on April 7, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

There have been three documentaries, that I know of, just in the last year showing how Noah's flood could, and probably did, happen.  FA, you are assuming that there were all of these animals scattered all over the earth in a way in which Noah could not get them.  Scientific studies have shown layers of dust and artifacts from different parts of the world scattered in such a way that anything but a great flood seems inprobable.  You are also assuming on the number of animals that were around at that time.  

The bottom line is that there is more reason for people to believe Creationism then evolutionism.  There hasn't been one story in the bible that has been contradicted.  As opposed, evolution myths have been found in the hundreds.

Also, if there is a God powerful enough to create the earth and universe, don't you think He could have put any amount of animals where ever he wanted?


---JB---
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 2:29 PM on April 9, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The error in your Christian documentary is that the animals such as Australian marsupials, Amazonian basin fish, Polar Bears in the Arctic, South American tapirs and jaguars and a thousand other examples of far flung animals were only found in those places before and after the time of the supposed flood.

For example, kangaroos were never found in Asia (Middle East, Europe, or Africa). Their fossils go back many millions of years. And today that is still where they are found. So pretending that there was a widespread flood, Noah had to get animals from Australia crossing salt seas to the Ark and then return them to Australia. Meanwhile he had to get Polar Bears back to the north of Asia where they have ben found in fossils back 19 million years. And he head to get fresh water colourful fish from the upper Amazon basin across the salty ocean in which they would perish, to the Ark in aquariums, then return them some 13000 miles back to the Amazon basin.

If God had deposited enough water to dilute the oceans to fresh water, then all of the salt water fish would have perished. He had to get tapirs, jaguars, javelinas, capybaras, New World Monkeys, 2000 species of snake, 4000 or more delicate amphibians (frogs and salamanders extremely sensitive to salt), llamas, alpacas, etc. from South America to the Ark and then return them to South America. Remember none of these animals are found in fossils in the Middle East prior to the flood time or after the flood time.

I have already made the argument about the amount of water needed and how it was obtained and removed. It is impossible by science. You must postulate a series of miracles or Divine magic to have it happen. I don't accept the existence of magic.

Lastly, one must object to the terribly perverted morality of a God murdering millions of babies, childen, pregnant women aside from the adult men. I refuse to even consider the remote absurdity that newborn babies are sinners.

I have seen some of the documentaries of the discovery of the Ark and other such Christian apologetics. My wife and I see which of us can find the most errors and misinformation passed off as fact by these unscrupulus Creation Institution people.



FreeAmerican


-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 4:46 PM on April 9, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Dear Guest:

I forgot one important piece of evidence against the world wide flood. That is there is no evidence in looking at the strata all over the world in thousands of sedimentary layers that there ever was one period in time that water covered everything. There are local regional floods in many places at many different times and these are evident in the rock deposits. I know of some in Eastern Washington. But there are no specific layers, call it the Noah layer of a giant flood in multiple or all sites around the world. Geologically, it just didn't happen.

Thanks, the discussion is stimulating. Have a great day.

FreeAmerican


-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 4:51 PM on April 9, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Again, you are assuming that I belive that the earth was created 6,000 years ago in 6 24 hour days.  That is not the case.

I believe that the earth could have been created from anywhere in the last several billion years.  There are verses in the bible saying that, to God, "a thousand years are like a day."

Also, if the earth was created, say five billion years ago, enough time has passed that the strata in our earth has shifted enough that it is impossible for anyone to use that as evidence that there was no flood.

Anyways, this whole argument is besides the point.  Once again, the bottom line is that none of you evolutionists can show how or when the first cell was made.  It just isn't possible to make something that complex out of simple proteins and such.  Many countries, including America, have been trying for years to scientifically put together a cell using these elements.  Even with the best technology of today, they can not do it.  If no one can do it today, how did it happen, except by an outside force.

---JB---


 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 2:18 PM on April 10, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Dead subject. Scientists around the world have said many times if the world wide flood happened, there would be overwelming evidence around the world and there is none. A flood of such great proportions would so huge eividence. It has been shown there was a local flood at that time and was used in the bible as a mythological story. hence Noah's Ark, besides the Ark was the size of a football field and would not fit the animals anyway.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:58 PM on April 10, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Scientists also conclude that everything on this earth evolved from nothing.  Shouldn't there be overwhelming evidence for that?

---JB---
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 2:18 PM on April 11, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Guest at 2:18 PM on April 11, 2003 :
Scientists also conclude that everything on this earth evolved from nothing.  Shouldn't there be overwhelming evidence for that?

---JB---


I never heard of a scientist who said such rubbish. We know that the Earth accumulated from accreted debris circulating the condensing gaseus proto-sun. Gravitational forces caused rocks, dust, ice and other mineral clumps to cling in a cluster. As  the cluster got bigger and biggern pressured heated up the core and eventually ingnited nuclear forces to greater heat. Newest evidence is the the central core may be uranium not iron.

As earth cooled, the outer surfice solidified while the core remained molten. About 4.5 billion years ago the crust was solid as our oldes rocks testify. We have evidence of tectonic plate movements and continental drift back to 3.5 billion years, with mountain forming, eroding, and wrinkling up again as continents collided again and again. Since then there have been high mountain chains.

The physical improbability of having enough water to  cover high mountains up to 8 Kilometres implies  so much water as to not have happened. Where did the water come from? Where did it go? It is not here anymore. There is no place for it to hide. One must postulate Divine Magic which I reject.

FreeAmerican





-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 8:08 PM on April 11, 2003 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Anyways, this whole argument is besides the point.  Once again, the bottom line is that none of you evolutionists can show how or when the first cell was made.  It just isn't possible to make something that complex out of simple proteins and such.  Many countries, including America, have been trying for years to scientifically put together a cell using these elements.  Even with the best technology of today, they can not do it.  If no one can do it today, how did it happen, except by an outside force."
This is Abiogenesis, it has nothing to do with The Theory of Evolution.  No matter where the first life came from, evolution happens!  Now, biochemists have not yet created life, but is it impossible?  Just because we can't now doesn't mean it's impossible.  Science has a nasty habit of progressing.

"Also, if the earth was created, say five billion years ago, enough time has passed that the strata in our earth has shifted enough that it is impossible for anyone to use that as evidence that there was no flood."
Completely wrong.  Geologists are very good at reading the Earth.  Shifting strata leave evidence of what caused them to shift, when they shifted and this evidence can be analysed.  In fact, there are many spots on the planet where the entire geologic column is displayed and none of these have any evidence of Noah's world wide flood.  Absolutely nothing.  Over 150 years ago geologists falsified a global flood.  No evidence found since then even remotely suggests there could have been a flood that covered the entire planet.  So the story of Noah's Ark has been rightly consigned to the fairytale category.

"Scientists also conclude that everything on this earth evolved from nothing.  Shouldn't there be overwhelming evidence for that"
Don't you people ever get tired of being wrong?  Learn a little about what your argueing against.  No scientist claims the earth evolved from nothing.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 03:49 AM on April 12, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Demon38 at 03:49 AM on April 12, 2003 :


"Anyways, this whole argument is besides the point.  Once again, the bottom line is that none of you evolutionists can show how or when the first cell was made.

None of you Fundamentalists understand that no scientist claims to know how the first cell formed. We know for certain what happened to evolution from the first cells to Humans. We are still trying to find the answer to the first cell. Unlike Christians, we don't lie about, or make up fantasies. We admit, "I don't know." I don't construct an imaginary invisible magical giant to do it.

 It just isn't possible to make something that complex out of simple proteins and such.

You don't know that. It obviously happened or we wouldn't be here. I admit that I don't know how it happened. You make up an imaginary God (Oxymoron) to create magical events. Sodium a corrosive metal Na+ will bind with Cl- a toxic gas to produce NaCl (table salt). You let a solution of it evaporate slowly and it produces a fan like display of complex crystaline beauty that is complex at smaller and smaller levels. It is derived by Mendalbrot's Equation and is due entirely to the natural properties of the elements. Simple fertilised cells with nucleotide/protein nuclei can differentiate into the many different complex and specialised cells of the body (blood, muscle, bone, ligament, skin, neurons, astrocytes, oligodendrogliocytes, etc.) And it regulates the arrangements of those into a functional human being. No divinities are needed. The cells carry their own instructions developed over 3 billion years of evolution.


 Many countries, including America, have been trying for years to scientifically put together a cell using these elements.  Even with the best technology of today, they can not do it.  If no one can do it today, how did it happen, except by an outside force."

For thousands of years humans tried to make vehicles that would fly, Da Vinci tried. But only Orville and Wilbur Wright succeeded. People dreamed of going to the Moon, they tried catapults, balloons, and aeroplanes but failed. Naysayers said it couldn't be done and man could not fly. But we did both. We flew off the North Carolina coast in 1903. We landed on the Moon in 1969. We haven't constructed a cell YET, but we are humans and we don't give up. The more intelligent eventually prevail, the less intelligent keep saying "it can't be done." So what do you do. You invent something that we can't see, can't hear, can't touch, give it a human personality. We call it omnipotent without a shred of evidence and the non-thinkers are happy as clams (and as smart.)

This is Abiogenesis, it has nothing to do with The Theory of Evolution.  No matter where the first life came from, evolution happens!  Now, biochemists have not yet created life, but is it impossible?  Just because we can't now doesn't mean it's impossible.  Science has a nasty habit of progressing.

Exactly, humans eventually find a way. We are already very close to artificial intelligence with computer technology, complimenting the work of me and my colleagues in Neuroscience and the brain circuits. In fact, our team has two Ph.D. Computer Scientists working with Neuroscientist MD, Ph.D.s.

"Also, if the earth was created, say five billion years ago, enough time has passed that the strata in our earth has shifted enough that it is impossible for anyone to use that as evidence that there was no flood."
Completely wrong.  Geologists are very good at reading the Earth.  Shifting strata leave evidence of what caused them to shift, when they shifted and this evidence can be analysed.  In fact, there are many spots on the planet where the entire geologic column is displayed and none of these have any evidence of Noah's world wide flood.  Absolutely nothing.  Over 150 years ago geologists falsified a global flood.  No evidence found since then even remotely suggests there could have been a flood that covered the entire planet.  So the story of Noah's Ark has been rightly consigned to the fairytale category.


I can't add to that nice summary.

"Scientists also conclude that everything on this earth evolved from nothing.  Shouldn't there be overwhelming evidence for that"

No scientist says anything as ignorant at that. If such a ridiculous scenario occurred there would not be evidence. What is evidence of nothing?

Don't you people ever get tired of being wrong?  Learn a little about what your argueing against.  No scientist claims the earth evolved from nothing.


No, fundies don't get tired of twisting facts or in many cases outright lying to reinforce Biblical superstitious Mythology. It is a basis for the to prolong the delusional belief in Immortality. A magic God who lives forever is ridiculous but the Bible of Magic says he is real. And it says that we are made in the image of this imaginary magic god, therefore we also are immortal. This is why fundies so aggressively resist evolution and fear those of us who are Atheists. We Atheists think. We are educated, but we don't believe in magic gods. That makes them think, and thinking is the greatest threat to unfounded superstition like Christianity.

FreeAmerican





-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 9:31 PM on April 12, 2003 | IP
Hammer_of_God

|       |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

FreeAmerican, omg, half the stuff you said is COMPLETELY wrong...have you actually READ the bible...yeesh

first off, God told noah to get 2 of every KIND, not species, so he only needed to get 2 horses,not 2 Zebras or 2 stallions...

second off, God told noah toget every creatre who breaths the breath of life through his nostrils, which cancels out ALL insects since they breath through their skin

thrid off, Go told noah to get every LAND animal, no fish or nuthin...

and also, where it says to God a a day is like a thousand years, it also says a thousand years is like a day, that's only saying that time means nothing to God...

BTW dude, the odds of self arranging DNA is 1 x 10 **119,000**...so theres a better chance of you winning the state loterry over 8300 times before theres a chance of self arranging DNA...


-------
Life is either an adventure, or nothing...
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 6:43 PM on April 13, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Hammer_of_God at 6:43 PM on April 13, 2003 :

FreeAmerican, omg, half the stuff you said is COMPLETELY wrong...have you actually READ the bible...yeesh

I not only read the Bible extensively in my youth, I attended religious primary schools, and took 4 years of Biblical Studies in College. I dare say that I read the Bible more than 90% of self-identified Christians. It is the Bible that in its atrocities, moral depravity, errors about the natural world, and the obviously plagiarised Pagan New Testament, that led me from Christianity to Atheism.

first off, God told noah to get 2 of every KIND, not species, so he only needed to get 2 horses,not 2 Zebras or 2 stallions...

He also told Noah Gen7: "Of clean beasts and of beasts that are not clean, AND OF EVERYTHING THAT CREEPETH UPON THE EARTH." That inclusive statement included insects since "everything that creepeth on the Earth includes insects." Genesis 6 makes no mention of nostrils. There are two flood narratives. Genesis 7:2 "Of every clean beast thou shall take to the by sevens...7:3 "Of fowls also of the air by sevens." All of this means a lot more animals than just pairs.

second off, God told noah toget every creatre who breaths the breath of life through his nostrils, which cancels out ALL insects since they breath through their skin

I disagree. It doesn't say "no insects." And they do creepeth on the Earth. God said everything that creepeth.... So did God change his mind, and if so which is right. Or just another silly contradiction?

thrid off, Go told noah to get every LAND animal, no fish or nuthin...

For your sake I will not list bugs and fish, worms, clams, snails, slime molds, OK?

The fact is that certain animals are found only in certain isolated location. For example, Kangaroos have never been found outside of Australia and New Guinea. Lemurs are only on the Island of Madascar in the last 20 million years. Emus, Koalas, Marsupial wolves, wombats, and marsupial lions are found only in Australia.  Many other animals while on the Eurasian mainland are found only at great distances from Palestine, Mt. Ararat, and Mesopotamia. These include: polar bears, tapirs, aardvarks, Meercats, Irish Elk, Reindeer/Caribou, Moose, the Ice loving Macaques of Northern Japan. There are a few thousand other animals found far from Mesopotamia.

These represent animals never found in Mesopotamia/Ararat. How did Noah and his sons gather all of these animals from the far reaches of the left and right hemispheres and polar areas? How did they fit in the approximately 3.8 million species into the Ark if it was the wee little boat described in Genesis? How could they store enough food for the entire long journey aboard the tiny boat? When it landed on Mt. Ararat how did they return all of these animals back to their places of origin?

How did they transport the Koalas, Wallabies, Kangaroos, Wombats, Marsupial wolves, Emus, and Marsupial lions back to the island continent of Australia? How did they get South American Tapirs back to South America along with Jaguars, sloths, prehensile tailed New World Monkeys, Armadillos, Alpacas, Llamas, as South American  Rheas (flightless birds)? In the vicinity of Sydney, Aus: The blind snakes (Family Typhlopidae), 2 species; Pythons (Boidae), 1 species; Colubrid snakes (Colubridae), 2 species; Elapid snakes (Elapidae), 15 species; Sea snakes (Hydrophiidae), 1 species.

The Anilioidea and booids are intermediate in phylogenetic position. Some have considered Booidea to be monophyletic (Rieppel, 1988), but we follow Kluge (1991), whose unpublished data support the paraphyly of the group.

