evolution or creation? lets talk...

by Sam87 537 Replies latest jw friends

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    I really have to say: TopHat and dido have shown themselves to be the best female clowns I've ever seen on this board. They're about the equivalents of our old friend scholar pretendus.

    Greendawn, Neanderthals seem to have died out around 25,000 years ago, having been replaced for as yet unknown reasons by modern humans. Neanderthals, according to the best DNA evidence available, are not the same species as modern humans. How can that be explained in creationist terms?

    As for the long held view that Neanderthals were stupid brutes, that's unfortunate, but that's the way science works -- it's self-correcting over the long haul. On the other hand, science has contributed greatly to correcting wrong views held by Christians for centuries, such as the notion that the earth is the center of the universe. I have no doubt that, in the long run, whatever Christianity is in a few hundred years, it will largely accept evolution just as surely as most Christians today accept that the earth goes round the sun.

    As for why civilization took so long to develop, no one can say with certainty. However, nature has delivered some severe blows to life with unfortunate regularity, and I suspect that that's one of the main reasons for the delay.

    For example, huge volcanic regions like Yellowstone, Long Valley and Toba have erupted from time to time, causing massive climate disruptions. The Toba eruption in Indonesia some 74,000 years ago was the biggest that geologists have been able to find in the last few million years. It apparently caused about six years of extreme cold, even in the tropics, which in turn caused much plant life to die or not to produce the normal amount of vegetation to feed humans and animals. Genetic evidence indicates that most modern humans died out at that time, since there is a "genetic bottleneck" evident in our genes, which indicates that only a small population in Africa survived the extreme cold. That such disruptions can occur is shown by the climate disruptions caused by modern volcanic eruptions such Pinatubo and Krakatoa. The most severe modern disruption occurred in 1815-1816, when the eruption of Mount Tambora in Indonesia killed close to 100,000 people outright, and led to "the year without a summer", during which thousands of Europeans starved because summer crops failed. There was snow all summer in New England and much of Europe. The Toba eruption was about 100 times greater.

    Yellowstone erupted about 600,000 years ago, certainly leading to similar climate disruptions. What effect that had on human populations is unknown, but probably severe, judging by what is known today. The recurring ice ages also cause a great deal of disruption, where roughly every 100,000 years the pattern of long, slow decline to the severest of cold conditions followed by 10-20 thousand years of relatively warm weather recurs. During these cycles, climate can shift radically. Ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica show that, about 10,000 years ago, climate entered another warm period, which is, for unknown reasons, the stablest in terms of climate seen in the entire record of ice cores. Such stability, unknown until then, likely provided the conditions that allowed humans to form stable farming societies for the first time.

    So the fact that civilization took a long time to develop is not nearly as mysterious as you want to believe. But the sciences that look back to these times are still in their infancy, and of course there are still many unanswered questions. These cannot be answered very well by creationists, either, so creationism in any form is of no help in giving real answers. Young-earth creationists reject almost all of modern science. Old-earth creationists simply have to throw up their hands and say, "God did it", until science comes up with something they can sink their teeth into.

    AlanF

  • dido
    dido

    Satanus- i`m having fun watching you lot try and `board bash` us, haha.

    fts-can`t you think of anything original than quoting other posts? Lack of imagination! We have retaliated with the bashing, to the entertainment of many! Let`s face it, the thread would have died a death a long time ago without me and my mate TopHat!

    stevenyc- ignore

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    freetosee, your cartoon reminds me of an old Abbott and Costello routine. It goes something like this:

    Costello: "I can prove you're not here."

    Abbott: "No you can't!"

    Costello: "Sure I can. Are you in Chicago?"

    Abbott: "No."

    Costello: "Are you in Los Angeles?"

    Abbott: "No."

    Costello: "Then you're someplace else, right?"

    Abbott: "Of course!"

    Costello: "Well if you're someplace else, you're not here!"

    AlanF

  • stevenyc
    stevenyc

    Dido: stevenyc - ignore

    Translates as:

    stevenyc, oh bugger, I can't answer that question. Maybe I need to do some research? Na, that would be BORING.


    steve

  • Dansk
    Dansk

    OK, I'll try and take this from a different angle. Are we to assume that the Creationists here accept the Bible as the word of God?

    Ian

  • dido
    dido

    BigTex- one thing that is established is that life does grow and their is rebirth in plants and humans and animals life cycle, no proof that it evolves. Yes we choose what we want to believe as we can`t prove either evo or cre, but some people have a problem with other people`s choice, and like to be sooo dogmatic that they try and FORCE you to believe their choice, and if you don`t, they resort to mudslinging and name calling. Bit like kid`s in the playground if you don`t want to play their games.

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    S

    I'm god, so, i'm not exactly atheist

    No you're not. I just dusted you for prints!

  • freetosee
    freetosee
    I love it when controversy reigns and threads grow so long: evolution, trinity, 607BC, they never fail to fire up a long debate. I am a creationist and I believe the theory of evolution is a collection of airy fairy tales for little children rather than a serious scientific preposition but I haven't got the time right now to engage in debates but later I will. I only say Neanderthal long promoted as a dull witted apeman has finally been accepted as fully human even by the evolutionists, that means fully human intelligent beings were on earth for 300 000 years yet only formed a real civilisation 7000 years ago. Who can believe that?

    Greendawn (or Dido),

    as you mentioned the Neanderthal I take it you accept his existence as a fact. Don’t know if you take the bible literal or not, but how do you explain his creation by god side-by-side with man’s creation. Where were they when Adam and Eve were living in Eden? How do they fit into the Genesis account?

    fts

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

  • stevenyc
    stevenyc

    Here is the full creation account in Genesis. It posses a few questions, which I have not been able to answer. I wonder if any creationist can answer them?

    1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was [ a ] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

    The Earth first existed before the sun and moon were created, it was one great ocean with no atmosphere.

    3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

    Day time was created, before the sun was created

    6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

    God then creates the sky, which is not the atmosphere. The sky is is the bit BETWEEN the ocean covered Earth and the clouds ABOVE it.

    9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.

    God then creates land.

    11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

    God then produced plants, ONLY on LAND.

    14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

    God then creates the stars, IN THE EXPANCE. That is, the bit BETWEEN the oceans, and the clouds.

    20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

    God then creates the birds, and the fish.

    24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

    Then God creates the other animals.

    26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [ b ] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

    27 So God created man in his own image,
    in the image of God he created him;
    male and female he created them.

    The God creates man and woman.

    Can anyone not see a problem with this account?

    steve

  • dido
    dido

    Dansk- Ian, ok, this is how i see it. I accept the bible because there is no better explanation. There are many parts of the bible, and `god` that i don`t like, but so far, nothing has convinced me with a better explanation. I can`t accept that the brain just `happened`, (mind you with some of the people on here it`s a good argument!) How can a man and a woman just `happen`, life is created by them both. There is too much artwork there, design etc. I don`t know if there can be a creator aside from the `god` of the bible, i wish there was, as i would rather believe in a seperate entity, but so far we have no other basis for believing that there is.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit