Noah and the Ark

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'm very aware of the wonder of nature. I'm a fisherman and birdwatcher when it comes to hobbies. My point is that your position lends itself to the notion that man originated as a primate, not from a single man named Adam who was created in God's image.

If evolution is true... God is unnecessary.

No. You're doing the binary thinking error again.

"If this... then it's ALWAYS going to be that!" - - - - NO! Not "always."

How about, because evolution is true God IS necessary?

And, it has been shown time and time again that we did all descend from a single breeding pair of human beings - not once, but at least twice! (Consider the "Adam & Eve" pair and the "Mr. & Mrs. Noah" pair).

Just by coincidence, I suppose?

Originally Posted by Aquila

I was just illustrating that there have been discoveries thrown out of the scientific community because they didn't match the accepted evolutionary model. There have been archeologists and anthropologists who have lost their careers because they stood by these discoveries. For example the woman who was escavating an ancient city in Central America. They found tools, arrow heads, pottery, etc. Much of it dated nearly 200,000 years old using radio carbon dating. They also used an isotope method I can't remember. The date for the city was so far off the charts the scientific community laughed her out of fellowship and closed the book from ever examining data from the site again unless it fit a more "reasonable" date range.

It's fascinating stuff really. Things like large metallic spheres, obviously human made, found in precambrian rock. The scientific community doesn't want to look into them... and if someone does they are labled a quack or a cook.

Okay, so you ARE going to quote Cremo and Thompson? (Am I psychic or what?)

... And the Weekly World News too,** from the "large metallic spheres" reference. This is all very old material in the sense that it's been debunked time and time again.

** ("Megan Fox Is A Man" - ???!!!) Now that's NEWS! - see the link above at the Weekly World News.

First of all, who exactly is that female archeologist you mention? I remember a similar scene involving artifacts Cremo was touting from Brazil. The site was at the base of a cliff and the material had all been washed out and tumbled in running water long after being originally deposited. This automatically excluded the finds from being candidates for radio-carbon dating. The site was thoroughly "contaminated" by debris from other sources and mixed.

The human skeletal remains in Brazil, however dated from just thousands of years and were apparently related to Australian aborigines, which was fascinating.

There's a rule about looking for "cavemen." If the cave shows signs of having been exposed to water then you move on to the next. Don't even bother digging because anything you find won't stand up to rigorous scrutiny when it comes to dating.

The metallic spheres come from a deposit in Africa. Volcanic heat raised the temperature high enough to melt metals. The metals within the loose clays ran together like hot lead on a copper plumbing pipe that you've put too much flux on (a common thing that I do). The lead beads up. Same thing with the metal "spheres." The vast majority are oblong and irregularly shaped, but Cremo would never show you those. He cherry picks the most spherical ones and says "Aha!"

Natives have been using them as talismans and carving the soft metal for who knows how long (but certainly NOT the 2.8 billion years that Cremo claims). The scientific community (especially the mining interests) have looked long and hard at these things.

Cremo was big news in the UPC back in the 1980's when he announced that he would reveal the "New Age Ruler of the Earth." Richard Heard and others were just about raptured with excitement over that.

Hail Lord Krishna, Chris?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by notofworks

...and where did those universes come from? Spontaneous Generation is so incredibly unlikely, that the earth, even at the 4 billion year old age, would need much longer to produce spontaneous generation as many times as it would have taken to produce male and female forms at the same time (in order to reproduce) in as many different species as we have.

There certainly is some "theory" in the "Theory of Evolution" but it's based on absolute fact, and I believe those "facts" work perfectly with what God has formed.

But ultimately, I won't pretend to be an expert in this. This thread has been like a college class!

I've read where physists claim that it's not unlikely or a miracle at all. Universes form and pass away like the weather. It's just physics they say.

As for the "facts"... they are "facts" as the evolutionists interpret them.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by noeticknight

I think this is an excellent point.

Although my understanding on this subject is severely limited and inadequate, its still seems perfectly reasonable to me to assume that there is a common authority of Jesus' words and teachings interwoven all the way back to the OT writings. To believe in the Gospels is to have faith that defies our human logic and understanding. It is only natural to rely on that same faith regarding OT writings; after all, those prophecies foretold of Jesus and his coming, the cornerstone of all of Christianity.

Great points have been raised on this thread. I've always enjoyed these types of discussions. I even attempted to start a thread about it on here at one point I think...

It is a great discussion. I wonder when those who believe in theological evolution believe the Bible picks up and reports actual history? Then how do they explain the miraculous? Red Sea becomes the Reed Sea, no miraculous parting of the waters necessary, the waters were low that time of year. As for the "burning bush", just an exaggeration or vision. Was the vision induced by God or was it just too much sun? It all unravels in my opinion.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I've read where physists claim that it's not unlikely or a miracle at all. Universes form and pass away like the weather. It's just physics they say.

Yes, and I can find a number of experts who have determined that it was impossible the the WTC to have collapsed on 9-11...that it had to have been set with explosives and that George W. Bush was responsible. One can always locate someone with a certain point of view.

So yeah, there are physicists and experts that say a little bit of everything.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by pelathais

No. You're doing the binary thinking error again.

"If this... then it's ALWAYS going to be that!" - - - - NO! Not "always."

How about, because evolution is true God IS necessary?

