Do Science and the Bible contradict e...
First Prev
of 8
Next Last
Frank

Holly Springs, NC

#149 Jan 22, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>Its also entirely possible we're nothing but figments of some beings imagination too...
You cant keep moving the lines of the playing field just to include a bunch of "What Ifs?"
Well it's like this: All that we can do is study what is--however we don't know what, if anything, is behind all of this, so you're in no position to say "nothing created us" just as I can't say for sure that something did create us.

However I'd have to say that there's enough evidence to reach the conclusion that it's entirely probable that something DID create us. If fact, I'd say that the probability that something did create us is much greater than the idea that we come from absolutely nothing for no reason.
socci

Willard, MO

#150 Jan 22, 2013
Gillette wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite
Granite is a common widely occurring type of intrusive, felsic, IGNEOUS rock which is granular and phaneritic in texture. Oops!

Are you putting us on or being intentionally dumb?
The initial expansion was not a "molten mass."
MUCH, much later, planets accumulated from space dust orbiting around our nascent star (and all other stars).

The early earth was a very hot, molten place indeed for a long time, until it cooled down. The geological record is very plain on this.

Gentry's nonsense was refuted YEARS ago:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF201.h...


Gentry published in a science journal and that is where it will need to be refuted. Until then the science stands. That science says granite formed instantly not over bazzillions of years with any molten mass.

(Radiohalos in Radiochronological and Cosmological Perspective. Gentry, R.V., Science 184, 62, 1974)
www.halos.com/reports/science-1974-perspectiv...
www.youtube.com/watch...


Wikipedia does not publish fact only the agreed upon consensus so just because they claim granite is igneous does not make it so. If granite were igneous scientists would be able to heat it to a molten state, recool and it remain granite. But they cannot. Granite loses its crystalline inter-mix at that point and is reclassified another mineral. For this reason granite cannot be produced in a lab even tho many other mineral can be produced in the lab, even something close to diamond.

Granite as found does not support big bangism but does support the biblical model created by God 6000 years ago.
socci

Willard, MO

#151 Jan 22, 2013
Gillette wrote:
I have already explained to you why the Adam and Eve myth has been completely exploded by the science of DNA and the fossil record.


Neither DNA genetics nor the fossil record supports anything other than the biblical account.


Genetics: no friend of evolution
A highly qualified biologist tells it like it is.
by Lane Lester

Genetics and evolution have been enemies from the beginning of both concepts. Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics, and Charles Darwin, the father of modern evolution, were contemporaries. At the same time that Darwin was claiming that creatures could change into other creatures, Mendel was showing that even individual characteristics remain constant. While Darwin’s ideas were based on erroneous and untested ideas about inheritance, Mendel’s conclusions were based on careful experimentation. Only by ignoring the total implications of modern genetics has it been possible to maintain the fiction of evolution.
http://creation.com/genetics-no-friend-of-evo...


The Origins of Variety
Professor Walter Veith
www.youtube.com/watch...


Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#152 Jan 23, 2013
socci wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither DNA genetics nor the fossil record supports anything other than the biblical account.
How can that be when, according to the human genome...

1.) there was no distinct beginning of homo sapiens, but rather a gradual transition from earlier, proto-human species and...

2.) All of the current humanity is descended, on their mother's side, from one female and on their father's side from another male, and those individuals lived tens of thousands of years apart?

RE: Granite

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/
Is granite a sedimentary rock metamorphic or a igneous rock?
Geology Questions

"In general terms granite is an igneous rock. But, there has been a famous debate over the years because extreme metamorphosis of crustal sediments can produce melts of rocks that are also granite. However, the best examples of granites such as those to be found in Dartmoor (UK) are clearly igneous intrusions.

