[__ Science __ ] Noahs Flood explained and Evolution refuted.

[Barbarian]

On the contrary, I showed you that the group of all animals that don't have backbones is a taxonomic group.
.

Well, let's take a look...

Taxonomic group
taxonomic group (Science: zoology) A taxon with all its subordinate taxa and their individuals, for example the taxonomic group insecta consists of all insects and their taxa.

www.biologyonline.com


The term invertebrates is not always precise among non-biologists since it does not accurately describe a taxon in the same way that Arthropoda, Vertebrata or Manidae do. Each of these terms describes a valid taxon, phylum, subphylum or family. "Invertebrata" is a term of convenience, not a taxon.
en.wikipedia.org

 

[KV-44-v1]

"…and the mystery of the missing remnants is also solved."

Solved by WHOM? by WHAT?
They assert "its solved" and you just blindly accept? :/
So what was the "SOLutiOn" that "SOLved" the mystery??

Maybe Jon just stopped reading in mid-sentence and missed it. Or maybe he was deluded about what "is also solved" means.

No, it's that there was zero solution given.

observed phenomenon of evolution

Speciation and alleles changing, which is variation within kinds (NOT kinds giving rise to other kinds!!) rather than EvilLotion (which WOULD involve kinds giving rise to other kinds, like the "bird from dinoes" belief).

You aren't your body. You have a body.


You aren't Jesus, either. Try to stay focused.

So WHAT died on the Cross?
JESUS, or
HIS BODY?
Nobody in this thread has claimed to be Jesus.

and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed
ancestors.

I bet you these "horse ancestors" were STILL horses! And the phenacowhatever's too!

and above types

Like Genus, but no family, right?

tried to alter it and pretend to you that it was the real one. Don't be so gullible.

Quote from 'my guys'?

Dr. Wise disagrees with you.

Where did he say that it contradicted YEC?

BTW, "baramin" refers to of "created kind", that is, a phylogenetic group.

Baramins do not give rise to other baramins. So NO, baramin aren't Phylo Groups.

the YE concept

BIBLICAL* concept.

"“And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. 20“Of the birds after their kind, and of the animals after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive."
^ try explaining THIS! ^

He received the society's Darwin Medal in 1922.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Medal

For his researches in the science of genetics.

So I don't see how this backs Punnet's supposed 'darwinism'.

those mutations that are beneficial to the life and reproduction of the organism

Lemme guess, bacteria LOSING a protein or a part (for example) to not get killed/rendered moot by antibiotics!

Ok, so Morgan May have believed in EvilLoition, But was it the cross-kind one that Secularists are pushing in schools, the dino-to-bird type?? Aka, The kind that clearly contradicts the Biblical "kind after kind" principle?
Or
was it simply the "Speciation & CAFPT"?

Let the earth produce living creatures according to [ae]their kind: livestock and crawling things and animals of the earth according to [af]their kind”; and it was so. 25 God made the animals of the earth according to [ag]their kind, and the livestock according to [ah]their kind, and everything that crawls on the ground according to its kind; and God saw that it was good.
I wonder,
What do YOU think the Biblical kinds are? kingdom? phylum? Domain? Or do you think they don't exist?

 

[KV-44-v1]

God says there was. That's what the Earth bringing forth life is. You're error is in thinking that biological life is the same as eternal life. God's not just some big guy who is like us but vastly more powerful. He's the eternal Creator. YE creationists often seem unwilling to accept a God that great.

Life is still life.
Why would biogenesis need biological life? I don't think the "bio" in biogenesis or in a-biogenesis necessitates biological life.

What about a God Who
CREATED INSTANTLY (no need for uber-time)
CREATED THE REAL (not allegorical) WEEK. (all the days were NOT one day, like augustine thought.)
JUDGED ALL THE SINNERS (instead of a measely few like your local flood THEORY implies)
SPEAKS PLAINLY FROM THE GET GO, IN GENESIS AND BEYOND (instead of in riddles like you believe.)

That God, the Biblical God, is much bigger than the OEE's view of God.

 

[KV-44-v1]

You can't "refute" facts. I'm not labeling all creationists as racists and Nazis. I'm just showing you the racist foundations of YE creationism. Henry Morris was one of the founders of YE creationism. No point in denial.

This at the time when Nazis and YE creationists like Morris and Tinkle were blathering about supposed racial and genetic inferiorities.
"Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they were eventually displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.”

Seems like you haven't/can't address my Post #474, because it is facts, so yeah you can't refute it!

 

[KV-44-v1]

Evolution is not a theory in crisis. It is not teetering on the verge of collapse. It has not failed as a scientific explanation.

present tense. Potential past tense.
When was that written?
Thx

 

[Barbarian]

present tense. Potential past tense.
When was that written?

This was back before a lot of transitional forms were found. About 2009, I think. So as Dr. Wise points out, a lot of new evidence supporting evolution has been found since then.

 

[Barbarian]

Seems like you haven't/can't address my Post #474, because it is facts, so yeah you can't refute it!

I showed you some examples.

This at the time when Nazis and YE creationists like Morris and Tinkle were blathering about supposed racial and genetic inferiorities.
"Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they were eventually displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.”

Would you like some more?

 

[Barbarian]

God says there was. That's what the Earth bringing forth life is. You're error is in thinking that biological life is the same as eternal life. God's not just some big guy who is like us but vastly more powerful. He's the eternal Creator. YE creationists often seem unwilling to accept a God that great.

Life is still life.

Your difficulty is God is still God. And I'll go with His word over yours. Sorry.

Why would biogenesis need biological life? I don't think the "bio" in biogenesis or in a-biogenesis necessitates biological life.

Because by definition, biogenesis is the formation of biological life. Which was produced by the Earth, as God says. Why not just believe Him?

What about a God Who
CREATED INSTANTLY (no need for uber-time)

Do you think you are a creature of God? Think.

CREATED THE REAL (not allegorical) WEEK.

Most Christians don't accept that revision.

(all the days were NOT one day, like augustine thought.)

Well, let's take a look...
Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth: 5 And every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew: for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth; and there was not a man to till the earth.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. 2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters. 3 And God said: Be light made. And light was made. 4 And God saw the light that it was good; and he divided the light from the darkness. 5 And he called the light Day, and the darkness Night; and there was evening and morning one day.
Genesis 1:And he said: Let the earth bring forth the green herb, and such as may seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind, which may have seed in itself upon the earth. And it was so done. 12 And the earth brought forth the green herb, and such as yieldeth seed according to its kind, and the tree that beareth fruit, having seed each one according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

So which is it? If it's a literal history, it has to be one or the other. One chapter says it all happened in one day. The other says one happened on the first day, and another happened on the third day. If it's literal, they can't both be true. So which do you accept and which do you reject?

JUDGED ALL THE SINNERS

There's a good reason He didn't say He judged all the humans on Earth. As you see, the real God is much greater and more powerful than YE creationists would like Him to be.

 

[Barbarian]

Jonathan Sarfati, another frequent contributor to your creationist perspective website, is no better. In his article “Exploding Stars Point to a Young Universe: Where Are All The Supernova Remnants?” first published in Creation Ex Nihilo 19:46-48 and later online at http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i3/stars.asp, Sarfati tries to claim that the absence of Type III supernovas suggests that the universe is young, perhaps a few thousand years old, not billions of years as evolutionary scientists claim. He offers the following quote from Clark and Caswell in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 1976, 174:267:

"As the evolutionist astronomers Clark and Caswell say, ‘Why have the large number of expected remnants not been detected?’ and these authors refer to ‘The mystery of the missing remnants’."

Sarfati conveniently forgot to finish the last sentence, which actually appears on page 301. In its entirety, it reads

"…and the mystery of the missing remnants is also solved."

The above are just a few of many, many out-of-context or incomplete quotes found in creationist literature. Whole books have been written about them.

Solved by WHOM? by WHAT?

Clark and Caswell, by analyzing the data from supernovas.

They assert "its solved" and you just blindly accept? :/

The point is that Jon Sarfati completely misrepresented what they said. For obvious reasons. If he had honestly quoted them, it would have destroyed his argument. The issue isn't whether or not they are competent astronomers (they are); the issue is that Sarfati falsely represented what they said. Maybe Jon just stopped reading in mid-sentence and missed it. Or maybe he was deluded about what "is also solved" means.

No, it's that there was zero solution given.

There was.

Supernova remnant G292.2–0.5, its pulsar, and the Galactic magnetic field

Abstract. The extended low-brightness Galactic radio source G292.2–0.5 is one of the few supernova remnants (SNRs) showing a likely association with a youn

academic.oup.com

No point in denial. Take a look and do the numbers yourself. It won't change.

 

[Barbarian]

As you now realize, evolution is an observed phenomenon. We see it in living populations constantly. Macroevolution (evolution of new taxa) is also observed from time to time.

Speciation and alleles changing, which is variation within kinds (NOT kinds giving rise to other kinds!!)

As you showed me, humans and other apes are in the same "kind" according to your definition. A new kind of species evolves every now and then; even AIG admits the evolution of new species and genera.

So NO, baramin aren't Phylo Groups.

Dr. Wise thinks they are. And he actually knows what he's talking about.

EvilLotion (which WOULD involve kinds giving rise to other kinds, like the "bird from dinoes" belief).

Sounds like a testable idea. So tell me one apomorphic character in birds, not found in other dinosaurs. If you can't tell any differences, you're pretty much locked into admitting birds are dinosaurs. So what have you got?

 

[Barbarian]

Sounds like a testable idea. So tell me one apomorphic character in birds, not found in other dinosaurs. If you can't tell any differences, you're pretty much locked into admitting birds are dinosaurs. So what have you got?

Anyone?