jgnat, i understand what your saying, heres the problem no matter what is said ppl will still believe genisis is giving two differnt accounts if thats there view, i dont think theres anything i can say to convince athiest god exist, i was looking over this part of the book on the missing link,(which i wanted to disuss yesterday i got called in to work early) and im no expert of bones and fossels , and i dont think anything even from someone who is way more knowledgeable than me would convence a person otherwise, so i would like to discuss this in a way that will be productive, i know theres a book that discuss this but i cant get a pdf its called the greatest hoax on earth? i think it would be better if i could see that book and see what they say sense im a fossel rookie
greatest show on earth
by unstopableravens 273 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
cantleave
Unstop - rather than relying on Dr Sarfati (who by the way is a Chemist and not a Biologist so knows as much about evolutionary biology as I did when I was a witness) to give you rebuttals to Dawkins, why don't you create your own?
-
cantleave
Ha Ha - Just found a link to Safarti's book, guess what it is categorised as? Science Fiction!!!!
-
jgnat
I'm not sure you got the whole point, unstopableravens. It is obvious that you have an affinity for truth that does not change. You are relying on the bible because it does say it has the truth, but it also has inconsistencies that need to be reconciled. It is a little unfair to demand from science "absolute truth" when what you are relying on is imperfect, too.
What I like most about science is its propensity to state the obvious, what is right before our eyes. If we dig up a trilobite, we're pretty sure it existed, even if we have none today.
Lately I've been reading up about how rock is formed. First we have mud, then we have shale. We have sandy beaches, then we have sandstone. We have great beds of shells, then we have limestone. There is the muck of decomposing vegetable matter, then we have coal. The transformation includes such forces as pressure (the weight of layers above), and mineral-laden water filtering through that creates a cement.
Here in the mountains, these layers are laid out in spectacular relief. Not too far from here are layers of shale and coal laid so evenly it looks like a seven-layer torte.
These layers tell a story to the geologist, each one representing a period of time. They can be read like a book. Some creatures can be found in the depths that are not found later, and so on. From these layers we build up a history of our world. Observable. Indisputable.
-
James Brown
evolution is fact not theory
I believe the above statement is true.
There is a lot of leeway there.
We humans are in the dark.
The Bible could be right about Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood, Jesus and a young earth or
it could be wrong and still there is evidence for evolution.
Evidence for evolution which is change, doesn't disprove God.
It doesn't mean that God didn't create Adam and Eve and all of the animals
as they are, it means that life adapts and changes to its environment and circumstances.
When the atheist and evolutionist say that we all came from a common ancestor.
That all life came from a common ancestor. All animals, birds, bacteria arose out of the primeval sea
from a common ancestor due to abiogenesis, that life arose from inorganic matter,
That is not fact, that is speculation.
That is just as speculative or more than to say we were created by God.
A certain number of scientist will always think that way. It is the nature of the business of science,
looking for answers and evidence that can be put under a microscope.
Dawkins overall agenda is too prove there is no God.
That is fine. That can even be of a scientific nature.
But that reality must be kept in mind when considering Dawkins writings.
That is his bias, his spin.
-
unstopableravens
james, i believe the orgin is god, thats the common thing, however i do understand some claim to believe in god and evolution, but the bible does not give the same account as evolutionist, jesus himself talked about mans creation and god creating them male and female. not god just putting the means of mans life but creating adam and eve , those who believe in evoultion and god are forced to not believe in the whole adam rib account, or just take it as not literal.
-
cofty
When the atheist and evolutionist say that we all came from a common ancestor.
That all life came from a common ancestor. All animals, birds, bacteria arose out of the primeval sea
from a common ancestor due to abiogenesis, that life arose from inorganic matter,
That is not fact, that is speculation. - James BrownJames you are mixing up different scientific disciplines.
we all came from a common ancestor. - That all life came from a common ancestor. - This is a fact as certain as absolutely anything you know to be true.
