[_ Old Earth _] Answers in Genesis

[ThinkerMan]

Humans and apes having a common ancestors rails against common sense!!!

Ok....let's have a common-sense quiz.

Below I will place picture of three animals. Please guess which two have the most genetic material in common.

1.

2. (please don't read anything more into this picture than it is a bearded man)

3.

If you guessed #1 and #2, you are correct!!!!

They do look remarkably similar, AND share the greatest number of genes. And where do we get our genes from?

Correct! Our ancestors!

Do you believe that is is just a coincidence that their genetic makeup is the most similar of the three? (I basically could have chose ANY other form of life for #3 and the same would be true)

 

[mh13]

Humans and apes having a common ancestors rails against common sense!!!

Ok....let's have a common-sense quiz.

Below I will place picture of three animals. Please guess which two have the most genetic material in common.

1.

2. (please don't read anything more into this picture than it is a bearded man)

3.

If you guessed #1 and #2, you are correct!!!!

They do look remarkably similar, AND share the greatest number of genes. And where do we get our genes from?

Correct! Our ancestors!

Do you believe that is is just a coincidence that their genetic makeup is the most similar of the three? (I basically could have chose ANY other form of life for #3 and the same would be true)

Yes, I would agree that OWL GORE is part ape!!!

But seriously, so humans and apes have similarities, SO WHAT?????????
What does this have to do with the price of rice?

Humans and apes have the same designer who made us suitable for his purposes for us.
God had a good design. I design lots of metal and plastic parts at work using CAD/CAM software. THEY HAVE LOTS of similarities. I designed them that way because I have a good basic design. Each individual part will have it's own unique variations as the situation requires.
Houses virtually all use the same types of materials.
I just don't see the conection between some similarities and taking this to mean that we evolved from an apelike ancestor.

 

[ThinkerMan]

mhess...nice strawman.

You ingored the DNA aspect of my comparison. How do you account for the fact that the more two species resemble each other, the more DNA in common they share?

 

[mh13]

mhess...nice strawman.

You ingored the DNA aspect of my comparison. How do you account for the fact that the more two species resemble each other, the more DNA in common they share?

Again, so what????
This does not mean my great, .................great....................................................greatgrandaddy was swinging from his tail millions of years ago.

 

[ThinkerMan]

mhess...nice strawman.

You ingored the DNA aspect of my comparison. How do you account for the fact that the more two species resemble each other, the more DNA in common they share?

Again, so what????
This does not mean my great, .................great....................................................greatgrandaddy was swinging from his tail millions of years ago.

I've never understood why the idea of our ancestors "swinging from his tail" is so insulting to many people. That the thought that at some point in our ancient history we looked different and acted different is somehow a "dis" to us today.

It is almost xenophobic, particularly similar to way people are disgusted to see odd practices of other cultures, such as putting a plate in one's lip or eating monkey brains.

They are just the idiosyncratic nuiances of life, just like swinging from a tree by one's tail.

By the way, you do have a tail, it it just too short to swing by anymore.

 

[mh13]

mhess...nice strawman.

You ingored the DNA aspect of my comparison. How do you account for the fact that the more two species resemble each other, the more DNA in common they share?

Again, so what????
This does not mean my great, .................great....................................................greatgrandaddy was swinging from his tail millions of years ago.

I've never understood why the idea of our ancestors "swinging from his tail" is so insulting to many people. That the thought that at some point in our ancient history we looked different and acted different is somehow a "dis" to us today.

It is almost xenophobic, particularly similar to way people are disgusted to see odd practices of other cultures, such as putting a plate in one's lip or eating monkey brains.

They are just the idiosyncratic nuiances of life, just like swinging from a tree by one's tail.

By the way, you do have a tail, it it just too short to swing by anymore.

I'm not insulted by an apelike ancestor. God and the Bible is insulted. If evolution is true then God did not create us in the manner described in his word. God's character is at stake, not mine.

I wish I did have a tail. I could hold the steering wheel w/my tail while I held my cell phone w/my right hand and chugged coffee w/ my left.

That's why I hate the theory of evolution; it jipped me out of a much needed tail!

 

[Quath]

What is interesting is the comparison of similar aminals. One flaw the human eye has is that the nerves run in front of the detectors. I believe squids do not have this design flaw. Now why would a creator give a good eye design to one creature and not all of them? Evolution is ok with this since our eye does well enough for what we need. However, it makes no sense from a functional design point of view. The same question can be asked of hemoglobin. It is functionally the same in animals. However, it is different in each animal as well. Why the variety of something that is functionally the same?

Quath

 

[rmills]

mhess...nice strawman.