The Caenophidia are considered the most "advanced" snakes. Within the colubroids, the Viperidae and Elapidae are two generally accepted, well-supported groups. Relationships with the Colubridae are a mess. Many characters used at family/subfamily level are derived from maxilla and hemipenis. A recent molecular study does support the scolecophidians as most basal; booids intermediately placed but paraphyletic; colubroids monophyletic except that Acrochordus is within booids; Atractaspis is within Elapidae; colubrids not obviously monophyletic. (Heise et al., 1995).  

The following are reptiles, mostly snakes not able to be transported to Iraq and returned to their home territories, a daunting chore.

Scolecophidia

Anomalepidae.--(Central and South America)

Liotyphlops albirostris

Typhlopidae.--(Europe, Africa, Madagascar, Southern Asia, Australian region, Central and South America).

Ramphotyphlops braminhae, Typhlops rostellatus, Leptotyphlopidae.--(Africa, Southern Asia, North, Central, and South America)

Leptotyphlops dulcis, Alethinophidia

Aniliidae.--(South America) Anilius scytale
Uropeltidae.--(Southern Asia) Shield-tail snakes, including Cylindrophis.

Pseudotyphlops philippinus

Macrostomata
Elongation of the mandible, posterior elongation of the supratemporal, posteroventrally directed quadrate, enlarged ventral scutes.

Xenopeltidae.--(Southern Asia) Xenopeltis unicolor

Loxocemidae.--(Mexico and Central America) Loxocemus bicolor

Pythonidae.--(Africa, Southern Asia, Australian region) Aspidites ramsayi, Morelia spilota, Chondropython viridis

Boidae.--(Neotropical, Antilles, Madagascar, Pacific region, New Guinea) Corallus caninus, Epicrates cenchria, Eunectes murinus, Boa constrictor

Erycidae.--(W North America, Continental Africa and Eurasia) Eryx conicus, Lichanura trivirgata, Charina bottae

Tropidophiidae.--(Central and South America, West Indes) Tropidophis melanurus

Bolyeriidae.--(Mascarene Islands)

Caenophidia (Acrochordidae + Colubroidea)

Acrochordidae.--(India to Australia)

Acrochordus arafurae

Review the material on venom delivery systems:
•Opisthoglyphs
•Proteroglyphs
•Solenoglyphs
Atractaspididae.--(Mole Vipers; Africa, middle east)

Elapidae.--(including Hydrophiidae) (Non marine forms: Africa, Southern Asia; North, Central, and South America. Marine forms: all continents except Europe) Micrurus fulvius, Micrurus spixii, Micrurus sp., Acanthophis antarticus (Common Death Adder), Pseudechis guttatus (Spotted Black snake), Pseudonaja inframacula (Peninsula Brown Snake), Naja oxiana (Central Asian Cobra), Hydrophis klossi

Viperidae

Viperinae (Non-pit vipers) (Europe, Africa, East Asia, Southern Asia) Bitis gabonica

Crotalinae (Pit vipers) (East Asia, Southern Asia, North, Central, and South America)

Agkistrodon contortrix, Bothrops nasuta, Bothrops lateralis, Sistrurus catenatus, Crotalus atrox

Colubridae.--(Worldwide; Colubrinae and Natricinae most widespread, but neither in Madagascar)

Natricinae (In US: Clonophis, Nerodia, Regina, Seminatrix, Storeria, Thamnophis, Tropidoclonion, Virginia.) Nerodia erythrogaster, Nerodia harteri, Thamnophis proximus, Thamnophis marcianus, Storeria dekayi

Xenodontinae (in US: Carphophis, Contia, Diadophis, Farancia, Heterodon, Hypsiglena, Coniophanes, Rhadinaea, Tantilla, Trimorphodon) Heterodon platyrhinos, Diadophis punctatus, Tantilla gracilis, Hypsiglena torquata, Leimadophis epinephalus, Ninia psephota, Leptodeira annulata, Imantodes inornatus

Colubrinae (in US: Arizona, Coluber, Drymarchon, Drymobius, Elaphe, Masticophis, Opheodrys, Pituophis, Salvadora, Cemophora, Lampropeltis, Rhinocheilus, Stilosoma, Chilomeniscus, Chionactis, Conopsis, Ficimia, Gyalopion, Sonora, Stenorrhina) Arizona elegans, Rhinocheilus lecontei, Elaphe guttata, Elaphe obsoleta, Pituophis melanoleucus, Lampropeltis triangulum, Lampropeltis getulus, Coluber mentovarius, Masticophis flagellum, Salvadora grahamiae, Ficimia streckeri, Sonora semiannulata, Chrysopelea paradisi,

Homalopsinae (Rear-fanged watersnakes; Asia) Enhydris polylepis

Lycodontinae (Africa, Asia) Psammophis sp.


How did they get the 9 types of Lemur back to Madagascar? I could go on listing some 3 million animals but I think I have made my point debunking the faerie tale Noah’s Flood.

and also, where it says to God a a day is like a thousand years, it also says a thousand years is like a day, that's only saying that time means nothing to God...

If a thousand years is a day, then the 6 day creation adds only 6000 years to the fundamentalist 6000 years old earth for 12,000 years which we know is not so. Earth is 4.5 billion years old and life began about 750 million years ago.

BTW dude, the odds of self arranging DNA is 1 x 10 **119,000**...so theres a better chance of you winning the state loterry over 8300 times before theres a chance of self arranging DNA...


That odds is fictitious. It is just pulled out of your sigmoid orifice. There is no basis for it. In our solar system Earth, ?Mars, ? Triton, and two other Jupiter and Saturn Moons may have water in liguid form. So my odds are 4:1, because it happened on Earth, but the Jupiter-Saturn moons are questionable, so the odds are Mars and Earth which is 2:1 odds. That seems pretty good. I definitely happened on Earth, since we know of no life elsewhere yet, it is mathematical rubbish to postulate odds. Odds require two sets of numbers. You are using that crazy Creationist's pseudostatistics that are totally fictional.

What are the odds on an invisible, inaudible, non-tangible, non-matter, non-energy, non-measurable being existing? There are no such odds. If you say God verses insects then it is about 10 million species of insects divided into 32 orders (with many more families, genera). Some species have millions of individuals like beetles. Realistically we are looking at several billion insects. So the odds on God versus Insects is say 1: 8 billion.

Cuchulainn





-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 01:37 AM on April 14, 2003 | IP
Hammer_of_God

|       |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If you were forced to go to church and forced to read the bible and so on and so forth, your were never really a christian...so don't give me this "Christian to Atheist" nonsense...

And with the believing in a non-matter, non-animate non-whatever object, it's called faith dude...

Also, the deal with animals only being on certain parts of the earth, that's how it is TODAY...you assuming its always been this way, which I don't believe to be true...


-------
Life is either an adventure, or nothing...
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 4:07 PM on April 15, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Also, the deal with animals only being on certain parts of the earth, that's how it is TODAY...you assuming its always been this way, which I don't believe to be true..."

No, it's because some animals' fossils are not found in other areas at all.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 5:39 PM on April 15, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

We know that the Earth accumulated from accreted debris circulating the condensing gaseus proto-sun.

You completely missed my point.  I was not saying just earth came from nothing, but the whole universe.  Where did it come from?  FA, you have not made it known to me whether you are a Big Banger or just belive the universe was here all the time, or other.

For thousands of years humans tried to make vehicles that would fly, Da Vinci tried. But only Orville and Wilbur Wright succeeded. People dreamed of going to the Moon, they tried catapults, balloons, and aeroplanes but failed. Naysayers said it couldn't be done and man could not fly. But we did both. We flew off the North Carolina coast in 1903. We landed on the Moon in 1969. We haven't constructed a cell YET, but we are humans and we don't give up.

This is a poor analogy.  An airplane was a creation in someones mind, something thought up without prior knowledge of.  An invention is conjured up in someone's mind.  If you want to compare a cell and an airplane, it would be like DaVinci finding an airplane in his world and then trying to re-create it, which would be very simple.  My analogy is simplistic, but you get the idea.  You really can't compare a cell to the workings of an airplane.

 None of you Fundamentalists understand that no scientist claims to know how the first cell formed. We know for certain what happened to evolution from the first cells to Humans. We are still trying to find the answer to the first cell. Unlike Christians, we don't lie about, or make up fantasies. We admit, "I don't know." I don't construct an imaginary invisible magical giant to do it.

I really don't think the early Christians, over 2000 years ago, or other early believers, possibly millions of years ago, decided to make up a God because they didn't know how animals and plants got on this planet.

P.S.  I am wondering, Free American, if you belive Jesus ever existed.  Maybe you believe he was a man and the books of the New Testement were just stories thrown way out of proportion.  Virtually all historians acknowledge that he did indeed exist, what he did is up to the individual person's own beliefs.

---JB---
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 8:20 PM on April 15, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I hope the system doesn't crush my post into a one inch column again. What is that?

I am an evolutionist. I can't understand the rejection of the fact of evolution anymore than gravity, heliocentric solar system, spherical earth, tectonic plates with continental drift, etc.

I don't know how the first cell formed. I have some hypotheses but no way to test them. I don't know what caused the Big Bang if indeed that is how the universe started.

So, I know about Evolution, the 4.5 billion years old world, the 13 billion year old universe, the origin of life approximately 750 million years ago and its long million step mutational/natural selection evolution to you and me. I know about plate tectonics (I live near Mt. St. Helens, and was nearly buried in ash when it erupted.) I understand how plate tectonics moves contiinents, connects continents, splits continents, caused volcanoes and earth quakes. This is scientific fact.

What I don't know, I admit. I know it violates the uiversal man's oath to never admit you don't know. I am a man. I also believe in honesty. I admit that I don't know exactly how the first replicating molecules of DNA formed the first lipoprotein cell membrane. I say "I don't know" rather than make up a fanciful explanation based on magic or imaginary beings.

This same applies to the Big Bang. I am a biochemist and neuroscientist but I am not a quantum physicist. So I only know that particles pop out of vacuums. How? I don't know. Likewise I don't know how the universe popped out of a singularity like flatulence from a cosmic rectum. I don't know. And I will not make up something lacking in evidence.

I realise that I may never know the answers but I am content that what I know is real. What I don't know is also real but I don't know it's mechanism.

FreeAmerican


-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 8:40 PM on April 15, 2003 | IP
Hammer_of_God

|       |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I do not lie, I may be incorrect, but I do not believe I am...

I believe what I say to be fact, if it is not, which I don't believe it to be, then it is not my fault that I don't know...

If I say something that you totally don't agree with, I'm not lying, I may be in your eyes, but I am not lying at all. I research what I say(or try to). I don't say random things hoping they're correct...


-------
Life is either an adventure, or nothing...
 


Posts: 24 | Posted: 8:41 PM on April 16, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"I can't understand the rejection of the fact of evolution anymore than gravity, heliocentric solar system, spherical earth, tectonic plates with continental drift, etc."

If you can't understand the rejection then you need to do some serious thinking.  I can show you a rock and drop it to show the theory of gravity.  What can you show me to prove the theory of evolution?  Nothing.  Nobody can prove the theory of evolution, it is hard to prove something that did not happen.
I don't believe the creationism theory because I was raised to believe that, I believe it because it is the best possible explanation.  If you ask a creationist how the earth and structures on it were formed, they will tell you.  If you ask and evolutionist, they will tell you a bunch of scientific explanations that have never been proved and the chances of it having happened are against impossible odds.

Anyways, Free American, you never told me about your view on Jesus.  Who was he?  Did he exist?  What is the bible?  A made up storybook?  I have tried to explain to you my view on evolution, what is you view on creationism and the bible?

Any response would be very helpful.  Don't take these questions the wrong way, they are not necessarily for debating, but more for my curiousity.

Thank you

---JB---


---"You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free."
                         -Jesus Christ

 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 7:23 PM on April 17, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:


   
"-Over 250 Flood legends from all parts of the world have been found. Most have similarities to the Genesis story

-The length-to-width ratio of 6 to 1 is what shipbuilders today often use. This is the best ratio for stability in stormy weather. (God thinks of everything!)

-The top 3,000 feet of Mt. Everest (from 26,000-29,000 feet) is made up of sedimentary rock packed with seashells and other ocean-dwelling animals.

-Petrified clams in the closed position (found all over the world) testify to their rapid burial while they were still alive, even on top of Mount Everest.

-"One of the best evidences that strata were accumulated very rapidly, rather than at Schuchert's postulated average rate of about one foot in every two thousand years, comes from a consideration of fossils. Dunbar and Rodgers considered Schuchert's average rate of deposition and said:

Internal evidence in the strata, however, belies these estimates [of the average rate of deposition]. In the coal measures of Nova Scotia, for example, the stumps and trunks of many trees, are preserved standing upright as they grew, clearly having been buried before they had time to fall or rot away. Here sediment certainly accumulated to a depth of many feet within a few years. In other formations where articulated skeletons of large animals are preserved, the sediment must have covered them within a few days at the most. Abundant fossil shells likewise indicate rapid burial, for if shells are long exposed on the sea floor they suffer abrasion or corrosion and are overgrown by sessile organisms or perforated by boring animals. At the rate of deposition postulated by Schuchert, 1,000 years, more or less, would have been required to bury a shell 5 inches in diameter. With very local exceptions fossil shells show no evidence of such long exposure. Evidently then, either our estimates of geologic time are grossly exaggerated, or else most of the elapsed time is not represented in any given section by sedimentary deposits."

-"On the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, this author found a stratum three feet in thickness composed primarily of closed fossil clams numbering in the millions. The stratum is peculiar for two reasons. First, clams do not live solidly packed together in a layer three feet thick. They naturally inhabit a sandy or rocky environment, each clam at some distance from another. Second, clam shells are rarely found in whole, closed condition, but broken apart at the hinge. On the seashore each valve (half of the clam's shell) is usually found separate from the other valve. The reason is that the hinging ligament is on the outside of the shell and tends to open the two valves. Only the muscles of the clam can keep the valves closed. When the clam dies, the muscles relax and the shell opens due to the outside hinging ligament.

How was this clam layer formed? The best explanation seems to be that the clams were washed into their present location and buried alive. If the clams had died prior to burial, the shells would have been open rather than tightly closed. The clams must have been transported because they could not have lived amassed in the layer in which they are found. Turbulent and flowing water seems to be the only mechanism which could rapidly transport and deposit heavy objects like clams. Some catastrophe like the Flood seems to be a most reasonable explanation. "


----previous reply from the user "pie"...thank you for your help...


 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 02:32 AM on April 18, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

     "It is very unlikely, at best, that all those different flood accounts would have been counted reality and fallowed as if it was, if in fact there was no evidence that it had actually occured. Do you imagine that all these ethnic groups, many that dispised the nieghboring cultures, would gladly just copy their flood accounts? Many of the people likely were isolated from their surrounding for quite a while, and wouldn't have even had the pleasure of doing so even if they pleased. Or what about the people that already had their "laws" or religious documents written, do you think they just skipped back a few pages and put the flood account in their recordings? Or is it very likely that all those ethnic groups just had their leaders get together and decide that a global flood must have occured, and then after that was done they continued being the enemies they originally were (as was the case for many of them, surely with exceptions)?. Highly unlikely that all these different cultures had the same illusionation of this "mysterious flood". Expecially since those cultures just took the fact of a flood, and not all or even any of the details into consideration. Let's be careful not to neglect the truth, especially if it could affect our eternity!"
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 02:34 AM on April 18, 2003 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Come on, don't creationists ever get tired of using old, debunked arguements?  All your "evidences" have been proven wrong.  What are you trying to do, deceive people who don't know how dishonest you are?

"-Over 250 Flood legends from all parts of the world have been found. Most have similarities to the Genesis story"
They don't have many similarities to Noah's flood, only vague generalities.  And since many early civilizations grew around rivers, flood stories would be plentiful.  But Noah's flood was disproven over 200 years ago, absolutely no evidence for it and it would be physically impossible.

"The length-to-width ratio of 6 to 1 is what shipbuilders today often use. This is the best ratio for stability in stormy weather. (God thinks of everything!) "
So do early ship builders and sailors, this in no way can be considered evidence for a world wide flood.  Boats were built before the flood and primitive ship builders were very ingenious.

"-The top 3,000 feet of Mt. Everest (from 26,000-29,000 feet) is made up of sedimentary rock packed with seashells and other ocean-dwelling animals. "
Once again, the top of Mt Everest is made up of seashell packed rock because at one time it was a sea bed.  India crashed into the Asian continent and pushed the seabed up into a mountain range.  It's still being pushed up today!  Ever heard of plate tectonics?

"-Petrified clams in the closed position (found all over the world) testify to their rapid burial while they were still alive, even on top of Mount Everest. "
I always get a laugh from this one.  Clams bury themselves in shallow sand.  If a sudden influx of debris covered over their shallow burial spots, they would die and the added pressure of the weight of debris would keep their shells shut.  Ridiculous premise!

Your strata deposition rates are totally ludicrous.  Look up "Polystrate" fossils to find out how 19th century geologists explained upright trees in strata formations, all the while still proving the world wide flood a myth.  And the fact that many shelled animals bury themselves when they are alive explains why the "...fossil shells show no evidence of such long exposure".

I can't beleive you had the balls to try and use Paluxy as real, creditable evidence for anything!  Why don't you trot out those dinosaur alond side human foot prints tracks while your at it!!!

Maybe you can explain where all the water for a world wide flood came from and where it all went.  Any geologists or oceanographer will tell you it is impossible for it to have ever existed.  There is no evidence for it in the geologic column, none.  Let's not forget that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for 8 people to care for all those 100's of thousands of animals which the ark was much too tiny to carry.  Or the fact that there was no way they could carry enough supplies to feed all those animals.  What did the carnivores eat anyway?
The fossil record clearly shows an order of organisms layed down over 100s of millions of years, it is impossible that they could have been put there quickly by a magic flood, once again, impossible!  Face reality, Noah is a myth, a fairytale, never could have happened and never did!  Only blind, unreasoning, illogical adherence to dogma could make anyone so willfully ignorant.









 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 05:33 AM on April 18, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually your arguement that all the flood accounts would be the same would only be relevant if all of the decendants and the desendants decendants (etc.) continued to believe In God Allmighty, and considering Noah had already cursed one of them before he died that was not the case for very long at all. Obviously everyone wasn't going to have the same position, however they couldn't deny the events occurance. The flood accounts all record a drastic flood pointing towards a world wide flood...
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:01 AM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

There are a number of Scripture passages that identify the flood waters with the present-day seas (Amos 9:6 and Job 38:8–11 note ‘waves’). If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah’s day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the earth (verse 9)[1]. They are the same waters!
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:14 AM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Nope, wrong.  I don't claim all the flood accounts were the same, they were not, different heroes, different methods of escaping the flood, different amount of survivors.  So they were clearly different myths spawned by different cultures, not based on the same magical world wide flood.
And there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land and mountains, so even if God rebuked them, they wouldn't have any place to go.  You seem  to be missing the point that it is physically impossible that Noah's flood ever occurred!  Impossible!  Like I said, the World wide flood was conclusively disproven 200 years ago when Christian geologists couldn't deny the facts staring them in the face any longer.  As our techniques of studying the past have become more and more sophisticated, they only reinforce the fact that there was no world wide flood!  If you're basing your faith on impossible myths, you're bound to be sorely dissapointed!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 01:25 AM on April 19, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Guest at 7:23 PM on April 17, 2003 :
"I can't understand the rejection of the fact of evolution anymore than gravity, heliocentric solar system, spherical earth, tectonic plates with continental drift, etc."

[B]If you can't understand the rejection then you need to do some serious thinking.  I can show you a rock and drop it to show the theory of gravity.  What can you show me to prove the theory of evolution?  Nothing. "

Actually I can  prove evolution. I can show you a series of different life forms dating back to 550 million BC. I can show you how classes and orders of animals and plants changed over each successive period (Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous, Permian, Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, Eocene, Palaeocene, Oligocene, Miocene, Pliocene, Pleistocene, and modern. At each stage we can see distinctive fauna of the chronology of that period. Some have become extinct and some developed new. We can accurately age them with isotope chronology confirmed by tectonic plate and continental drift movement as I have shown before. That is hard science. We just recently completed the Human Genome. That is a text book of evolution. WE (You and I) still have genes from Cambrian animals that we didn't discard. We have genes for an exoskeleton that we don't need. We have genes for a notochord that is made in the first two months of our own embryology, similar to Pikaia of the Cambrian (Burgess Shale), and modern Amphioxus a creature with a notochord. Ours is recycled by newer genes (HOX) regulatory genes. We have genes for gills of fish and amphibian larvae in our embryo that are later recycled by other HOX genes into ear parts and larynx. We have genes for a spine that includes a tail. Other COX genes recycle the tail in us and our brothers the Apes, but occasional babies are born with a tail or a residual piece of gill in the neck (branchial cleft cysts which are histologically gill tisssue.)

" Nobody can prove the theory of evolution, it is hard to prove something that did not happen."

That it happed with certainty is why we can prove it. How can one ignore the nearly million tonnes of fossil evidence, the accurate chronology and staging of the progression of animals over 550 million years, and the FACT that we retain the genes of many of those past Palaeozoic and Mesozoic ancestors. Also how can we ignore that we ourselves do a 9 month replay of evolution from one cell to us with the transitionals inbetween. How can one ignore the over 1000 well documented transitional forms from Pikaia to amphioxus, lobe fin to amphibian, agnostomic fish to mouthed fish, armoured fish to boney fish and to cartilaginous fish, primitive armoured to lobe fin fish to amphibian, Ampibian to reptile, reptile to mammal like reptile,  mammal like reptile to true mammal, to the mammal explosion in the Cenozoic to tree insectivores, to lemur like animals to prosimians, to simians to a branch point were monkeys split from early apes, apes to advanced apes, apes to Hominidae to Hominids to Homo to Homo Sapiens. The conclusions are inescapable as dropping the stone to show gravity. Find a small aborted human foetus and I will show you a fish or amphibian or a notochord. We carry our history with us in our genes.

"I don't believe the creationism theory because I was raised to believe that, I believe it because it is the best possible explanation.  If you ask a creationist how the earth and structures on it were formed, they will tell you."

And it is totally the mythology of Bronze Age savages, and easily debunked by one rock older than 6000 years.

"  If you ask and evolutionist, they will tell you a bunch of scientific explanations that have never been proved and the chances of it having happened are against impossible odds."

See my paragraph above. The fossils are not made up. They are in museums where you can see and touch them, in Drumheller, Boseman, Colorado, Smithsonian, London Museum of Natural History and hundred others. The study protocol is the anatomical comparisons of the different aged fossil evidence, chronologially dated by an isotope system confirmed by laser measurements of continental drift. In case you missed that I will repeat it.

240 million years ago Africa split off from South America in the great southern continent of Gondwana. It was a rift with lava upwelling in Gondwana at Cameroons, 240 million years ago. SA moved away from Africa at 2 cm /yr. as the upwelling magma formed new crust and pushed the older crust apart east and west. Now we test fossils in those rocks in Cameroon and Recife, Brazil area. The rocks by isotope date to 240 million years in a reptile called Lystrosaurus found in Cameroon and Brazil 240 million years ago. How do we know the isotope decay is accurate? We measure the distance from Cameroon to Brazil and divide that distance in cm by 2cm/year and we get approximately 240 million years. We measure the yearly drift (for the past 20 years) and it is consistently 2cm per year. If we use seafloor measurements it is also 2 cm per year. IT ALL FITS TOGETHER LIKE A DELICATE AND PRECISE PUZZLE. Evolution is a proven fact to 99.9% of scientists because they understand it and the scientific methods. Now we even have the thrilling data from our own DNA that retells our long illustrious history to the Cambrian grandfather Pikaia, 550 million years ago. Our genome is an evolutionary text book. Americans unfortunate have not been taught this in schools as we in Europe were lucky to learn. That is why science illiteracy is so abysmal in America.

