Explain the Trilobite

Well here again you have demonstrated that you have know idea what a Christian is. Jesus told us that no murder will enter the Kingdom of God. Men who burn innocent woman or anyone else are murders and are not Christians.
And the Bible does not support a flat earth, and I believed I had covered this in one of my last post. And the idea that a flat earth was supported by early Christian Fathers was pushed by men who were opposed to the faith and wrote books that stated such. Yet these books were really a work of fiction, and again I spoke of this in one of my last post which you completely ignored.

 

The point I was making was the person or persons who did the figurines did not make them up from their imagination, because no one could make exact copies of so many dinosaurs they had never seen before. To make such accurate copies they would of had to of seen the real thing.

 

Well Campbell, you've ignored posts of mine too.

No doubt you do 'know what a christian is'.

A person with no pride, who treats enemies and friends with complete equality, and 'resists not evil'. I would consider it very interesting to meet such a one. Alas, nearly 50 years on the planet and I'm still waiting.

So anyway, if the guys who did the witch burning were'nt acting on the basis of the bible, whic states clearly "ye shall not suffer a witch to live", perhaps you could explain who they were? Because I'm afraid I just can't see who else it was, or what other book would put these nonsensical and evil concepts into their heads?

EDIT: I'm afraid Campell, that my very first experience of xtians in this life, was in the form of leather strap wielding nuns, to whose tender care my education was given at age 4. After a 'strapping' because I refused to say my prayers at age 6, I was lucky enough to be removed to a normal non religious school.
That was of course, many years ago, but I'm afraid these 'good xtian women' instilled at least one valuable lesson in me - the utter hypocrisy and backwardness of xtians in general, and the fact that all their talk of love and kindness is mere puff.

 

Perhaps they 'saw' them in imagination. Just like others 'saw' unicorns.

 

Well, I think it is valid because its the same type of logic. I have heard those same type agruements from ufologoists "proving" ancient visitations to Earth from aliens. That artists could not have imagined the artifacts founds and were merely copying what they saw. My point was that a person could "prove" anything that way, or aliens have been visiting.

As far as "literal accounts" and "actual animals", that is completely subjective upon the reader or hearer of the text, in that, if a person believes a story is fact or fiction. To many people, their mythology to me, is their religion. They believe it as fact, I listen to it as story.

 

I think you're having a problem here. You expect us to believe that dogs and wolves evolved in the last 4000 years? Evolution does not work that quickly, and especially not for organisms with such a slow reproduction rate.

The crocodile is a primative animal. And correct me if I'm wrong, but the form they take now is considerably smaller than the prehistoric form. Yes, things exist now that existed before. What I'm concerned with is thing that exist now that didn't exist before. Like us, like large modern animals.

1- Show me. Links, gimme something.
2- The only two on there of any notability are the mouse and beaver. I have heard of a prehistoric beaver, but it's a different form.
3- Ceolocanth? Salt water mud? Are you frickin kidding me? Think, boy! They live in the ocean! Yes they still exist, they're an old species, and their failure to go extinct is really no concern to evolution, it's just cool.
4- Crabs, wasps and frogs are all understandable, because they came around long before dinosaurs, and are very simple animals with high reproductive rates.
5- When arguing this, it is your job to show that fossils of modern animals were found in the same layers as the prehistoric ones. If it died 100,000 years ago and fossilized, that's nothing.

Insects in amber? Maybe you should get started, because I don't see the relevance. Plants are even more primative that animals.

Your parent kind thing is ridiculous. It doesn't work like that.

Wow. This just takes the cake right here. Complete misunderstanding of evolution. Have you taken a biology class ever? Fish, of which there are plenty that can live on land for a decent amount of time, evolved into amphibians. Amphibians were the first land animals. Amphibians gave rise to reptiles, which gave rise to mammals and birds. Marine mammals evolved from a prehistoric relative of the hippopotamus. Why would any intelligent designer give whales hand bones and small, useless hips?

I'm just fine with it. I'll tell you why. Let's say that after the flood 4000 years ago, the two of every animal would have had to reproduce and get on every continent. I'll be conservative and say 300 years for that. So 3700 years ago, continents moved apart. The tip of Brazil is now about 3000 miles from Cameroon, where it fits quite nicely. To get to it's present location in 3700 years, they would have had to travel at .81 miles every year. The present rate is not more than 5 meters, and is usually less than half of one. As opposed to about 1,625.

Land bridges certainly explain bears on two continents, but they are not the same bears. I suppose the other one could apply to other animals. Did you know that some tropical tortoises float around until they find an island? Crazy, huh? Stuff gets around.

One, I know you're exaggerating slightly, but consider that many of the mountains in question were themselves formed by continental drift.

Except for the rate thing, of course. If bears are the brunt of your argument, as they seem to be, I suggest you reconsider your argument. What about horses? Horses did not exist in the Americas until they were brought over by people in the 1500's.

I understand the question, but I do not see your answer from the bible.

 

That is a very bizarre misconception Evos have about Genesis Creos.
No, of course I do not think anything evolved in the last 4,000 years.
Natural Selection (especially in a dividing and environmentally changing world) would have plenty of time to take care of the different breeds we see today.

No, of course I dont think they evolved over 4,000 years.
Obviously not in the sense you are using the word.

 

It's funny, I had an experience in a religious school myself which should of turned me away from the Christian faith as well. I still recall my father pulling me out of this school back in 1956. I was 11 years old and I recall as my father was walking away from this religious leader. We were about to go down the steps and there was this big picture of Christ and my father look back at what I will only describe as a very upset principal of the school, and said. "You know, you have this big picture of Christ hanging here in the hallway, but I have to tell you, for what you have done to my son in your school, you really should have a picture of the Devil." After so many years of mistreatment and abuse, my father could not of said it any better. Often such schools and churches will not show any evidence of God. And that is why Jesus said, many would worship Him with their lips, but their hearts are far from Him.
I believe Hell will be fill with many religious people who were very religious in life, but never had a heart for Jesus, and God can tell the difference. The Bible is often a Book that people will use to justfy their crimes, but these crimes will never be supported by the Book. The witch burnings were from the Old Testament and was one of the Laws for the Jewish people, and you would have to understand that time period. When Christ came the law of works was replaced with the age of grace. If you are an Islamic or some other religion you are still trying to get to heaven by the works of the law. Yet, Jesus tells us that no man will be justified by the works of the law. Heaven will only be obtained if we receive God's gift to the world, which was given to us by the death of Christ on the cross. None of us will ever be able to say we earned our own salvation, we deserve to go to heaven because we are so good.

 

Dogs and Wolves are the same species, they can mate with each other and produce viable offspring. DNA test have also confirmed this. All the breeds of domesticated dogs were created by humans by breeding them for specific characteristics.

 

Yes this is correct.
We dont even need have anything to do with DNA for this one.. we bred out Poodles from Wolves in what is actually a blip of time compared to 4,000 years.

Usually when looking for an example for the Noahs Ark explanation we tend to use the Wolf.
It gets the idea across because we are all more familiar with that.
But,
As I was saying points to the validity more is that there is a sort of dog which may very well be 'original grandad' and Wolves are actually bred out of it.
But like I say.. we DONT find these big dogs anywhere except buried in sediment and fossilised.

Just need to clear up something about 'Species'.
There is a common misconception about the whole 'mating' standard for species and subspecies.
A subspecies can break off of a species and eventually that subspecies will not be able to mate with the 'parent species'.
Researchers always knew this but it seems like alot of internet 'evowarriors' dont know that.
Just clearing it up.

DNA.
Yep, this is exciting.
Now we can have 'proof' that all humans came from the same family.
Its (eventually) working to show just what kinds of animals there really are.
I once had a great article on Bears and Dogs and DNA showing them up to be essentialy the same 'kind' of animals.
But,
I cant find any links on the net so sorry on that one.

But yeah, we have lots and lots of time and reasons why so many different subspecies and breeds could have come about in 4,000 years.
Heck, Poodes from Wolves took what.. a coupla hundred.
Reminder: Natural Selection is the OPPOSITE of Evolutionism.
Poodles 'DEscend' and are SELECTED OUT OF Wolves.
They are not 'adding' new genetic traits. not at all. No need to anyways.

I think its hilarious how everytime another pillar of evolutionism gets exposed and demolished - the unbreakable evobelievers just act like 'i meant to do that!'
Sure sure.
But in a way you are right because nothing is a 'problem' for evolutionism because its practically unfalsifiable.
Its just a big story that can change, adapts, morph and add, drop and rewrite itself as it goes.
If we find out that Tyranosaurus Rex was alive in the Jungles of Africa the Evo would just say something like:
"Oh well.. of course and in fact we 'knew this' because its a good animal that just stayed the same for eleventeen million years"
Wow.

Yep, there are a lot of modern plants and animals who are the same today as they were 4,000 years ago.
Btw.. Im told that the 'Beaver' in question is just the name of a type of Mole.
(although I also heard of the actual beaver thing too, dont recall now either?)
Here are some examples of critters that we are asked to believe just stayed the same for a gazillion years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_fossil

A Muslim website has alot more examples and actually some superb pictures!
http://living-fossils.com/2_1.php
This also explains the whole Amber thing too.

 

I don't believe in hell, and I wouldn't want to see the abusive nuns I mentioned punished anyway - they were simply acting out the nonsense with which they'd been programmed, probably as kids, and probably under a regieme which was even more harsh and violent than what I experienced during the early 60's. To quote your man 'they know not what they do'.

I think the idea of 'grace' is a dangerous one, because it could lead to people thinking that if they just believe they can do whatever they like, and make no effort themselves. That leads nowhere, only to more of the same old stuff we've had for thousands of years.
Hence for example, we have extremely rich people who say they are xtians - disregarding entirely jesus statements about the 'eye of the needle' etc. Yet no doubt they imagine they are going to heaven.

 

Jesus said that many would worship Him with their lips but their heart would be far from Him. People can play what ever games they like, but in the end, only those who truly love Christ will be allowed into His Kingdom. And God knows who's playing games, and He also knows who really loves Him.

 

I got that poll result from a CBS Poll: Creationism Trumps Evolution
New York, Nov. 22, 2004 Poll indicated that 55% of Americans believe that God created humans in present form.
Your right Spook13, I think we both try to keep our discussions friendly. However as you know, sometimes I like to pull my old Crusader Sword out of the closet just for old time sake, you know, just to feel that old steel in my hand again.

 

"But yeah, we have lots and lots of time and reasons why so many different subspecies and breeds could have come about in 4,000 years.
Heck, Poodes from Wolves took what.. a coupla hundred.
Reminder: Natural Selection is the OPPOSITE of Evolutionism.
Poodles 'DEscend' and are SELECTED OUT OF Wolves.
They are not 'adding' new genetic traits. not at all. No need to anyways." -Ikdenkhetniet


But new things do pop up. Mutations in genetics are a fact, relatively easy to measure, just by DNA comparisions. I said domestic dogs and wolves were the same species, I didn't say their DNA was identical because it is not. Some breeds of dogs have genes that are not present in wolves. Check out this National Geographic atlas of the human journey mapped by genetic markers, I am curious how you would explain that.https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html

 

One thing I could point out is that there might be something like a "time gap"
like 2 different mankinds, the first one disappeared, then we came out
I dont know, it s just an idea

peace

 

Thanks. That's probably as credible a source as any.

Yeah, I've seen you take some good swings with it.

 

[Excellent link that everyone in here should check out - very well presented. Thx]
Mutations.
Yes indeed they do occur.
It has to be one of the ironies of all ironies that occasional genetic mutations and the ability to record these markers is what is ending
evolutionism and delivering the closest thing to logical proof for Genesis you could ever ask for.
I mean even as a creationist - I didnt even see that coming that emphatically!

Now mind you, of course we always knew mutations happen. Obviously if you have a baby born missing a finger well then there ya go.
Its just that now we can see the actual 'blueprints' here and connect the dots backwards.

