[_ Old Earth _] Missing links...

[cupid dave]

These are erroneous assumptions you have tried to apply to the bible. This is the problem with those who try to marry-up the bible with evolution. First, evolution is still, and always will be, an unproven theory. Any orthodox Christian should dismiss it as false from the beginning. Genesis does not support the big bang theory, micro or macro evolution, or any other version of creation than the everything being created in six days of ordinary length.

Maybe orthodox christianity is ready for he same kind of change that took place when Galilleo insisted that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe, but travelled around the sun?

Protestants are orthodox.
The Catholics are not, because the Pope remembers the consquences of denyoing the facts that science can establish and stone walling erroneous theological ideas about Genesis that do not even agree with what is written in Genesis.

Remember that the 24 hour day was not even "created" until "day" four.

So the six "days' HAD to be some other duration, like the Eras:



1. Formative/Cosmologic Era-Hadean Era/ = First Day

2. Hadean Era-Archaean Era/ = Second Day

3. Archaean Era-Proterozoic Era/ = Third Day

4. Proterozoic Era-Paleozoic Era/ = Fourth Day

5. Paleozoic Era-Mesozoic Era/ = Fifth Day

6. Mesozoic Era-Cenozoic Era/ = Six Day

7. Cenozoic Era-Common Era/ = Seventh Day

And the "Big Bang" was admitting that Genesis is right, that WAS the beginning,... right?????

 

[Adam]

Some of those are eons.

In fact, the last three are subdivisions of a fourth eon. And there is no 'Formulative Cosmological" era or eon. Being a GEOchronological scale, there is no context in which a cosmological stage can be placed.

Again, you are doctoring scientific jargon with pure fiction.

There are FOUR geological eons, not 7.


The geoochronological stages do not line up with the 6 days of creation.

 

[Knotical]

Maybe orthodox christianity is ready for he same kind of change that took place when Galilleo insisted that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe, but travelled around the sun?

Protestants are orthodox.
The Catholics are not, because the Pope remembers the consquences of denyoing the facts that science can establish and stone walling erroneous theological ideas about Genesis that do not even agree with what is written in Genesis.

Remember that the 24 hour day was not even "created" until "day" four.

So the six "days' HAD to be some other duration, like the Eras:



1. Formative/Cosmologic Era-Hadean Era/ = First Day

2. Hadean Era-Archaean Era/ = Second Day

3. Archaean Era-Proterozoic Era/ = Third Day

4. Proterozoic Era-Paleozoic Era/ = Fourth Day

5. Paleozoic Era-Mesozoic Era/ = Fifth Day

6. Mesozoic Era-Cenozoic Era/ = Six Day

7. Cenozoic Era-Common Era/ = Seventh Day

And the "Big Bang" was admitting that Genesis is right, that WAS the beginning,... right?????

Again, you are forcing your presuppositions onto the bible, which is specifically forbidden in Revelations.

 

[cupid dave]

Again, you are forcing your presuppositions onto the bible, which is specifically forbidden in Revelations.

?
How is that different from what every church does?

Theology is the discipline where people try to do exactly that.

In the case of most YEC's they force the six days into representing 24 hour earth durations BEFORE god made the Sun and the moon the authority oiver Solar Time.

That seems wrong and forced and hardly different in that they merely state their "book report" on Genesis as am I doing here.

 

[Knotical]

?
How is that different from what every church does?

Theology is the discipline where people try to do exactly that.

In the case of most YEC's they force the six days into representing 24 hour earth durations BEFORE god made the Sun and the moon the authority oiver Solar Time.

That seems wrong and forced and hardly different in that they merely state their "book report" on Genesis as am I doing here.

So, you do admit you are trying to force your own assumptions onto the bible, rather than allowing God to reveal his purpose to you through it. Good to know.

 

[Adam]

?

Even your illustration denotes eras and eons.

You have just provided evidence that disproves your 6 stage model.

 

[cupid dave]

Some of those are eons.

In fact, the last three are subdivisions of a fourth eon. And there is no 'Formulative Cosmological" era or eon. Being a GEOchronological scale, there is no context in which a cosmological stage can be placed.

Again, you are doctoring scientific jargon with pure fiction.

There are FOUR geological eons, not 7.


The geoochronological stages do not line up with the 6 days of creation.

Geochronology is the science of dating and determining the time sequence of events in the history of the Earth.
This is different from listing the rock layers, themselves, and dating them, in regard to how old they are, i.e.; Chronostratigraphy.


Geochronology is concerned with using the knowledge locked in the rocks.

The rocks can be used to date the Age of something else, i.e., the major stages of the Earth’s unfolding evolution in this case of "six stages" or durations analogous to the six "days" in Genesis.

 

[cupid dave]

Even your illustration denotes eras and eons.

You have just provided evidence that disproves your 6 stage model.

Read more carefully.
Note the legend at the very top of the chart which clearly explains how science uses the rocks to date the Earth:


"The Geological Time Scale can also be used to define the major stages in the History of life on Earth.
Often each era ends with a major extinction which eliminates the dominant life forms of the time, and paves the way for new comers."