"Anyways, Free American, you never told me about your view on Jesus.  Who was he?  Did he exist?"

Jesus is difficult. I don't know. I like him as the gospel character. He may have been a real human not a god or he may have been fictional, a copy of Mithra and Aten borrowing their virgin birth, death and resurrection stories. The Jews didn't notice him and the Romans didn't notice him at the time. He is recalled only by gospel writers and Roman historians who merely said that some people worshipped a Jesus Christos. None if it is evidence but hearsay. So the jury is out on that. I am sceptical but do not rule othe possible real live Jesus as an itinerant rabbi.

"  What is the bible?  A made up storybook?"

Yes and No. Genesis is clearly false mythology. After exodus it is largely history with a fair amount of accuracy up throu Daniel, and excellent historical account of the Jews from Babylonian captivity to the end of the Seleucid Empire and the advancing menace of Rome. It was written in 145 BC by its style and anachronisms not in 587BC. Compare to Jeremiah and Ezekiel who did write in 600-590 BC (their prophesies were in error.) Daniel's fake prophesies were accurate because they had already happened and he wrote about them after the fact.

"  I have tried to explain to you my view on evolution, what is you view on creationism and the bible?"

Creationism is a retelling of the Genesis I and 2 chapters of the Bible. It is scientifically wrong and doesn't bother to use genuine science although it calls itself Creation Science. It is religion in a none too clever sham. I already told you the rest of the OT is largely history and fairly accurate. There is beautiful poetic imagery impressive even to a poet filled Celt like me. The New Testament is a fictional account of Mithra with his name chanbed to Jesus and some other Jewish named figures added. It was primarily a propaganda set of essays. Paul's letters are incoherent and give a lot of insight into his psyche. Psychiatrist have long arguments over his diagnosis while neurologists argue over his epilepsy and migraine.

"Any response would be very helpful.  Don't take these questions the wrong way, they are not necessarily for debating, but more for my curiousity."

Same here. I gave you honest answers be they unpopular in America. Let me add that I am a constitutionalist, and I support freedom of belief and unbelief. I would fight to defend your right to believe in fundamentalism as repugnant the ideology is to me. I feel it is your right. In defending your right, I may be protecting my own.

"Thank you

---JB---"

Your welcome. I appreciate the exchange of ideas. Not to necessarily convert one another to or from religion. I mainly try to convince Chrstians that they need not fear evolution. Since is obviously happened, and if you believe in God as creator, then you must regard evolution not as my "theory" but as your God's plan. Who are any of us to argue with what God did? Eh? We might as well protest the spherica Earth. "But God we don't like your evolution mechanisms."


---"You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free."
                         -Jesus Christ'


If he was real, he was wise.

Air do dheagh shlàinte!

FreeAmerican (Celtic American)






-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 03:40 AM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"even if God rebuked them, they wouldn't have any place to go."

   Actually if we leveled the surface of earth, water would cover the whole surface of the earth at about 1.7 miles. Do not forget that 70% of the earths surface is covered by water. What God says, goes. If He created this existence, He can also sustain it how He pleases.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:45 PM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

   "We can accurately age them with isotope chronology confirmed by tectonic plate and continental drift movement"

     Sorry this is irrelavent information to say things kindly. This dating technique is not accurate as previously thought. There are endless examples of extremely strange variations of dates coming from material known to be dated different than the results shown. You threw in that this was "confirmed by tectonic plate and continental drift movement",these are simply speculative theories that don't have anything to do with dating.

      "We have genes for gills of fish and amphibian larvae in our embryo that are later recycled by other HOX genes into ear parts and larynx."

     That was a hoax that originated in the 1860's, and has has been disregarded in the field of science for many years. Thes are now called "pharyngeal clefts" (proper name for what was previously thought to be gill slits), are just human development designed by God, not gill slits.

 "(branchial cleft cysts which are histologically gill tisssue.)"

    That would be quite speculation to say that a syst regarding the division of the windpipe is histologically gill tissue.

  "WE (You and I) still have genes from Cambrian animals that we didn't discard. We have genes for an exoskeleton that we don't need. We have genes for a notochord that is made in the first two months of our own embryology, similar to Pikaia of the Cambrian (Burgess Shale), and modern Amphioxus a creature with a notochord."

      We are still just barely grasping the complexity of our make up. All of this is just speculation, with no basis, and is not accepted by many scientists.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 1:13 PM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"   Actually if we leveled the surface of earth, water would cover the whole surface of the earth at about 1.7 miles. Do not forget that 70% of the earths surface is covered by water. What God says, goes. If He created this existence, He can also sustain it how He pleases."

Except that we KNOW that the surface of the Earth was never levelled.  Even you admit this
in your post where you use the fact that the top of Mt. Everest has fossilized sea creatures on it.  So why are you changing your story now?  Your first stupid claim is shot down in flames, you throw out another equally stupid claim, totally opposite of your first...

 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 11:01 PM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

  Who changed their arguement? You don't "KNOW" much of anything.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 02:43 AM on April 20, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

NewAmerican, Are you a teacher or instructor of somesort?
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 03:48 AM on April 20, 2003 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Who changed their arguement? You don't "KNOW" much of anything. "

I was assuming that you are the same "guest"
that posted this:

"There are a number of Scripture passages that identify the flood waters with the present-day seas (Amos 9:6 and Job 38:8–11 note ‘waves’). If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah’s day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the earth (verse 9)[1]. They are the same waters! "

And then later posted this:

"Actually if we leveled the surface of earth, water would cover the whole surface of the earth at about 1.7 miles. Do not forget that 70% of the earths surface is covered by water. What God says, goes. If He created this existence, He can also sustain it how He pleases."

If these posts were written by 2 different "guests" then I apologize, I jumped to conclusions and was wrong.  
But you can see my point, the first post says
"After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6)...", the waters covered the mountains, so the Earth was not level at this time according to this post.  These 2 posts contradict each other.
Be that as it may, there still was never enough water on the planet to cover all land, so the world wide flood arguement is falsified.  
To say that the Earth was level and the flood caused all the land features (mountains, valleys, ect.) is also impossible.  The amount of energy produce by such rapid tectonic plate movement would have turned the continents into molten rock.  So that theory is also falsified.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 05:10 AM on April 20, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Actually I can  prove evolution."

If you can prove evolution, I suggest you go to drdino.com and post it because you can earn one-quarter of a million dollars.  But I guarantee that he will successfully refute anything you say.

"And it is totally the mythology of Bronze Age savages, and easily debunked by one rock older than 6000 years."

As I said, I don't believe the earth is six thousand years old.

"Evolution is a proven fact to 99.9% of scientists"

Incorrect.

"He is recalled only by gospel writers and Roman historians who merely said that some people worshipped a Jesus Christos. None if it is evidence but hearsay. So the jury is out on that. I am sceptical but do not rule othe possible real live Jesus as an itinerant rabbi."

What other proof do you need?  It is not hearsay, it is known among almost all historians that Jesus did indeed exist.  Didn't you hear of the box with the inscriptions on it saying "James, brother of Jesus" the box is dated at the time we think Jesus lived.  What are the chances that it is someone else?  Not as great as the chance evolution happened, but still rather huge, somewhere between 1 and 200 and 1 and 2000.