All animals, birds, bacteria arose out of the primeval sea from a common ancestor due to abiogenesis, that life arose from inorganic matter, - This is still a work in progress. There are some very promising hypotheses about the details of abiogenesis. If anybody is thinking about "organic soup" they are a long way behind current scientific knowledge. Cantleave and I are going to be putting a thread together in the near future to discuss the latest evidence.
Even if you were right that life required a life-giver you would still be 100% wrong to deny common ancestry of all living things through evolution over millions of years.
How much evolution have you read - by that I mean books by evolutionary biologists?
If you have doubts about common ancestry please have a read at the Common Ancestry thread that a few of us put together for this reason.
-
James Brown
James you are mixing up different scientific disciplines.
we all came from a common ancestor. - That all life came from a common ancestor. - This is a fact as certain as absolutely anything you know to be true.
All animals, birds, bacteria arose out of the primeval sea from a common ancestor due to abiogenesis, that life arose from inorganic matter, - This is still a work in progress. There are some very promising hypotheses about the details of abiogenesis. If anybody is thinking about "organic soup" they are a long way behind current scientific knowledge. Cantleave and I are going to be putting a thread together in the near future to discuss the latest evidence.
Even if you were right that life required a life-giver you would still be 100% wrong to deny common ancestry of all living things through evolution over millions of years.
How much evolution have you read - by that I mean books by evolutionary biologists?
If you have doubts about common ancestry please have a read at the Common Ancestry thread that a few of us put together for this reason.
Cofty you cant know these things.
No one knows those things.
People think they know, just like you thought you knew when you were a witness, then
you thought you knew when you were a Christian.
You are just a person who has to be right and portray the image of knowing whats
going on and being in control.
I have been around the block enough times to know you dont know.
Thats not to say, you might be right or you might not be right but you dont know.
You dont know any more than Dawkins or Hawking.
Don't take my comments the wrong way. I do enjoy your opinions
But in matters of mans origins at this point in mans history no one knows.
Even Dawkins accepts the posibility that we are in a computer matrix.
So he doesn't know eihter. He just has an agenda.
A reason to get up in the morning.
To prove there is no God.
And he deffinitely wont let the facts get in his way.
-
cofty
Yes as far as the common ancestry of all living things and their evolution over millions of years we absolutely KNOW this is a fact.
You think otherwise because you are committed a priori to a book you believe has a supernatural origin - that trumps everything!
Please tell me which books on evolution written by an evolutionary biologist you have read.
-
James Brown
Cofty I believe in evolution.
The problem I have is making the same mistake I made when I was a witness and
that is saying I know when I dont know.
I do appreciate your input and comments.
As far as all the books I have sitting here and have read
"Biology concepts and investigations" by Hoefnagels and "Chemistry" by Chang.
I have read most of Dawkins I have not read his book he just wrote for children.
I have read Darwins origins of species.
As I see it Cofty your agenda is to prove there is no God.
And my agenda is to tell you and all those like you that you can't know that.
I think we both probably have too much time on our hands,
or its easier to sit here and dicker than to do something productive.
I'm not the expert that you are.
But I do know that you can not know the unknowable.
You can have an idea, a hunch, a conjecture and what everybody but evolutionary
scientist call a theory.
An if you would just present it as your idea that you are pursuing, I would not say anything.
Its when your idea, your posibility becomes fact that you start yanking my chain.
I doubt I will ever be able to get my mind around how you and others can know
that we all came from a common ancestor millions of years ago.
Its great science fiction. I like talking about it. Its even a possibility.
It's also Bullshxt saying you know.
I need to be a little more anchored in my reality.
Knowing we came from a common ancestor millions of years ago is like
knowing your team is going to win its next highly competitive match.
It's like knowing who the next president of the USA is going to be.
It's like knowing who blew up the world trade towers on 911.
Nobody knows.