I see the Evolutionists at NG have now put 'Adam' back to 30,000 years at the earliest here heh.
I kinda chuckle because at first it was just enough for the Evos to realise there was an Adam and an Eve.
but,
They stretched the most outrageous maximum longest dates for him as incredulity would allow - 100,000 years plus.
Then 70 thous,
Ok now its 30-70 thousand heh.
Hey.. Im not complaining.. at least they are on the right track!

I think you might want to let some of the latest researchers know your discovery because domestic dogs and wolves most definately are the same critter.
I think you 'might' be trying to consider some of the latest mytochondrial testing that has been going on?

I dont want to repeat myself again so maybe reread what I was getting at but basically it goes like this:
Obviously dog breeders have kept track of which breed they bred out of what breed etc.
Ok.
Now if we go back far enough we start running out of records but we are kinda left with Wolves, Jackals, Foxes.
Ok.
Now its true that alot of people just assumed 'Wolves' for obvious reasons and this is BEFORE DNA research too.
Ok.
Even then, and even more so now, most experts on this subject did speculate that Wolves are not the 'Top Parent' anyways.

How can I put this... Its almost as if we have several different kinds of wolves, not to mention Jackals, Foxes.
Its as if they are 'breeds' of some sort of 'Dog' that must have been before them.
Now low and behold we surely DID find what appears to be some sorts of 'Top Dogs' (no pun intended).
I believe that at one point it was fossils of 'Dire Wolves' that were picked as the likely 'parents' and now we are looking closely at Boros.
Boros are basically a big-ass hyena like dog.

Once again got to get back to what I was getting at here..
We DO see all sorts of breeds of 'dog' around the planet.
Including the ones we bred out on purpose.
Ok.
We DO see what appear to be some 'Prime Dogs' on top of that but interestingly we only find remains of those ones.
Buried in sediment and not around in that form anymore.

This is evidence for Genesis account of how the earth was repopulated.
it is NOT evidence for any wild stories about 'new species' laughably 'mutating' new genes into existance.

Again, I just want to clear something up - Poodles do not have 'new genetic information'.
They are not 'evolved from' something else.
They are bred 'out of' already existing information.
In this case, mans hand helped in 'SELECTING OUT' information.
Usually nature alone does this.. its called Natural Selection.
Think in terms of the very 'opposite' of what evolutionists want to believe in.
SELECTS FROM PRE-EXISTING Information.

 

You agree that mutations happen, but why do you think that they are all bad? They are not all bad, there is a whole field of breeding plants based on mutations (positive ones). You have proably eaten some of the benifits of them, because it directly effects modern agriculture. It is a fact, that their are new genes, that didn't come from their genetic ancestors. (I am talking about breeding not transgenic or gene splicing,etc) Some dog breeds do have new information, the American hairless terrier, for example has a hairless gene as result of a mutation. There is new information in people's genetics, all the time, most of it is very minor. Every time DNA/RNA copies, when cells divide, there are some errors. A benefiticial mutation in humans that comes to mind is CCR5-delta 32 mutation. This gene is only found in about 10% of white people of European anscestry and 2% of central Asians, it alters the white blood cell in a way they makes them very resistant or immune to both the black plague and HIV/AIDS. No Native Americans, Chinese, African, Indian, etc. people have EVER had this mutation. Without this gene mutation its posible that just about ever person in Europe would have died when the black plague sweep through.

 

Well, all I can say is that I'm opposed to the concept of monarchy. In a past age, people constructed this idea of god as king - today, the imagery just doesn't fit. Like most of what is in the bible, it is outmoded.

 

I don't believe it is the Bible that is outmoded, it is the world that has walked away from it. And it is the world that has ignored it's prophecies of truth, which fortell our future. The Bible is way ahead of our time, the world by it's ignorance will fulfill the prophecies of the Bible because they have ignored them, and are destined now to fulfill them. When Christ returns to this world, He will be King to all who love Him, and we will be His servants. And God tells us no eye has seen, no ear has heard the things He has prepared for those who love Him. We are approaching the day of God's wonders.