[_ Old Earth _] Alright, time for some answers

[Barbarian]

The problem is then we have a case were Jesus speaks about allegorical stuff to teach about His resurrection or His 2nd Coming. It would be easy to believe that these too were allegorical.

That wouldn't fit in a Christian context, because the seventh day of the Creation week, although allegorical, was compared to the Sabbath, which was literally true.

The 2nd coming of Christ could be something like the JW's taught.

Don't see how.

 

[zeke]

You do know that uniformitarianism predicts catastrophes, right?

Do tell. Does uniformitarianism predict a past hydraulic catastrophe where water covered the entire surface of planet earth for a period of months?

 

[jasoncran]

if the flood is the local then the firiery judgment is local.sinners not near that area neednt bother repenting

 

[zeke]

Just pointing out that evolutionary theory (including Darwin's theory as well) is completely compatible with the Bible.

You didn't answer my questions - are you floating the notion that the Bible supports classical Darwinian evolution and do you distinguish between biological evolution (science) and Darwinian myth? Evolutionists teach that evolution did not have man in mind - do you agree?

Change in allele frequency over time. Takes in everything from variation within a species to common descent of all living things on Earth.

Your simple answers to complex questions continues. How exactly does change in allele frequency over time account for the Darwinian myth that theropod dinosaurs evolved into birds? Please be specific - where did all of the new genetic information come from? No 'evolution of the gaps' hand-waving, please. Give us some real science to back up your notion. The Bible doesn't really reveal that God made birds from pre-existing dinosaurs - does it?

 

[jasoncran]

barb, if evolution falsefiable, if so then the way you say god did like a prophet makes that its not but a faith statement.

if evolution points to god why then did this man use it deny god?

http://creation.com/scott-stephenson

he knew he was doing wrong and it made it easier. so when you teach evolution you are preaching a christian faith?

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
You do know that uniformitarianism predicts catastrophes, right?

Do tell. Does uniformitarianism predict a past hydraulic catastrophe where water covered the entire surface of planet earth for a period of months?

Nope. Nor does the Bible say that happened. That's a modern re-interpretation of Genesis, which says only that the land was covered. "Eretz", which is the word, is presently used to describe the state of Israel.

 

[jasoncran]

Barbarian observes:
You do know that uniformitarianism predicts catastrophes, right?



Nope. Nor does the Bible say that happened. That's a modern re-interpretation of Genesis, which says only that the land was covered. "Eretz", which is the word, is presently used to describe the state of Israel.

so what type of judgement do you believe will happen?

a mini flame that killls only sinners in the middle east?

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Just pointing out that evolutionary theory (including Darwin's theory as well) is completely compatible with the Bible.

You didn't answer my questions - are you floating the notion that the Bible supports classical Darwinian evolution

The Bible doesn't support protons or the wave/particle duality of light, or evolution, or molecular biology. But it is compatible with all those.

and do you distinguish between biological evolution (science) and Darwinian myth?

That's like asking if I distinguish between men and hobgoblins. I guess I could, if I had some evidence for hobgoblins.

Evolutionists teach that evolution did not have man in mind - do you agree?

In the sense that gravity and chemistry and radiation didn't have man in mind. God did, though. Nature is a mindless, indifferent thing.

Barbarian observes:
Change in allele frequency over time. Takes in everything from variation within a species to common descent of all living things on Earth.

Your simple answers to complex questions continues.

It was a simple question. You asked what it is, and I told you.

How exactly does change in allele frequency over time account for the Darwinian myth

This Darwinian myth you believe in, how does that relate to the four points of Darwin's theory? I don't know what your myth is.

that theropod dinosaurs evolved into birds?

First, of course, the fact that theropods were generally feathered. The fact that scutes (scales found on dinosaurs and birds) can be induced to form feathers by genetic manipulation. The large number of transitional forms between theropods and birds. The fact that T. rex heme is genetically most similar to that of birds... Stuff like that. Admittedly, there is a chance that Feduccia is right, and birds and dinosaurs have a common ancestor, rather than birds evolving from dinsaurs. But if I had to bet the farm on it, I'd go with dinosaurs as the ancestors.

Please be specific - where did all of the new genetic information come from?

Mutation and natural selection. As you might know, any new mutation will increase the information in a population. Would you like to see the numbers on that?

No 'evolution of the gaps' hand-waving, please. Give us some real science to back up your notion.

See above.

The Bible doesn't really reveal that God made birds from pre-existing dinosaurs - does it?

Doesn't really reveal that elements differ in the number of protons, either. Go figure.

 

[zeke]

Nope. Nor does the Bible say that happened. That's a modern re-interpretation of Genesis, which says only that the land was covered. "Eretz", which is the word, is presently used to describe the state of Israel.