You ingored the DNA aspect of my comparison. How do you account for the fact that the more two species resemble each other, the more DNA in common they share?

This is due to the fact that the design is similar, but absolutely will not support an argument for linking species in any way other than a common designer.

 

[Guest]

Blueeyeliner:

Can I ask a question?

How do you know the world isn't flat?

I am just curious how your have come to believe this....remember there are still quite a few people who believe it is flat.

I assume you haven't been in a spaceship to discern the curvature of the earth, or that you have repeated Eratosthenes' expirement, or studied lunar eclipses first hand.

Is it science that you have based this conclusion on? Because the bible was intrepreted by most for thousands of years as saying that the earth is flat. I am just curious why you believe science in this case, if you do believe the earth is a sphere.

:B-fly: You misunderstand. The Bible doesn't say the world is flat at all.
The four corners of the earth simply put means the four directions,like north,east,west and south. Where did you get that the world is flat?
The bible says it is round.
The Bible has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is wrong,when it shows itself right time and time again as
time goes on.

 

[ThinkerMan]

Blueeyeliner:

Can I ask a question?

How do you know the world isn't flat?

I am just curious how your have come to believe this....remember there are still quite a few people who believe it is flat.

I assume you haven't been in a spaceship to discern the curvature of the earth, or that you have repeated Eratosthenes' expirement, or studied lunar eclipses first hand.

Is it science that you have based this conclusion on? Because the bible was intrepreted by most for thousands of years as saying that the earth is flat. I am just curious why you believe science in this case, if you do believe the earth is a sphere.

:B-fly: You misunderstand. The Bible doesn't say the world is flat at all.
The four corners of the earth simply put means the four directions,like north,east,west and south. Where did you get that the world is flat?
The bible says it is round.
The Bible has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is wrong,when it shows itself right time and time again as
time goes on.

I apologize, blue, I didn't make my post exceptionally clear.

Ok, so you believe the world is a sphere (much different than round).

Now, do you believe it is a sphere because that is what the bible says, or because of science? What is your proof of a spherical world?

It is certainly not clearcut that the bible says the earth is a sphere. That is a matter of interpretation. A prima facie reading of the bible says it is flat. That is why the great majority of christians believed the world was flat, until the science was sufficient to disprove the theory.

 

[Sophistress]

Blueeyeliner:

Can I ask a question?

How do you know the world isn't flat?

I am just curious how your have come to believe this....remember there are still quite a few people who believe it is flat.

I assume you haven't been in a spaceship to discern the curvature of the earth, or that you have repeated Eratosthenes' expirement, or studied lunar eclipses first hand.

Is it science that you have based this conclusion on? Because the bible was intrepreted by most for thousands of years as saying that the earth is flat. I am just curious why you believe science in this case, if you do believe the earth is a sphere.

:B-fly: You misunderstand. The Bible doesn't say the world is flat at all.
The four corners of the earth simply put means the four directions,like north,east,west and south. Where did you get that the world is flat?
The bible says it is round.
The Bible has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is wrong,when it shows itself right time and time again as
time goes on.

Does anyone else notice the irony in what Blueeyeliner just said?

"Science has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is right,when it shows itself to hold natural, scientific and moral flaws, and will continue to do so as time goes on."

 

[Guest]

Blueeyeliner:

Can I ask a question?

How do you know the world isn't flat?

I am just curious how your have come to believe this....remember there are still quite a few people who believe it is flat.

I assume you haven't been in a spaceship to discern the curvature of the earth, or that you have repeated Eratosthenes' expirement, or studied lunar eclipses first hand.

Is it science that you have based this conclusion on? Because the bible was intrepreted by most for thousands of years as saying that the earth is flat. I am just curious why you believe science in this case, if you do believe the earth is a sphere.

:B-fly: You misunderstand. The Bible doesn't say the world is flat at all.
The four corners of the earth simply put means the four directions,like north,east,west and south. Where did you get that the world is flat?
The bible says it is round.
The Bible has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is wrong,when it shows itself right time and time again as
time goes on.

I apologize, blue, I didn't make my post exceptionally clear.

Ok, so you believe the world is a sphere (much different than round).

Now, do you believe it is a sphere because that is what the bible says, or because of science? What is your proof of a spherical world?

It is certainly not clearcut that the bible says the earth is a sphere. That is a matter of interpretation. A prima facie reading of the bible says it is flat. That is why the great majority of christians believed the world was flat, until the science was sufficient to disprove the theory.

