Post Reply
Page 18 of 22  •  Prev 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 ... 22 Next
Switch to Forum Live View The bible - not history, and certainly not science.
3 years ago  ::  Nov 08, 2011 - 3:09PM #171
wohali
Posts: 10,227

"When you are not needing to make room for the evolution-speculation's long-required-ages, <10,000 years="" works="" just="" fine="" p="">"


Translation: Ignore evidence and facts and pull stuff out of your ass to make things fit what you think your holy book says..................

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Nov 08, 2011 - 8:22PM #172
Slipnish
Posts: 3,869

Nov 6, 2011 -- 11:24PM, iamachildofhis wrote:


iama:  Yes, yes!  But the "bottleneck" which he is referring to, also, happened to humans, according to The Bible.  The genomes of animals and humans, both experienced his concept of a "bottleneck," and both humans and animals have the exact same conserved and variation entities.  If his speculations are true, they will be true for both animal and human genomes.




Your ignorance is showing.  Even IF there were 2 genetic bottlenecks, Adam and Eve AND the Flood, there would be evidence for them both.


As it is, there is NO evidence of ANY bottleneck on a worldwide scale.


Bottom line, you're pulling things out of the air, or as Wo put it, out of your ass, to make things SEEM like they fit in with your religious ideals.


The TRUTH, and that's a word creationists will need to look up, is that they don't.  Period.  Scientists know what they are doing, even if arm chair idiots like Taz Walker and those other idiots at AiG or whatever website you go to, don't.


Sorry Iama, but your argument is crap.

I don't believe it. Prove it to me and I still won't believe it.

~Any Creationist~
(But honestly Douglas Adams)

"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Nov 09, 2011 - 5:58AM #173
Blü
Posts: 24,830

iama


As for genetic bottlenecks in the human population, you can read of them here.  It says in part -


[...] our ancestors went through two different phases of population “bottlenecking” (constriction): one occurred about three million years ago, when a large population declined to around 10,000 individuals. [...] The second bottleneck is [...] associated with a reduced population size as humans left Africa.  For the Chinese, Korean, and European genomes, effective population size fell from about 13,500 (at 150,000 years ago) to about 1200 between 20,000 and 40,000 years ago.  Now this is the effective population size, almost certainly an underestimate of census size [...]


Nothing in 4004 BCE and nothing in 2348 BCE.  But you have to admit the real science is not only derived from real evidence, but is a lot more interesting than bible stories.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 5:06PM #174
Stephen
Posts: 148

To maintain scholarly integrity, one needs to see what the scriptures do say about themselves. My own efforts at this found it to declare that it is a document inspired by a living being who viewed us as worms or grasshoppers, but who wanted to communicate with us, Dr. Dolittle style.


There are specfic instructions for how to do this, which in all my asking around, never fail to work. Thus, the bible is similar to the directions for building the contact machine in Carl Sagan's book and movie, Contact. As in that book, those who build and test the machine have an experience that changes their lives, but which is written off by the rest of the world. This result has been scientifically verified by reseach on NDE's.


The directions themselves include a warning that to take them "literally" (to use them for any other purpose) is fatal. ("the letter kills').


Once one is in an interview with the inspiring Person of the bible, the rest of the scriptures, as well as the rest of His creation, and all of science, become great topics for discussion.


Both the scriptures, and Sagan's Contact, do give instructions for how to handle the skeptics.


Bible Codes studies and theomatics provide ample evidence that this is all true. Of course, skeptics who refuse to spend  time reading the original studies of these topics will fume and sputter in efforts to explain all this away. Anyone betting their life on the opinions of such skeptics deserves what they get. Go to the sources, and find out for yourself, if you want to hold a safe opinion on the matter.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 5:16PM #175
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Dec 29, 2011 -- 5:06PM, Stephen wrote:


To maintain scholarly integrity, one needs to see what the scriptures do say about themselves. My own efforts at this found it to declare that it is a document inspired by a living being who viewed us as worms or grasshoppers, but who wanted to communicate with us, Dr. Dolittle style.


I have no wish to communicate with a being who regards me as no better than a worm or a grasshopper. I despise such a being.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 5:39PM #176
Stephen
Posts: 148

The worms I have known only wanted to avoid being robin food or bait on a fish-hook, which concerns I appreciated as sensible. But, one biblical ingredient in the building of the Contact machine is free will, the choice for life and survival over, say, "Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven." kind of thinking. So, your decision is not unexpected.


But, of course, the God of scriptures is only interested, so he says, in those who accept truth. Realizing one is a worm in His eyes, and communicating anyway only gets the process started. He promises, both in interviews and in scripture, to engage in biological engineering and other transformative works, to turn us worms into sons, in His eyes.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 6:20PM #177
amcolph
Posts: 17,314

Nov 6, 2011 -- 12:33AM, iamachildofhis wrote:



When you are not needing to make room for the evolution-speculation's long-required-ages, <10,000 years="" works="" just="" fine="" p="">



.




You've got it backwards.  It was, in fact, discovery of the great age of the Earth which came first.  That discovery made consideration of evolution possible and led to the theory of evolution, not the other way around.


You creationists like to put it about that the great age of the Earth was fabricated to accomotate the theory of evolution, but that is--as usual--a lie.


The evidence on which the age of the Earth rests is entirely distinct from that which supports the theory of evolution.  If the theory of evolution were falsified tomorrow, the Earth would still be old.






This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 9:32PM #178
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Dec 29, 2011 -- 5:39PM, Stephen wrote:

But, of course, the God of scriptures is only interested, so he says, in those who accept truth. Realizing one is a worm in His eyes, and communicating anyway only gets the process started.



He's only interested in those who suck up to him and say "Oh, what a worm I am compared to great big wonderful You!" It's repulsive.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 9:41PM #179
MMarcoe
Posts: 16,093

Dec 29, 2011 -- 9:32PM, Ken wrote:


Dec 29, 2011 -- 5:39PM, Stephen wrote:

But, of course, the God of scriptures is only interested, so he says, in those who accept truth. Realizing one is a worm in His eyes, and communicating anyway only gets the process started.



He's only interested in those who suck up to him and say "Oh, what a worm I am compared to great big wonderful You!" It's repulsive.





Lol. That's how the clergy has beaten it into our heads. I heard enough of it on Jimmy Swaggart back in the 80s.


I think what it REALLY means is that finite creatures are too small to compare to something that is infinite. There's a certain mathematical sense to it.


Experiencing your own smallness is a good antidote to egotism.


 

There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.

God is just a personification of reality, of pure objectivity.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Dec 29, 2011 - 10:17PM #180
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Dec 29, 2011 -- 9:41PM, MMarcoe wrote:


Dec 29, 2011 -- 9:32PM, Ken wrote:


Dec 29, 2011 -- 5:39PM, Stephen wrote:

But, of course, the God of scriptures is only interested, so he says, in those who accept truth. Realizing one is a worm in His eyes, and communicating anyway only gets the process started.



He's only interested in those who suck up to him and say "Oh, what a worm I am compared to great big wonderful You!" It's repulsive.



Lol. That's how the clergy has beaten it into our heads. I heard enough of it on Jimmy Swaggart back in the 80s.


I think what it REALLY means is that finite creatures are too small to compare to something that is infinite. There's a certain mathematical sense to it.


Experiencing your own smallness is a good antidote to egotism.



I don't think value has anything to do with size. If I could save the life of a person I loved by snuffing out the entire Andromeda galaxy, I'd do it in a flash.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 18 of 22  •  Prev 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 ... 22 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook