Orthodox Jews believed in a literal 6 day creation long before the SDA.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
[__ Science __ ] Noahs Flood explained and Evolution refuted.
- Thread starter reddogs
- Start date
- Status
Barbarian
Member
It's not tissue. Even Dr. Schweitzer says it's not tissue. It's not even cells. It's a bit of heme (fragment of hemoglobin molecule) and some collagen. But physical chemists tell us that proteins can survive for millions of years, if stabilized by iron.
Which happens to be what heme contains. The interesting thing is, the molecule was another way to test evolutionary theory. The heme was injected into rabbits which produced antibodies. The antibodies showed that the heme was more like that of birds than like that of other reptiles, once again confirming that birds evolved from other dinosaurs.
As it is not a salvational issue, I am going to just leave you to yourself. I prefer not to sow division in cases where salvation is not in danger. That said, I stand with scripture and have seen the difference between my children, who are mentally healthy, make A's in school, and are happy vs. the vast majority of their friends who are none of those things. I was greatly deceived by school teachers who told me there would be an ice age by now and acid rain so bad food wouldn't grow. As always, they were wrong
Barbarian
Member
I doubt if any science teachers did that. Even in the 1970s, the great majority of climatologists thought warming was coming.
An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.
THE MYTH OF THE 1970s GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS
Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. The integrated enterprise embodied in the Nobel Prizewinning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change existed then as separate threads of research pursued by isolated groups of scientists. Atmospheric chemists...journals.ametsoc.org
Barbarian
Member
Some might have. But many well-respected Jewish theologians did not.
In the Middle Ages, Saadia Gaon argued that a biblical passage should not be interpreted literally if that made a passage mean something contrary to the senses or reason (or, as we would say, science; Emunot ve-Deot, chapter 7). Maimonides applied this principle to theories about creation. He held that if the eternity of the universe (what we would call the Steady State theory) could be proven by logic (science) then the biblical passages speaking about creation at a point in time could and should be interpreted figuratively in a way that is compatible with the eternity of the universe.
It is only because the eternity of the universe has not been proven that he interpreted the verses about creation at a point in time literally (Guide, II, 25), but he still insisted that the creation story as a whole was written metaphorically (Book I, Introduction).
To Saadia and Maimonides, belief in the truth of the Bible does not require a denial of science ("reason," "logic") when the two seem to conflict. These philosophers imply that questions of science should be left to scientists and scientific method. In fact, Maimonides quotes a passage in the
in which Jewish scholars abandoned an astronomical theory of their own in favor of a theory of gentile scholars (Pesahim 94b).
Genesis As Allegory | My Jewish Learning
Genesis as Allegory. Creationism and Evolution in Judaism. Science and Judaism. Jewish Science. Jewish Ideas and Beliefs
www.myjewishlearning.com
You doubt a lot of things, huh? It happened, but believe whatever you want. I'm old enough to remember these things but not so old as to have a failing memory.I doubt if any science teachers did that. Even in the 1970s, the great majority of climatologists thought warming was coming.
An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.
THE MYTH OF THE 1970s GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS
Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. The integrated enterprise embodied in the Nobel Prizewinning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change existed then as separate threads of research pursued by isolated groups of scientists. Atmospheric chemists...
Barbarian
Member
Science won't make you a better person. If God's word won't do it, science can't help you. Yes, we no longer burn witches or enslave people. But humans are no better now than when we were burning witches.
Barbarian
Member
I was in college in the 1960s. I remember what the scientists said. I remember the equivalents of today's climate deniers, announcing that an ice age was on the way. But it's not something climatologists were saying.
Check out the graph here showing the number of papers predicting warming or cooling.
Loading…
nora.nerc.ac.uk
That was my point. The age of reason was supposed to be an age of justice, but now we are witnessing it's fruits. And it's not good fruit
That will take a while for me to dig into. I did download it though. I cannot say anything other than that I remember my science teachers telling us there would soon be an ice age. I also remember that Al Gore claimed Florida would be under water today. They constantly get it wrong. The religion of naturalism has lied to me all my life, I will stand on the one source that hasn't... Scripture. You do you fella, I'll trust in God Almighty.
Barbarian
MemberMicroevolution
Definition
noun, plural: microevolutions
Evolution involving small-scale changes, i.e. within the species, occurring over a short period of time
Macroevolution
Definition
noun, plural: macroevolutions
Evolution happening on a large scale, e.g. at or above the level of a species, over geologic time resulting in the divergence of taxonomic groups.
Read it and learn.
That's what macroevolution is. Microevolution is evolution within a species.
"Human" merely means our own genus. H. sapiens, H. erectus, H. ergaster, etc. What makes us God's children is not biological at all. You're looking in the wrong place. Do you think Neanderthals are human? Why or why not?
When I was in college, YECs were denying speciation. Today,l they admit the evolution of new species, genera, and sometimes families.
When I was young, Creationists were writing books about the supposed genetic inferiority of black people. Agassiz, an early YE creationist, thought that black people were not descended from Adam and Eve. Few YEC would agree with them today.
Barbarian
Member
Justice is just that. Criminals are punished, people are protected, and everyone if free to do as they wish, so long as they don't harm or oppress others.
It tends to make us behave better. But it doesn't make us better people.
We are much less violent than we were even half a century ago. But we aren't really morally any better than we have ever been. Neither law nor culture will change human nature.
I would be really disturbed if those were science teachers. But there have been ignorant science teachers, too. As far as Algore goes, he's about as good a scientist as any other lawyer. And the truth is, climate often has tipping points that are very sensitive to particular conditions.
Should an ice shelf that is now in the process of collapse in Antarctica, suddenly give way, then seas are going to rise a lot faster than predicted. Florida has lost little coastline to sea rise, but it's already in deep trouble as the rise has contaminated many aquifers with salt water.
One part of the U.S. that has dealt with saltwater intrusion is Florida. In Florida, saltwater has intruded into groundwater supplies through different compounding ways. For example, saltwater has encroached into aquifers because fresh groundwater levels have decreased relative to sea level, allowing higher gradient water to flow toward the freshwater. Also, leaking saltwater inland canals, leakage between aquifers, or even upwelling of saltwater from depth also have impacted freshwater aquifers. Water managers in Florida are using information from local, State, Tribal, and Federal saltwater-intrusion monitoring networks, such as from the USGS, to prevent and reverse saltwater intrusion.
Saltwater Intrusion | U.S. Geological Survey
Saltwater intrusion has occurred to some degree in many of the coastal aquifers of the United States. Since saltwater cannot be used to irrigate crops or be consumed by people, saltwater intrusion can be very problematic to coastal communities that rely on fresh groundwater supplies for the...www.usgs.gov
Later on, you admit that SDA did not invent the YEC position.
Hint: God did.
You admit Jews believed it before SDA ever was around. So no more "SDA made YEC" now, right?
As you learned, K2K Evo was invented by pagans.
Are you saying that Darwin invented K2KE and not pagans?
Having visions about something is not inventing something. Thought you knew.
Also, Jews. See above.
You admit it's an opinion later on.
See above.
Why dodge Biologos saying that SDA never "invented" YEC? Right, you want to belief in K2KE.
So you have no answer to Biologos the K2KE supporting organization. Ok.
Yeah, you cant convert them because they are already that way. Can you convert a i9 Pentium chip to an i9 Pentium chip? Nope, it's already that.
Nonono, which one
K2K evo
Micro "Evo"
or macro "evo"?Last edited:
Tells me nothing.
Didn't answer whether micro "evo" was CAFPT or small scale changes.
Do you remember what CAFPT the acronym means?
Or is it small scale changes?
MicroevolutionDefinitionnoun, plural: microevolutionsEvolution involving small-scale changes, i.e. within the species, occurring over a short period of time
I.E. In Example. So your definition means "there could be more".
"Ie within the species" So that defitition of micro "evo" uses species AS AN EXAMPLE.
If micro "evo" is just evo within a species, then explain that "ie"?? Is it just there for show?
Or..... mabye are you Wrong !
Speciation is only at species level. With your 2nd (or 3rd?) definition of "macro evo" it says OR ABOVE.
So no, speciation is NOT macro evo. You've already admitted it.
More x2mind. Cant decide on a definition, or whether it is both or neither!
ALL his ways indeed.
It refers to all who came from Adam n Eve.
Yes because they used human tools + YEC does not have a "racist foundation" like you wish to assume. Read AIG articles on racism and watch your belief fall into the dust with a hard clonk. Bet you won't, or will but strawman them.
But it's not K2K evo.
Which ones?
Merely "Writing about " something does not mean promoting or defending the idea. Thought you knew.
If what you say is correct then Agass also compromised with K2K Evo-ism on the "race" issue.
because racism usually gravitates to/from those that think any populations of organism can give rise to any other organisms. Ala, OEK2KE.
I doubt that you are a R-ist, though.
Glad you admit that a tendency to sin is our fallen nature, instead of trying to allegorize it.
How did he confirm this?
Yeah right. Extrapolation. Where was the testing?
If they can "survive for mills of years" explain why fresh human muscles, which had iron rich blood pumped to them, decay after only a few month or less? Even in a coffin their muscles will decay after centuries OR LESS, not oodles of time. Lol.
They cannot survive for millions of years, that's just an out on a limb belief designed to prop up the OE agenda.
And prove K2K Evo false.
How?
Barbarian
Member
Reaction rates are easily measured. Just physics.
She. You never read the report, did you?
We can easily recover heme from mummies thousands of years old, which weren't even anaerobic. C'mon.
Physical chemists say otherwise. And they actually know what they are talking about.
Which happens to be what heme contains. The interesting thing is, the molecule was another way to test evolutionary theory. The antibodies showed that the heme was more like that of birds than like that of other reptiles, once again confirming that birds evolved from other dinosaurs.
Biochemistry. You see, heme varies slightly in different taxa. The more closely related they are, the more similar the heme is. As evolutionary theory predicts, dinosaur heme is most like the heme of birds.
And another prediction of evolutionary theory is confirmed.
Barbarian
Member
When one learns nothing from facts, that's kind of a flag in itself.
Microevolution is evolution within a species.
By definition, it is evolution within a species.
I see your confusion. You see, "i.e" means "that is." I think you confused it with "e.g." which means "for example."
Read it again, and it should clear up for you.
Macroevolution is evolution happening on a large scale, e.g. at or above the level of a species, over geologic time resulting in the divergence of taxonomic groups.
No. Speciation is the evolution of new species.
As you now see, it is. You just got the two confused again.
Microevolution is evolution within a species. Macroevoution is the evolution of new species. As even many creationists now admit, that can result in the evolution of higher taxa like genera.
Do you think H. neandertalis came from Adam and Eve? How about H. erectus?
Chimpanzees use stone tools as well as Neanderthals. So you think chimpanzees are human? I don't think you've given this enough thought.
The co-founder of the Institute for Creation Research declared that black people were genetically inferior to white people in intelligence and spirituality. That's the foundation of the YE religion.
Nope. Ellen White was not God. Instead of making up things, why not deal with what I actually said?
Incidentally, until the SDAs, people who believed in a young earth were not YE creationists. That doctrine is no older than the 20th century.
George McCready Price (26 August 1870 – 24 January 1963) was a Canadian creationist. He produced several anti-evolution and creationist works, particularly on the subject of flood geology. His views did not become common among creationists until after his death, particularly with the modern creation science movement starting in the 1960s.
...
Numbers says that Seventh-day Adventism is grounded on the Sabbath doctrine of a literal Creation week. To Price, the Sabbath doctrine is what saved Adventists from evolutionism.[12] He adopted Ellen G. White's position on creationism as his own and he sought to persuade the world that a recent creation was required by the Bible and science.
...
Price's ideas were borrowed again in the early 1960s by Henry M. Morris and John Whitcomb in their book The Genesis Flood, a work that skeptic Martin Gardner calls "the most significant attack on evolution...since the Scopes trial". Morris, in his 1984 book History of Modern Creationism, spoke glowingly of Price's logic and writing style, and referred to reading The New Geology as "a life-changing experience for me".[24]
George McCready Price - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
As you see, the SDA doctrine of YE creationism was spread to evangelicals by Price. Men like Morris then spread the SDA doctine to others.
Barbarian
Member
No. It was invented by SDAs. Some Jewish theologians thought the world was young, but they didn't believe all of the other stuff the SDAs put into YE creationism.
Darwin merely discovered how evolution works. Scientists before Darwin were aware that some kind of biological change must have happened. Darwin just figured out the mechanisms.
Racism, as you now see, was an essential part of YE creationism. Many, if not most YE creationists today reject the racist foundations of YE creationism. But the fact remains.
Morris asserted the supposed genetic inferiority of black people. It was an essential part of YE creationism.
No, that's wrong. For example, Henry Morris preached racism as part of YE creationism. On the other hand, it's hard to find a racist scientist, since evolutionary theory shows that there are no biological human races. YE creationists got that completely wrong.Paul E. Michael
Member
What's directly observed constantly is your cognitively-meaninglessly chanting of slogans like "evolution is directly observed in populations constantly", alongside your perpetual inability and failure to present any argument(s). As you know, among others, BroRoyVa79, Alfred Persson , and KV-44-v1, among others, testify of that fact.
We get it, Barbarian, you like to repeat your Darwinistspeak. (Why, you even "Post reply" to numerous posts by @AIG.com, despite knowing that @AIG.com does not read your posts.) You constantly labor according to a delusion that you chanting your Darwinistspeak over and over proves that your Darwinistspeak is true. But, as you know, one of your insurmountable problems is that not only are you incapable of proving, and constantly failing to prove that your Darwinistspeak is true, but, you cannot even prove, and have never proved, that your Darwinistspeak is, in the first place, even cognitively meaningful. You can't even prove that your Darwinistspeak rises to the level of being false.Paul E. Michael
Member
I've got grievances with different aspects of the SDA. But, be aware that he thinks he has an axe to grind with the SDA, because the SDA has always seemed so opposed to and critical of Romanism. Since he seems to asininely tell himself that the SDA are the sum of all evil, he deludes himself into thinking that by his constantly associating the Bible Truth of 6-day, young-Earth Creationism with the SDA, other people will be impressed with his doing so, and will want to get as far away from the Bible Truth of 6-day, young-Earth Creationism as they can. Which, of course, is a sadly desperate, futile, and yet almost comical ploy he is resorting to. But that's what he figures has to do, since even he knows that he has no hope of ever proving his precious Darwinistspeak.- Status