 

[cupid dave]

Except unlike the birth of Jesus, what you are describing never happened. So there is that, which is nice.

As christians I woukd hope we are gathered together in his name, Truth, and unconcerned in regard to where the chips might fall in regard to support or constructuve criticism of rather old teachings and doctrines by previous church people who lived long ago.

In that frame of mind we can see that science supports the Bible, unlike the Pharisees who in 32AD felt the need to attack what did not agree with own interpretation of Torah.
I caution you to be open to better and scientifically supported reading of Genesis which can make our religion stronger in the age when that medicine is exactly what America needs.

Think about Bil Maher, and how befuddled he would be with these thoughts.
His blaspheme of Creation as explained in Genesis would be seen for what it is.

There is great power for the church in comparing the Big Bang evidence with the argument in Genesis that the Cosmos had a beginning.
There is great support for a divine source of knowledge that correctly uses the rocks to define the major stages in the History of life on Earth.

 

[Adam]

Geochronology is the science of dating and determining the time sequence of events in the history of the Earth.
This is different from listing the rock layers, themselves, and dating them, in regard to how old they are, i.e.; Chronostratigraphy.


Geochronology is concerned with using the knowledge locked in the rocks.

The rocks can be used to date the Age of something else, i.e., the major stages of the Earth’s unfolding evolution in this case of "six stages" or durations analogous to the six "days" in Genesis.

The GEOCHRONOLOGICAL stages at their highest division are enumerated at 4.

Hadean Eon
Archeon Eon
Proterozoic Eon
Phanerozoic Eon


The Phanerozoic eon is further divided into 3 Eras, Mesozoic, Cenozoic and Paleozoic.

You are surrepticiosly dividing the 4th eon down into it's subcategories to get a number that you want.

It does not matter if you try to confuse the issue further by implying that I am using a chronostratigraphic break-down. Apart from the fact that both types of stages are used to measure different things, there is not a deviation in the number of stages.


Regardless, I AM using the geochronological model.

 

[Adam]

Read more carefully.
Note the legend at the very top of the chart which clearly explains how science uses the rocks to date the Earth:


"The Geological Time Scale can also be used to define the major stages in the History of life on Earth.
Often each era ends with a major extinction which eliminates the dominant life forms of the time, and paves the way for new comers."

I am fully aware of what the geological timescale is. You keep implying that I don't to try to make it seem as if the geological divisions I am referring to are about something else. They are not.

The geological breakdown is 4 eons divided into 10 eras which are then even further divided.

As well, the picture even helps clear this up since it tells us what model we are dealing with AND tells us that the Mesozoic, Cenozoic and Paleozoic divisions are of a different category than the eons.

 

[cupid dave]

The GEOCHRONOLOGICAL stages at their highest division are enumerated at 4.

Hadean Eon
Archeon Eon
Proterozoic Eon
Phanerozoic Eon


The Phanerozoic eon is further divided into 3 Eons, Mesozoic, Cenozoic and Paleozoic.

You are surrepticiosly dividing the 4th eon down into it's subcategories to get a number that you want.

It does not matter if you try to confuse the issue further by implying that I am using a chronostratigraphic break-down. Apart from the fact that both types of stages are used to measure different things, there is not a deviation in the number of stages.


Regardless, I AM using the geochronological model.

See title at top of the graphic below which reads as follows:
"The Geological Time Scale can also be used to define the major stages in the History of life on Earth.
Often each era ends with a major extinction which eliminates the dominant life forms of the time, and paves the way for new comers."

 

[Adam]

Irrelvant to the actual divisions of Geochronological time, which are 4 eons that are further split into 10 eras.

 

[cupid dave]

I thought I found the missing link once, turns out it was just my brother.

The term "missing link" is obsolete today.
It was used among paleontlogists who once believed that just that very first one, of all the bones they had been dugging, would more clearly and difinitively demonstrate our relationship with the ape from whom we were born.
That was then

But the fussion of two Ape Chromosomes now found in all human is what is the modern link which is no longer missing.

The evidence is in our own genes.

About seven million years ago an Act-of-God fused two chromosomes together in some surrogate Ape and in classic Evolutionary Theory, produced the new species, Human, not Ape
Seven, seven million years ago, was a great number for the Bible to add to the Genesis genealogy of 22 species in our ascent to Modern man, too.


At each end of a chromosome we have a Telomere.
The purpose of the telomere in a chromosome is to prevent deterioration of the important bits of the chromosome from the end.

Chimpanzees and Humans have extremely similar DNA to humans.
But Chimpanzees have one more chromosome than Humans do, (24 pairs), and if Humans and Chimpanzees are genetically related (sharing a common ancestor), this extra chromosome had to go somewhere.
Evolutionary Biologists might predict that two chromosomes fused into one.
But they would need hard evidence to use that hypothesis as more argument for evolution in general, and for a good enough reason to make such a claim.
As it turns out Chromosome number 2 in Humans was once two different chromosomes that were fused together.
Additionally, the evidence is that an extra large Telomere appears in the middle of the #2 chromosome, as well as an extra Centromere, as depicted in the illustration above.