"Yes and No. Genesis is clearly false mythology. After exodus it is largely history with a fair amount of accuracy up throu Daniel, and excellent historical account of the Jews from Babylonian captivity to the end of the Seleucid Empire and the advancing menace of Rome. It was written in 145 BC by its style and anachronisms not in 587BC. Compare to Jeremiah and Ezekiel who did write in 600-590 BC (their prophesies were in error.) Daniel's fake prophesies were accurate because they had already happened and he wrote about them after the fact."

If so much of the bible is correct, why don't you assume that it all is?  Also, what prophesies were not fulfilled?  Have you read of the prophecies in the bible saying the Jews would stay a race throughout eternity?  There are no races that have not dissolved over time and withered away, the Jews are the only one.  And this is with them being persecuted and murdered in the millions (WWII).

"Since is obviously happened, and if you believe in God as creator, then you must regard evolution not as my "theory" but as your God's plan."

God loves his creations (people) so much he gave us free will.  But, Christians are called upon in the bible to go out into the world to seek and convert everyone.

One other question if you don't mind, purely for curiousity sake.  What do you, as an Atheist, feel morals and ethical feeling are?  This is something that has puzzled me since I obviously  believe they are from God.

Thank You!

---JB---
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 5:31 PM on April 20, 2003 | IP
Crim

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If you can prove evolution, I suggest you go to drdino.com and post it because you can earn one-quarter of a million dollars.  But I guarantee that he will successfully refute anything you say.

No.  One cannot earn 250k dollars from Kent Hovind.  Kent Hovind does not HAVE 250k dollars.   The wording of his offer makes it impossible to prove ANYTHING.  If our legal system were similar to Mr.  Hovind's offer, jails would not exist because no one could ever be convicted.

Kent Hovind has been asked repeately about details of his offer.   He refuses to respond.  He has also been asked to prove ANY event using the criteria of his offer.  He refuses to respond.  

What are the chances that it is someone else?

It is estimated that in the area at the time, there would be around 4-5 families which had those 3 names in that relation.  The ossuary gives no details about the people in question, only their names.  Certainly, that cannot be used as evidence towards the divinity of this Jesus or the Jesus worshipped by Christians.  Finally, the second part of the inscription (the 'brother of Yeshua') part is of questionable validity.  The style of the text is different than the rest.

Have you read of the prophecies in the bible saying the Jews would stay a race throughout eternity?  There are no races that have not dissolved over time and withered away, the Jews are the only one.

Every other race has been wiped out?  Wouldn't that make everyone on Earth a Jew?

What do you, as an Atheist, feel morals and ethical feeling are?  

Morals are a necessary construct for any social animal.   They support both the individual and the group.
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 5:46 PM on April 20, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Evolution is a proven fact to 99.9% of scientists because they understand it and the scientific methods."

     This statement (even in it's context) has no logical relevance. This is just a silly mistake of sorts.

The interesting thing about the Jews is that the Lord had siad in numerous Old Testament prophesies that the land was to be broken up (again after the Babylonian captivity in 586 B.C. ) For example in Ezekiel (written during the exile period, in refference to future scattering of the Israelites) 36:19 ,"And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them." Jesus also spoke of this scattering of the Israelites. In Luke 21:24 Jesus said "Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles (anyone who is not of Jewish origin) until the period of the Gentiles is fulfilled." These things came to pass exactly as stated in 70 AD, approx. 37 Years after Jesus said them (Also 37 years after His death and resurrection). The Roman's came upon the land with great fury with the emperor (possibly emperor's son at that time) Titus. They annialated the Jews home land, and burned down the Jewish Temple. This, however was not the end of the prophesy as the Lord God said through Ezekiel in chapter 36:24,"For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you to your own land." And Jesus had said "until the period of the Gentiles is fulfilled." Therefore, the prophesy of Ezekiel regarding the gathering of the Jewish people and them being brought back to Israel was fulfilled in May 14, 1948. However, they did not have complete control of Jerusalem. Jesus said specifically that Jerusalem had to be under Jewish control. This came to pass in the 6-day war of 1967. Although all odds seemed agianst this miraculous feat, it is now both fact and history, as well as prophetic fulfillment.

....note "Prophesy" is when God tells what He will cause occur at a later time: either through a live person sbmitted to the Holy Spirit, or , as is the case here, as documented in the pages of the Holy Bible. And for questions or comments, or to recieve e-mails about the Truth of Jesus, contact me at:bensaved2001@hotmail.com

...In Christ,
                         Benjamin
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 4:12 PM on April 21, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Hammer_of_God at 8:41 PM on April 16, 2003 :
I do not lie, I may be incorrect, but I do not believe I am...

I believe what I say to be fact, if it is not, which I don't believe it to be, then it is not my fault that I don't know...

If I say something that you totally don't agree with, I'm not lying, I may be in your eyes, but I am not lying at all. I research what I say(or try to). I don't say random things hoping they're correct...


I don't think you are lying. You are emotionally into your beliefs to the point that you can't see their irrationality. Your rational brain is chained by superstition and your critical analysis circuits shackled by relative science illiteracy. Not your fault and no insult intended though you will likely be offended. I think you education in science has been sadly neglected. It is not possible for you to critically analyse scientific propositions if you don't even have a science vocabulary or the basic elements of scientific method.

You are not lying, I know that. I wish that you were lying and down deep understood reality. You are a mental slave to  stone age superstition.

FreeAmerican




-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 11:15 PM on April 21, 2003 | IP
FreeAmerican

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Guest at 1:13 PM on April 19, 2003 :
   "We can accurately age them with isotope chronology confirmed by tectonic plate and continental drift movement"

     Sorry this is irrelavent information to say things kindly. This dating technique is not accurate as previously thought. There are endless examples of extremely strange variations of dates coming from material known to be dated different than the results shown. You threw in that this was "confirmed by tectonic plate and continental drift movement",these are simply speculative theories that don't have anything to do with dating.

      "We have genes for gills of fish and amphibian larvae in our embryo that are later recycled by other HOX genes into ear parts and larynx."

     That was a hoax that originated in the 1860's, and has has been disregarded in the field of science for many years. Thes are now called "pharyngeal clefts" (proper name for what was previously thought to be gill slits), are just human development designed by God, not gill slits.

 "(branchial cleft cysts which are histologically gill tisssue.)"

    That would be quite speculation to say that a syst regarding the division of the windpipe is histologically gill tissue.

The windpipe in your quaint jargon is ciliated pseudostratified columnar epithelium which rests on a basement membrane. The gill slits have a complex structure with endothelium over a dentritic (bush like) vascular structure for Oxygen and CO2 diffusion. When the tissues are recycled the entire structure is broken down, cells change to columnar epithelium. Some of the vascular dentrites are just reabsorbed. Connective gill tissues become osteoblasts to make inner ear bones. You really shouldn't plow in over your head.

  "WE (You and I) still have genes from Cambrian animals that we didn't discard. We have genes for an exoskeleton that we don't need. We have genes for a notochord that is made in the first two months of our own embryology, similar to Pikaia of the Cambrian (Burgess Shale), and modern Amphioxus a creature with a notochord."

      We are still just barely grasping the complexity of our make up. All of this is just speculation, with no basis, and is not accepted by many scientists.

You are free to call all knowledge speculation but that is just your ignorance poking through. We have crustal plates (tectonic) that move by measured mantle flow cycles, there is observed upwelling at rift zones as the plates are pushed apart by mantle currents whether you like it or not. Continents move, some away and some toward and collide. How else do mountains form other than crustal movements and volcanic upwelling of magma? This is as hard fact as the existence of gravity, nuclear energy, oxidation, photosynthesis. You may not like reality, but calling all of it speculation is just admitting your ignorance.