So to simplify that: Igneous. It's an igneous rock."

http://geology.com/rocks/granite.shtml

"What is Granite?
Granite is a light-colored igneous rock with grains large enough to be visible with the unaided eye. It forms from the slow crystallization of magma below Earth’s surface."

http://www.galleries.com/rocks/granite.htm

"Granite is possibly the most common igneous rock type known to the general public. "
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#153 Jan 23, 2013
socci wrote:
<quoted text>
Gentry published in a science journal and that is where it will need to be refuted. Until then the science stands.
POLONIUM HALOS AND MYRMEKITE IN PEGMATITE AND GRANITE
http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/revised8.htm

The Geology of Gentry's "Tiny Mystery"
http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/gentry/tiny.htm
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#154 Jan 23, 2013
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#155 Jan 23, 2013
socci wrote:
<quoted text>
Genetics: no friend of evolution
A highly qualified biologist tells it like it is.
by Lane Lester
He may hold a degree, but he is a fundamentalist Creationist working a religious agenda here. Dismissed.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#156 Jan 23, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
He may hold a degree, but he is a fundamentalist Creationist working a religious agenda here. Dismissed.
That does not mean he was wrong. You have an anti Christian agenda so we can dismiss you.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#157 Jan 23, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
That does not mean he was wrong. You have an anti Christian agenda so we can dismiss you.
You cannot dismiss 150 years of scientific evidence for evolution form geology, archeology, biology and DNA genetics, however.

It means your Christian "scientist" wasn't doing SCIENCE when he wrote his stuff, and neither are you. So when it comes to the veracity and correctness of the scientific evidence, we can dismiss religious people who oppose the science because it threatens their literal interpretation of their religious scriptures, and not because of the science itself.

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#158 Jan 23, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
He may hold a degree, but he is a fundamentalist Creationist working a religious agenda here. Dismissed.
You are a bised atheist working your own agenda. Dismissed.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#159 Jan 23, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
You cannot dismiss 150 years of scientific evidence for evolution form geology, archeology, biology and DNA genetics, however.
It means your Christian "scientist" wasn't doing SCIENCE when he wrote his stuff, and neither are you. So when it comes to the veracity and correctness of the scientific evidence, we can dismiss religious people who oppose the science because it threatens their literal interpretation of their religious scriptures, and not because of the science itself.
Evolution is a failed theory. It cannot explain the origin life or the function of a cell. That's why so many appeal to intelligence as the cause of life and why the cell functions as it does.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#160 Jan 23, 2013
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a biased atheist working your own agenda. Dismissed.
Well said...
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#161 Jan 23, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution is a failed theory. It cannot explain the origin life or the function of a cell. That's why so many appeal to intelligence as the cause of life and why the cell functions as it does.
No, people who "appeal to intelligence" are some brand of conservative Christian working a religious agenda.

The Theory of Evolution does not even address the origin of life, so OF COURSE it "cannot explain it." It isn't MEANT to.

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#162 Jan 23, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
No, people who "appeal to intelligence" are some brand of conservative Christian working a religious agenda.
The Theory of Evolution does not even address the origin of life, so OF COURSE it "cannot explain it." It isn't MEANT to.
If the theory of evolution can work forward from some arbitrary point in the past and "explain" the theory, up to the present, why can't it work backward from that same point using the same logic, reasoning, theorem, algorithm, whatever and determine the origin?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#163 Jan 24, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution is a failed theory. It cannot explain the origin life or the function of a cell. That's why so many appeal to intelligence as the cause of life and why the cell functions as it does.
And the Bible never did either!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#164 Jan 24, 2013
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
If the theory of evolution can work forward from some arbitrary point in the past and "explain" the theory, up to the present, why can't it work backward from that same point using the same logic, reasoning, theorem, algorithm, whatever and determine the origin?
Because at some point, far enough back, the tools and ideas used to explain and document the splitting of species need to be replaced by other tools and principles and laws of nature such as those found in the biochemistry subject of Abiogenesis, which is where the origin of life is studied.

The Theory of Evolution is not interested and does not touch the subject of origins. It assumes life was there and then explains how it evolves down through nested hierarchies of common descent.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#165 Jan 24, 2013
By analogy: Scientist can study the action of forest fires without knowing when and how the first fire originated on earth.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#166 Jan 24, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
That does not mean he was wrong. You have an anti Christian agenda so we can dismiss you.
You've got the brains of a kumquat so let's dismiss you instead.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why did Christ come to Earth? (Oct '16) 30 min Big Al 1,188
There is a National Rejection of God in America!! 47 min Big Al 2
The False Teachings of the Hebrew Israelites, s... (Jan '14) 2 hr Big Al 1,950
breath of god, and how we come to light. 2 hr Big Al 99
"The love of many shall wax cold." It's REAL m... 5 hr Big Al 2
Are Your Beliefs TRUE? 7 hr Big Al 262
Early Christianity (Dec '16) 20 hr Seentheotherside 2,632
More from around the web