This genetic evidence is the new and found once missing link.

 

[Adam]

Humans ARE apes, Dave.

And a chromosomal fusion does not and cannot create a new species considering the information on the genes and the gene expression does not change.

Unless you think humans with down syndrome are a seperate species....


This is no different than a company expecting to recive goods. Whether the goods are shipped in one truck or two trucks has no bearing on what will be recieved into inventory when the truck or trucks arrive.



You really have no business trying to explain things that you have no understanding of.

 

[Asyncritus]

I really don't know why you guys are wasting time discussing the descent of humans from apes/chimps/whatever.

Isn't it obvious that the groups are not, and cannot be connected?

Addition, deletion, duplication, or whatever you care to name about chromosomes cannot change any chimp or chimp ancestor into a human being.

The differences are too vast.

Anatomically they are unbridgeable, and mentally they are at the opposite ends of the universe as far as capabilities are concerned.

Just as a for instance, go look at my thread re Andrea Bocelli, and you will see a single instance of an ability that humans have that cannot be derived from the bow-wow and yo-he-ho capacities of the lower animals.

If that doesn't convince you, go look at the photos of the Empire State Building and a chimp nest.

Then ask yourself the question - is this the result of evolution, or divine creation of the separate species and their separate capacities?

There can be only one answer.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Micro evolution (that I can swallow) which is variation between kinds, I see that, different dogs, cats and all that!

"Kind" is a made up word that has no real use in biology. Phylogenetic makes more sense for classifying animals because it is based around the genetic and morphogenesis properties of organisms. For instance when you say dogs, I can point out that dogs fit into the group Caniform, which includes bears, weasels, dogs, wolves, foxes, etc. So when you say dog kind, I could counter with how we have genetic, morphological, and fosil evidence that shows how all of these species together. Remember, it is us humans that have categorized living things.

Macro evolution (still waiting on this one) ape to man,

Humans are Apes, Under the ape branch we are filed as Homo Sapien.

fish to dog

Fish are are very far from dogs in genetics. What I can show you is how Dogs are related to fish. Fish split from Reptiles, and Reptiles split into Mammals and Birds.

man even I don't have enough faith for that one!

IF you haven't studied a lot of biology, I wouldn't blame you. There is a lot of information and study when it comes to animal origins. There are several different lines of animals, plants, fungus, etc that went extinct well before man even came on the scene. Its actually fascinating when you look back at the process of evolution through different eras.

 

[cupid dave]

I really don't know why you guys are wasting time discussing the descent of humans from apes/chimps/whatever.

Isn't it obvious that the groups are not, and cannot be connected?

Addition, deletion, duplication, or whatever you care to name about chromosomes cannot change any chimp or chimp ancestor into a human being.

The differences are too vast.

Anatomically they are unbridgeable, and mentally they are at the opposite ends of the universe as far as capabilities are concerned.

Just as a for instance, go look at my thread re Andrea Bocelli, and you will see a single instance of an ability that humans have that cannot be derived from the bow-wow and yo-he-ho capacities of the lower animals.

If that doesn't convince you, go look at the photos of the Empire State Building and a chimp nest.

Then ask yourself the question - is this the result of evolution, or divine creation of the separate species and their separate capacities?

There can be only one answer.

Well, yeah,... it seems a waste of time to discuss evolution with you guys who don't need to reconcile what you know with what you believe the Bibe says.
You already accept Genesis and ignore the millions of people who can't accept your private interpretation of that story, because they can't dismiss everythingthey know, i.e.; the facts of Science.

You don't have to be concerned with people loke Dwakins and Bill Maher, because you are already saved according to your philosophy.

But what I am telling you is that there is another way to interpret Genesis which is compatible with what science people know and what genesis says in one cares to dismiss the long archaic medieval book report the churches swear by to this day.

The fact that 7 million years ago, Ape-man with his fused 23 chromosomes branced off from the other Apes with 24 chromosomes and after long ages endured by 22 now extinct relatives leading finally to us, modern day man compares very well with Genesis makes it acceptable teaching for these people you would lock out of the church unless they bow to what you think the bible says.

 

[cupid dave]

1) Humans are Apes, Under the ape branch we are filed as Homo Sapien.

2) Its actually fascinating when you look back at the process of evolution through different eras.

1) Yes, man is classified as an Ape, but we are in need of a designation that allows us to debate the issue, that some see man as just the next evolution of Apes, while other read into the Bible that "man did not come from monkeys," as those people often put it.

2) Yes, again.
That the Hisory of the Earth can be marked into seven long durations by using the punctuations of geological events, like catastrophic meteoric mass parallels what Genesis tells us.

This is just another case where the church people need to allow these kinds of observations to address the critics who mock the bible people and in so doing, mock the bible, too.

 

[Adam]

That the Hisory of the Earth can be marked into seven long durations by using the punctuations of geological events.
.

No, it cannot.