:o
:Fade-color I don't read the bible and get that impression. The bible says round,no matter what science says. science did not teach us anything about this issue that wasn't already mentioned in the bible,and science may call it what it wants to call it,but round is how I understand it.
You may understand the words differently but that doesn't change the way
the bible was meant to be read.
I don't know of any christians who say the world is flat,but I know of many
evolutionists who accuse the christians of it.
either way you look at it,the bible says the earth is round.
You may feel the bible says the earth is round and flat simply because you don't find the word sphere,but thats not what I get from it.
If you feel that the bible is in error,I must disagree.
I don't believe man knows everything,but I do believe God does,amen.

 

[Guest]

:B-fly: Just because the bible says the earth is round instead of using the word sphere,is no reason to believe the bible is wrong.
A Basketball is considered round,yet it is also a sphere shaped object.
Most of us would often describe a ball as being round,before saying it is a sphere.
a penny is round,and it is not a sphere.
If you make a federal case out of something as slight as this,you can see
why there are so many silly arguements about such issues.
The bibles tells us the earth is round,and it is round. No big deal,amen.

 

[Guest]

Does anyone else notice the irony in what Blueeyeliner just said?

"Science has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is right,when it shows itself to hold natural, scientific and moral flaws, and will continue to do so as time goes on."[/quote]

:B-fly: Changing my words like that only increases the chances that the
same thing will happen to your words!
Christian science that does not support evolution proves the worldly scientists wrong,and it will keep on doing it,amen.
The Holy Bible is always right. man has been proven wrong repeatedly!

 

[Guest]

The Bible has proven itself right over and over again,and it shall continue to do so. Just because man doesn't know everything,is no reason to believe the bible is wrong,when it shows itself right time and time again as
time goes on.[/quote]

Does anyone else notice the irony in what Blueeyeliner just said?

You also realize that science often changes,and with the changes,there
is often a change of mind set.
God's word is always right every time,and it teaches us what we already do know,and what we may know in the future.
Christian Scientist's are very good scientists,and I believe the one's who
are against evolution. My choice to do so,and thats what I do.
I just don't understand why some atheists claim to also believe and accept
evolution when it is part of many ancient pagan religions?
Why can't an atheist just be an atheist? I have heard of some who don't
claim evolution,yet a great many of them do.
What is wrong with that picture?
It is the fool who says in his/her heart that there is no God!
The bible says it,I believe it,enough said!

 

[Quath]

I just don't understand why some atheists claim to also believe and accept evolution when it is part of many ancient pagan religions?

For one, pagans did not come up with evolution. It took putting together genetics, mutation and long periods of time along with observation to come up with it. However, for argument sake, say the pagans did come up with evolution. Should that make it untrue? What if pagans came up with the area of a circle is PI * radius * radius? Does it mean it is untrue if they came up with it?

Quath

 

[Guest]

I just don't understand why some atheists claim to also believe and accept evolution when it is part of many ancient pagan religions?

For one, pagans did not come up with evolution. It took putting together genetics, mutation and long periods of time along with observation to come up with it. However, for argument sake, say the pagans did come up with evolution. Should that make it untrue? What if pagans came up with the area of a circle is PI * radius * radius? Does it mean it is untrue if they came up with it?

Quath

:B-fly: Quath, It takes a much greater leap of faith to believe in evolution
than it does to believe God.
The pagan's believed what they chose to believe,and they do not have a good track record. It is your choice if you wish to believe them,but I cannot.

 

[reznwerks]

how so

[quote="

Quath[/quote]

:B-fly: Quath, It takes a much greater leap of faith to believe in evolution
than it does to believe God.
The pagan's believed what they chose to believe,and they do not have a good track record. It is your choice if you wish to believe them,but I cannot.[/quote]
==================
Let me interrupt please. How does it take a greater leap of faith to believe in evolution than believing in God? We have sound evidence for evolution we have no evidence at all for God. If there is something you don't know or can't explain and then attribute the explanation to God is not a solution but a default. Remember believing does not make something true no matter how hard you believe.

 

[Featherbop]

reznwerks, I think she may have meant evolution without God takes more faith to beleive. I could be wrong though.

Now, you also need to stop the overused, and worthless, atheist arguements against God. Your "atheism" is showing it's true colors, provide some real evidence against God, and maybe you can be taken seriously, and not be seen as a mindless atheist God-basher.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

Again droop, you fail to understand the idea of burden of proof. Proof must be provided by the one making a positive claim in a debate. You and all abrahamic religions posit the existence of Yahweh, thus the evidence for Yahweh must be provided.

Evolution by default requires fewer leaps in logic(next to none) than belief in Yahweh, because evidence that evolution happens EXISTS! The only none circular evidence ever presented in favor of your god is anecdotal, thus useless in a debate.

Oh and good job reducing yourself to namecalling, very classy.