LOL - do you back up what you say with facts or do you just pull it all out of the air?

 

[Barbarian]

barb, if evolution falsefiable, if so then the way you say god did like a prophet makes that its not but a faith statement.

Don't see how. The evidence just shows how He did it.

if evolution points to god why then did this man use it deny god?

Because he's as dumb as people who try to use nature to prove God?

he knew he was doing wrong and it made it easier. so when you teach evolution you are preaching a christian faith?

You can't preach science, and it's never a matter of faith. All that matters in science is evidence.

 

[jasoncran]

barb stephen jay gould would disagree he says mans arisal from evolution is a fluke

 

[jasoncran]

Don't see how. The evidence just shows how He did it.



Because he's as dumb as people who try to use nature to prove God?



You can't preach science, and it's never a matter of faith. All that matters in science is evidence.

and you do just that, you say evolution points to god.

how can you then say you cant prove god by science when you make that statement.

changes over time yeah thats a good equivacation

just like the oxymoronic populations elvolve not indivuals yet how is that? so populations dont have indivuals in them?

 

[jasoncran]

barb are you sure? evolution cant be removed as theory of origins?

you do realise that science. surely you know that. so you will beat the evo is true wardrum even when all manner of consensus denies it?

 

[zeke]

Barbarian observes:
Just pointing out that evolutionary theory (including Darwin's theory as well) is completely compatible with the Bible.

Then we agree - the Bible does not teach classical Darwinian evolution. Classical Darwinism is atheism - is atheism compatible with the Bible?

That's like asking if I distinguish between men and hobgoblins

Then you do not distinguish between biological evolution (science) and Darwinian myth. Sad.

In the sense that gravity and chemistry and radiation didn't have man in mind. God did, though. Nature is a mindless, indifferent thing.

But classical Darwinism does not allow God in the equation. You know that - right?

It was a simple question. You asked what it is, and I told you.

It's a complex question and you provided a simplistic answer.

First, of course, the fact that theropods were generally feathered.

Really? Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

The fact that scutes (scales found on dinosaurs and birds) can be induced to form feathers by genetic manipulation.

Really? Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

The large number of transitional forms between theropods and birds.

Really? Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

The fact that T. rex heme is genetically most similar to that of birds... Stuff like that.

Really? Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

Admittedly, there is a chance that Feduccia is right, and birds and dinosaurs have a common ancestor, rather than birds evolving from dinsaurs. But if I had to bet the farm on it, I'd go with dinosaurs as the ancestors.

Hand-waving and speculation is not science - right? Do you have science? What does Alan Feduccia say about feathered dinosaurs?

Mutation and natural selection. As you might know, any new mutation will increase the information in a population. Would you like to see the numbers on that?

No - I would prefer to see the science that proves mutation and natural selection had the magical power to change dinos into birds. It never happened. Your hand-waving and projection proves nothing - right?

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Nope. Nor does the Bible say that happened. That's a modern re-interpretation of Genesis, which says only that the land was covered. "Eretz", which is the word, is presently used to describe the state of Israel.

LOL - do you back up what you say with facts or do you just pull it all out of the air?

From Strong's Concordance:
erets: earth, land
Original Word: אָ֫רֶץ
Transliteration: erets
Phonetic Spelling: (eh'-rets)
Short Definition: land

 

[Barbarian]

barb stephen jay gould would disagree he says mans arisal from evolution is a fluke

He also says that perhaps there is a God, Who assured the evolution of intelligence because He wanted someone to share it all with. As Aquinas says, contingency can also be used in divine providence.

 

[Barbarian]

barb are you sure? evolution cant be removed as theory of origins?

Sure. I can think of all sorts of things that would remove it, if they were found to be true.

you do realise that science. surely you know that. so you will beat the evo is true wardrum even when all manner of consensus denies it?

In science, only a tiny number of people object to it. In Christianity, only a minority deny it. Don't see a consensus against it, among anything that matters.

 

[jasoncran]

sorry barb,

the bibles says the heavens declares the glory of the lord. do you believe that?

that means that all men have a general revalation of god. still believe that the bible isnt complete.

and on the individual he walked away from god and evolution made it easy to quell his conscience.

do you also believe that adam before god knew what was wrong and right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality

you do realise that god is evil if he purpose made men gay then tells them that is wrong to act on that even though his natural agent made it that way.

delineate faith.

 

[jasoncran]

Sure. I can think of all sorts of things that would remove it, if they were found to be true.