And, it has been shown time and time again that we did all descend from a single breeding pair of human beings - not once, but at least twice! (Consider the "Adam & Eve" pair and the "Mr. & Mrs. Noah" pair).

Just by coincidence, I suppose?

Okay, so you ARE going to quote Cremo and Thompson? (Am I psychic or what?)

... And the Weekly World News too,** from the "large metallic spheres" reference. This is all very old material in the sense that it's been debunked time and time again.

** ("Megan Fox Is A Man" - ???!!!) Now that's NEWS! - see the link above at the Weekly World News.

First of all, who exactly is that female archeologist you mention? I remember a similar scene involving artifacts Cremo was touting from Brazil. The site was at the base of a cliff and the material had all been washed out and tumbled in running water long after being originally deposited. This automatically excluded the finds from being candidates for radio-carbon dating. The site was thoroughly "contaminated" by debris from other sources and mixed.

The human skeletal remains in Brazil, however dated from just thousands of years and were apparently related to Australian aborigines, which was fascinating.

There's a rule about looking for "cavemen." If the cave shows signs of having been exposed to water then you move on to the next. Don't even bother digging because anything you find won't stand up to rigorous scrutiny when it comes to dating.

The metallic spheres come from a deposit in Africa. Volcanic heat raised the temperature high enough to melt metals. The metals within the loose clays ran together like hot lead on a copper plumbing pipe that you've put too much flux on (a common thing that I do). The lead beads up. Same thing with the metal "spheres." The vast majority are oblong and irregularly shaped, but Cremo would never show you those. He cherry picks the most spherical ones and says "Aha!"

Natives have been using them as talismans and carving the soft metal for who knows how long (but certainly NOT the 2.8 billion years that Cremo claims). The scientific community (especially the mining interests) have looked long and hard at these things.

Cremo was big news in the UPC back in the 1980's when he announced that he would reveal the "New Age Ruler of the Earth." Richard Heard and others were just about raptured with excitement over that.

Hail Lord Krishna, Chris?

LOL

My point is that there are unexplainable findings. Science will debunk them, that's a given. I'm not advocating what Cremo or any others have said, I'm simply stating that some have "facts" that if interpreted their way lends to a very ancient mankind. Far more ancient than evolutionists would propose. As a creationist, I walk away not wondering if these human remains and artifacts are older than usual because they were found in older sediment... but wondering if the sediment is really as old as they think.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Yes, and I can find a number of experts who have determined that it was impossible the the WTC to have collapsed on 9-11...that it had to have been set with explosives and that George W. Bush was responsible. One can always locate someone with a certain point of view.

So yeah, there are physicists and experts that say a little bit of everything.

The theory of evolution in it's purest form is atheistic. It's the development of life through natural forces.

[Aquila]

Here's a link that has some interesting video. Of course the scientific community has probably engaged quit a bit of money and effort debunking much of this. But what if... those disagreeing with the scientific community are right? (The link is pretty hard on creationists by the way.)

http://www.savechicobabies.com/scien...rcheology.html

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The theory of evolution in it's purest form is atheistic. It's the development of life through natural forces.

Are you saying that the Theory of Evolution as developed as a way of discrediting God? Maybe so. Point taken. But in the middle of the discrediting work, they stumbled into God's work!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Are you saying that the Theory of Evolution as developed as a way of discrediting God? Maybe so. Point taken. But in the middle of the discrediting work, they stumbled into God!

Most of the people I know who believe in evolution don't believe the Bible because they believe evolution presents fact while the Bible presents fairy tales. They rarely embrace evolution over Scripture and stumble into God.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Aquila

LOL

My point is that there are unexplainable findings. Science will debunk them, that's a given. I'm not advocating what Cremo or any others have said, I'm simply stating that some have "facts" that if interpreted their way lends to a very ancient mankind. Far more ancient than evolutionists would propose. As a creationist, I walk away not wondering if these human remains and artifacts are older than usual because they were found in older sediment... but wondering if the sediment is really as old as they think.

There are unexplainable findings. But not as many as Cremo and company would have you believe. All of the unexplained just tests out to be "inconclusive" rather than pointing to alternate "facts" or "realities."

Time and time again, the Standard Model proves to be true.

The "some" you mention are really just a couple of guys who joined the Hare Krishnas and took it very literally. The Vedic scriptures with the Ages of Rama and all of that point to the idea that our universe is eternal and was not ever "created."

Sir Fred Hoyle, the famous astronomer who went to his grave denouncing the "Big Bang" theory was an ardent follower of Hinduism as was his star pupil Chandra Wickramasinghe (both won Nobels). A lot of YEC's will quote Sir Fred when trying to argue against the "Big Bang" without ever even realizing just how startling a confirmation the discovery was for the teachings of the Bible.

In order for the radio-metric dates to be off you need have have one of two things:

1) A contaminated sample.

Someone somehow got a mineral crystal mixed up. To avoid this, multiple samples are taken from carefully documented locations and when the findings are published, every mean spirited old crank in the department is going to go over it with a fine toothed comb just so they can be the expert who put you in your place. This is called "the scientific process" and "peer review."

or...

2) If you can raise enough energy to fuse the "stray" neutrons and protons back to their original nucleus.

This would require a process known as "nuclear fusion" and if it happens, well... you won't even have a sample left to be dated anymore; to say the least.