I smell bullshit. Show me one shred of proof that you have a common ancestor for every species from the family canidae. My money is that you can't. And yet, you are using this exact same argument to criticise scientists who study evolution. Do you have fossil evidence showing that at (insert time of flood here) there was mass extinction of animals? Because I'm fairly certain that nobody else has.
Why has no-one commented on my awesome post, did anyone even bother to read it?
Also, if you were in a computer program, you could not rely on your scientific facts to prove anything, as they would all be meaningless, just constructs of the program. So saying 'I believe this because of this scientific fact’ means nothing on it's own, it can only mean something if you believe that your 'scientific facts' are correct, therefore, you are on the same level as any creationist.
Now, a belief in God falls outside this, as it is because of a persons own spirituality that causes them to believe in a God, and not dependent on facts produced by the world they live in, whether it be real or simulated.
You idiot Steady!You just wasted an hour of Atnifix's time.
He wasted like 5 hours of my time trying to read all the new f#ckn posts he put up!!Serves him right!
If evolutionists are allowed to change their theories, why aren't creationists allowed to change there theories as well, as new evidence comes along!
The evidence for a catastrophic flood, landslides, extremely fast burial of millions and billions of animals (especially marine life) are everywhere
Blackheart is correct, there were many civilisations that were aware of the earth being spherical. Possibly some members of the church did (hey, some may still) believe the earth was flat. So what!? Darwin believed in spontaneous generation!
What members of a particular group may have incorrectly believed proves very little; the point is, the Bible refers to the earth being spherical, not flat.
Fair enough blackheart, given the evidence you have been exposed to, the Noahic flood seems ridiculous. I expect it to be to anyone who has only ever looked into one side of the arguement.
If you assume that I'm hell bent on defending creationism because I'm desperate to protect my "religion", you will have to allow me to make the same claim against you: You are hell bent on defending evolution to protect your belief in Naturalism i.e., the absence of the supernatural. (As it was, I was at pains to point out that I believe in my beliefs because of the evidence for creation, and not the other way around)The evidence for a catastrophic flood, landslides, extremely fast burial of millions and billions of animals (especially marine life) are everywhere. You want references? (Even you must admit dirtyape, mass graves containing millions of fossils all over the world shouldn't need references.) Read D. Heyler and C.M. Poplin, ‘The Fossils of Montceau-les-Mines’, Scientific American, September, 1988, or http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/26/science/26FOSS.html, or Woodmorappe, J., Studies in Flood Geology, for just a few random examples of zillions of articles that look a mass deposits of fossils. Read your school geology book dude! Sure, they interpret them using evolutionary assumptions, but thats because they are evolutionists; the mass graves that cover the globe are excellent evidence of catastrophic flood waters and its aftermath. Hell, the grand canyon offers just as much evidence of masses of water retreating in a very short time, as it does for a tiny amount of water over a very long time. Its all about what assumption you apply to the evidence: billions of years, or a few thousand years.Fair enough blackheart, given the evidence you have been exposed to, the Noahic flood seems ridiculous. I expect it to be to anyone who has only ever looked into one side of the arguement.As for humans "increased intelligence", there is no evidence to suggest that this is because of an increase in genetic information. The fact that an adopted baby from a primitive tribe in Africa but brought up in a developed country can grow up to gain a Doctorate indicates that its all about using the potential that our brains already have. By my theory (and I freely admit its a theory, based on assumptions) is that the potential of the human brain pre flood could have been much greater. And yes, the Bible gives painstaking details of the average age pre flood being around 850years, which then decreases within the subsequent 500 years to anywhere between 70 and 120. This is what one would expect given the expected huge downgrade in enviroment the full catastrophy Genesis would predict. Yes, this is all theory based on the assumption that Genesis may be true, so I don't expect you to swallow it as fact. Just as you shouldn't expect me to swallow evolutionist theory which is assumed because one has already assumed evolution to be true.:disappoin
This thread was made sticky?!How about you just rip my heart out and feed it to wild pigs!
Too many issues all at once! You guys must love my long epistles. I promised Laur I wouldn't reply to anything tonight, plus I want to play CS for a change, so you might have to wait for my next reply. Need to realise the frustation by (attempting) to headshot someone.