In science, only a tiny number of people object to it. In Christianity, only a minority deny it. Don't see a consensus against it, among anything that matters.

the jewish experts then and now deny jesus, they outnumbered the saints.

who was right?

the christians are in minority who is right, truth cant be decided by majority.

and a dogma can exist in all human endeavors. im sure you know that even has affected science


case in point the men who found the cure for ulcers. their research was peer reviewed yet rejected and they fought for years.

so we cant use logic to point to god? we can use the law of sowing and reaping to point to god? we cant use moral behaviors to point to god?

Nevertheless, he tried to justify his sin, till he reached the point where, he said,

“I knew I had to kill off God inside myself to get rid of the guilt. ‘Kill the judge, kill the judgment.’ So I started telling myself there was no God. I would cling to any and every fragment of what I thought was ‘evidence’ against Him. I espoused evolution; I cited the hypocritical nature of pious religious types who would say one thing and do another … And, like any good predator, I would pick on the weakest of the group … my Christian wife.â€​

if evolution is so obvious then barb how could do that? that man was raised in church and knew what he was doing.

http://creation.com/scott-stephenson

are storms part of natural selection and if so why dont evolutionist say that when haitians die or these less devoloped nations have deaths that because they are less adapted to survive nature has deemed them unfit to live?

that is what evolution does say.

​

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Just pointing out that evolutionary theory (including Darwin's theory as well) is completely compatible with the Bible.

Then we agree - the Bible does not teach classical Darwinian evolution.

Doesn't teach protons or solid-state physics, either.

Classical Darwinism is atheism

Protons and solid-state physics are atheism?

- is atheism compatible with the Bible?

Evolution, protons, and solid-state physics are compatible with the Bible.

Barbarian chuckles:
That's like asking if I distinguish between men and hobgoblins

Then you do not distinguish between biological evolution (science) and Darwinian myth. Sad.

Well, first you'll have to show me hobgoblins exist.

Barbarian observes:
In the sense that gravity and chemistry and radiation didn't have man in mind. God did, though. Nature is a mindless, indifferent thing.

But classical Darwinism does not allow God in the equation.

Neither do Maxwell's equations. So now you're claiming electromagnetism is atheistic?

Barbarian chuckles:
It was a simple question. You asked what it is, and I told you.

It's a complex question and you provided a simplistic answer.

Nothing complex about your question.

Barbarian observes:
First, of course, the fact that theropods were generally feathered.

Really?

Yep.

Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

It's easy to find:
Since then, more than twenty genera of dinosaurs, mostly theropods, have been discovered to have been feathered. Most fossils are from the Yixian formation in China. The fossil feathers of one specimen, Shuvuuia deserti, have tested positive for beta-keratin, the main protein in bird feathers, in immunological tests.

link:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jez.b.21436/abstract

Barbarian continues:
The fact that scutes (scales found on dinosaurs and birds) can be induced to form feathers by genetic manipulation.

Really?

Yep.

Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

In all cases where a chick was infected with the inhibitor virus at days 15-18 of development, at least some of the scutes developed into feathers. The feather development ranged from thickening of the edge of the scute, to short, fat feathers, to long, thin feather filaments (see figures at left and right; click on the images to see larger hi-res picture). These feathers contained the barbs characteristic of normal feathers, although the barbs were more numerous. The scutellae also developed into feathers to various degrees.
http://web.me.com/dinoruss/jdp/archie/scutes.htm

Barbarian observes:
The large number of transitional forms between theropods and birds.

Really?

Yep.

Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2898520...inks-transition-dinosaurs-birds/#.TzuxSlHnvMk

Barbarian observes:
The fact that T. rex heme is genetically most similar to that of birds... Stuff like that.

Really?

Yep.

Do you offer real evidence or pull your 'facts" from the air?

http://www.pnas.org/content/94/12/6291.full

Barbarian observes:
Admittedly, there is a chance that Feduccia is right, and birds and dinosaurs have a common ancestor, rather than birds evolving from dinsaurs. But if I had to bet the farm on it, I'd go with dinosaurs as the ancestors.
Hand-waving and speculation is not science - right? Do you have science?

What does Alan Feduccia say about feathered dinosaurs?

He thinks the common ancestor of birds and dinos had feathers. There is a bit of fragmentary evidence suggesting that.

Barbarian continues:
Mutation and natural selection. As you might know, any new mutation will increase the information in a population. Would you like to see the numbers on that?

No -

Pity. You guys always drop the "information" subject as soon as someone gets into the numbers.

I would prefer to see the science that proves mutation and natural selection had the magical power to change dinos into birds.

Sorry. No magic. Just mutation and natural selection.

It never happened. Your hand-waving and projection proves nothing - right?

Comes down to evidence. Science has it. You don't.