FreeAmerican





-------
"The man who follows is a slave. The man who thinks is free." Robert G. Ingersoll
 


Posts: 42 | Posted: 11:53 PM on April 21, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

 I hope that you will soon see the reality of Christs love for all mankind.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 11:51 AM on April 23, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Am I the only one who thinks this conversation has gone completely awry? Evolution vs Creation. The life of christ is irrelevant to the arguement. According to historical records there was like 13 James in Jerusalem who had a brother named Jesus, from that era. It was a relatively common name. But it's a moot point. Atheists will never change the mind of a devout Christian (or muslim, or jew for that matter) and a Christian (muslim or Jew) is not going to change the feelings of a devout atheist at least not by arguments of evolution/creation. What we need to look at is hard scientific principals that disprove evolution. For example. The first thing I learned, even in Junior Highschool is: "Life can only come from other life." Rocks for instance, cannot become worms, etc, etc. I think the principal of Evolution is prooved wrong from it's root. They "theorize" that certain elements combined with a little lightening and some heat, and a sprinkle of radiation will result in a living thing. Scientifically speaking, prove it. You can't, no one has ever birthed life out of nothing, or out of inert matter. The error here in my opinion is that science has taken a theory that just isn't supported by available evidence. I'm not saying the idea should be dropped, but shouldn't it conform with what we know? It is entirely illogical to theorize something new in order to support a currently unproven theory? Am I the only one who finds that unscientific?


-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 3:44 PM on April 23, 2003 | IP
Crim

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Life from non-life is abiogenesis, NOT evolution.  The formation of life is irrelevent to the mechanisms of evolution.  

Also, there's no barrier to life coming from non-life, it's just incredibly hard.  It's WAY more efficient for life to just come from pre-existing life.
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 4:41 PM on April 23, 2003 | IP
tinmanyd

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

God's existence has never been proven -- that's why religions are called "faiths"

I still believe in God but frankly the track record of "true believer" Christians in scientific disputes is a perfect 0-for-millenium uninterrupted string of failures.  Smart money is on the scientists again (DUHHH!).  

Cheerfully humming "My God is Greater than Your God" I remain respectfully yours,

tin

 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 10:13 PM on April 23, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If you cant except the idea that Noah's flood did happen then you should read the bible more carfully.SECURITY ALERT: null[random]
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:44 PM on April 24, 2003 | IP
Crim

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So you'd take a symbolic story as literally true over the mounds of evidence showing the event to be false?
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 12:49 PM on April 24, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Let me state that I'm a... Old World Creationist (I think is what they call it)...anyways. About the flood thing, you can't assume that the world was then, as we know it now. I heard somewhere that if the world were uniformly level, it would be covered with 1.7 miles of water or something like that...maybe I heard wrong, I'll see if I can get a source for that to cite for you.

Crim-    Life could not possibly have ALWAYS existed. All things in Nature have a beginning and an end. I've never found and exception to this, please correct me there if I'm wrong. According to science, even the universe had it's beginning. That's another matter. Life had to have started somewhere. Without proving that it emerged by chance or whatever, it's only logical to conclude that there was some event outside of physical laws as we know them. This is pertinent to evolution because without that first organism, nothing would have evolved. The main problem that i find with evolution as a theory is that is a string of theories based on theories, supported by yet more theories. There are a number of variations of Evolution, some, though as I understand it few, believe in completely natural selection. The strong surviving and adapting to their enviroment. Then there are those who tend to think of the "master control gene" for which I have never seen any evidence in any report on genomic studies. In my humble (un-formally educated) opinion, the theory of evolution is based on principals much like this new "multiple universe theory." Which is to say, it makes speculations on things that cannot be observed. If it cannot be observed, or recreated, how can you build on it as a theory?





-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 5:28 PM on April 24, 2003 | IP
Crim

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Life could not possibly have ALWAYS existed.

I didn't say it did.

Without proving that it emerged by chance or whatever, it's only logical to conclude that there was some event outside of physical laws as we know them.

No, that's completely unreasonable.  It's the god of the gaps.

This is pertinent to evolution because without that first organism, nothing would have evolved.

It really isn't.  That would be like claiming you have to have knowledge of the formation of matter before you could have scientific knowledge regarding the matter itself.

Which is to say, it makes speculations on things that cannot be observed. If it cannot be observed, or recreated, how can you build on it as a theory?


The mechanisms of evolution have been observed and the evidence we have found of the past fulfills the preditions made by evolutionary theory.
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 7:44 PM on April 24, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It's WAY more efficient for life to just come from pre-existing life.


You DID imply that life has always existed. Pre-existing life must have started somewhere, or it has always been.

It's the god of the gaps.

I'll give you the expound on this statement first.

That would be like claiming you have to have knowledge of the formation of matter before you could have scientific knowledge regarding the matter itself.


If you can't make the distinction between matter and life we shouldn't even be talking. There is a huge difference. Matter is innate, and finite (from everything I've read) and cannot be created, only altered. What I'm saying is that if you can't tell me how the first single celled organsim came to be, how can you tell me that it evolved into me? What I'm saying is: if evolution is true, then it should be traced back to a single celled organism? Unless you'd admit that complex life was at some point created. The problem with that is that the first step of evolution CAN'T be proven.

The mechanisms of evolution have been observed

Care to cite for me an example? Please don't confuse evolution with adaption. I've looked for solid evidence of evolution and can't find any. I await your response.

I want to make it clear that I fully believe that humans have adapted to enviroment and so forth. What I don't believe is that man evolved from monkeys and ultimately single celled organsims.


-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 10:00 PM on April 24, 2003 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"What I'm saying is that if you can't tell me how the first single celled organsim came to be, how can you tell me that it evolved into me? "
The Theory of Evolution like every theory has boundries.  As has been stated numerous times, where the first life came from is not part of the ToE, no matter how much you demand it be included, it is irrelevant to evolution.  The ToE deals with how that life changed and diversified.  It doesn't matter how life started, the Theory of Evolution explains how it changed.  So you are patently wrong when you say "The problem with that is that the first step of evolution CAN'T be proven."  Since we know that life today is vastly different from what it was 3.5 billion years ago, your first step of evolution is proven.  And it is proven without admitting that complex life was created.

"The mechanisms of evolution have been observed

Care to cite for me an example? Please don't confuse evolution with adaption. I've looked for solid evidence of evolution and can't find any. I await your response."

We have seen speciation occur innumerable times, both in the lab and in the wild.  Fish, birds, plants, insects, mammals, reptiles, when part of a population is seperated, it developes new characteristics that make it better suited to live in it's new environment.  This is not confusing adaptation with evolution because adaptation IS evolution.  You claim they are different, then tell me how.  Small changes in the populations genetic structure are selected against by nature.  Those changes that help the population survive are passed on to the next generation.  These small changes accumulate and over time a new species forms, given enough time a completely different organism can arise.  How do we know this?  Well, as has been stated, we have seen speciation events, we've seen new species arise.  As for more dramatic changes, the fossil record clearly shows that organisms have changed radically over millions of years and the large number of transitional fossils shows radically different organisms are related.


 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 11:07 PM on April 24, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well if everyting adapted slowly, there would be WAY more transition fossils between species. Adaption is fact, that's conceded. But it still takes thousands of years for a small change to occur. There isn't any fossil evidence of small changes occuring in species. And if these small changes lead to adaption then what about caucasians/africans/asians. All have different charcter traits due to enviroment and conditioning. Are you saying that eventually all three will become seperate species? Or would you say that because they are no longer seperated they will become more similar. They certainly should according to what you're saying. And how would you explain creatures emerging from the ocean? Certainly no sea dwelling creature would survive on land long enough to adapt.



-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 11:20 AM on April 26, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

      Stormy, were you doubting the historical truth of Jesus existence???
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 2:43 PM on April 26, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

not at all guest, I totally believed that he existed, personally I believe him to be the son of God and the massiah. What did I say to make you think I doubted the existance of Jesus?


-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 9:45 PM on April 26, 2003 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.