• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
This is called applied science

lol!
Making sh!t up on the spot, is not what I would call "applied science"

, where you apply laws of science to physical problems, like how can we use accepted science to explain the time discrepancy of Genesis compared toCosmology. One answer is relativity and time dilation; reference affects. Only solid science can have such applications.

What you do, is not "applying" physics. Instead, what you do is abuse it to rationalize an ancient myth you desperately want to believe in. It's as ad hoc as it gets. And it requires quite a bit of assumption, imagination and selective reading.

Evolution as is, is not easy to apply.

Agriculture, medicine, ...
And genetic algorithms (the modeling of evolutionary processes into a an algorithm / software) have an extremely wide array of applications to optimize all kinds of problems... It can be applied in all kinds of ways... in fact, just about any systemic thing that could be optimized, could make use of GA to do it.

AI programming also involves quite a bit of GAs


In the lab we get human selection due to the experiments

No. "human selection" is what we get on the farms and in breeding facilities.
In the lab, as with the E Coli experiment, what we get is simply a controlled environment.
A confined space where we can manipulate selection pressures.
In such experiments, nobody is doing any "genetic engineering". Nobody is doing hand-picked selection.

Natural selection is at work just like it would be at work in the outside world.
The only difference is the confined, controlled space, giving us control over the selection pressures.

The goal there is simply to eliminate "noise". To simplify the world so that it's easier to focus on one specific aspect of it.

and too much black box stuff. The theory needs an overhaul but the conceptual foundation is good. If you apply a water analysis it has better shot at being applied.
Que?
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Details. What I was getting at, do we agree, that according to your scenario, god was nowhere near Earth during it's first 4.543 billion years and therefore had no hand in forming it, creating life of messing with evolution?
At time=0, the universe is a point, and what would become the earth, is part of that point. Like a modern computer programmer, God could write a program, that will simulate a flower growing from a seed. In this case the seed is the primordial atom and the flower will be the expanding universe all the way to our solar system. The details of the flower will be that of a daisy, which is analogous to the rest of the days of creation; life. Once the programmer pushes the start button; let there be light, the rest is already programmed to unfold, with the programmer watching the simulation as it unfolds. Brooding over the deep is trouble shooting the program to get the bugs out.

In this case, the universe undergoes a relativistic slow down; Special and General Relativity from a dense point all the way to the modern still expanding reference of the universe. The flower is now forming seeds. But when the universe was young, space-time was very contracted and seconds in that reference were equivalent to years in our expanded modern earth space-time reference; earth was the fast aging twin from that reference.

It is a good academic exercise of relativity, which seemed to be known in ancient times.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
At time=0, the universe is a point, and what would become the earth, is part of that point. Like a modern computer programmer, God could write a program, that will simulate a flower growing from a seed. In this case the seed is the primordial atom and the flower will be the expanding universe all the way to our solar system. The details of the flower will be that of a daisy, which is analogous to the rest of the days of creation; life. Once the programmer pushes the start button; let there be light, the rest is already programmed to unfold, with the programmer watching the simulation as it unfolds. Brooding over the deep is trouble shooting the program to get the bugs out.
What you are describing here is Deism. A deterministic world set into motion by a deos who doesn't (and doesn't need to) interfere with that world after "pushing the start button". And it doesn't need the contemplation of relativity. In fact, the deos could have left and never be seen again in the universe.
In this case, the universe undergoes a relativistic slow down; Special and General Relativity from a dense point all the way to the modern still expanding reference of the universe. The flower is now forming seeds. But when the universe was young, space-time was very contracted and seconds in that reference were equivalent to years in our expanded modern earth space-time reference; earth was the fast aging twin from that reference.
Again, no relativity needed. And not conductive to your intended goal of explaining the "days of creation" with relativity. You are farther away from that now than at the beginning, you even degraded your theos to a deos.
It is a good academic exercise of relativity, which seemed to be known in ancient times.
The only thing this has to do with relativity is that the guys who came up with the story must have had a relative high amount of alcohol.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
So why did God create some babies with the genes that cause cancer? Since you insist that God can do anything, that he doesn't end childhood cancers means he allows it. Explain why a God would do that to children and their families.
I always wondered what came first, genes that cause cancer or products that changed genes

Carcinogenic exposure circumstances

1 Tobacco smoking: The most common exposure to the stimulant, prepared from the leaves of the tobacco plant, is through burning it and smoking it from a cigarette or hookah pipe into the mouth and then releasing it. Smoking’s history dates back to as early as 5000–3000BC when the agricultural product began to be cultivated in South America.

2 Sunlamps and sunbeds: A tanning bed, a device that emits ultraviolet radiation for a cosmetic tan, can give humans overexposure to UV radiation, which can cause skin cancer, cataracts, and premature skin ageing.

3 Aluminium production: Increased lung and bladder cancer risks have been reported in workers in aluminium reduction plants. The fumes of chemicals the workers may inhale, and exposure to coal-tar pitch volatiles for long periods during the process, can cause cancer.

4 Arsenic in drinking water: The highly toxic chemical which is used to make certain alloys used in the manufacturing industry, can get into the drinking water supply, particularly in ground water. Arsenic is known to cause skin cancer, and linked to causing liver, lung, kidney, and bladder cancer.

5 Auramine production: Auramine can be used as an antiseptic agent as well as to make dyes. A study found there to be an excess of bladder tumoursamong men engaged in the manufacture of auramine, through inhaling harmful agents, such as formaldehyde and sulphur, during the manufacturing process.

6 Boot and shoe manufacture and repair: Linked to increased risk of nasal cancer and leukaemia, due to exposure to suspected carcinogens such as leather dust, benzene and other solvents, yet the risk of cancer in shoe manufacturing may vary depending on the duration and level of exposure.

7 Chimney sweeping: Cleaning chimneys of soot and dust, historically done by small boys who could climb the chimney but now done mechanically, could cause a very specific form of cancer – termed “chimney sweep” cancer. It could be caused by inhalation and accidental ingestion of coal and burnt wood fumes and residue.

8 Coal gasification: Studies of the cancer levels of workers who had occupational exposure to coal gasification – when coal is reacted with oxygen, steam and carbon dioxide to form a gas – showed there to be an excess of lung cancer.

9 Coal tar distillation: Derived from coal, coal-tar pitch is a thick black liquid that remains after the distillation of coal tar. It is used as a base for coatings and paint, in roofing and paving, and as a binder in asphalt products. Both coal tar and coal-tar pitch contain many chemical compounds, including carcinogens such as benzene. Human exposure to coal tars can be through inhalation, ingestion, and absorption through the skin. The general population can be exposed to coal tars in environmental contaminants.

10 Coke (fuel) production: Workers at coking plants and coal-tar production plants – where coal is refined to be used as a solid fuel – may be exposed to coke oven emissions, and have an excess risk of dying from lung cancer and kidney cancer.

11 Furniture and cabinet making: Furniture makers are shown to have a statistical increase in nasal cancer risk, with excessive exposure to wood dust, according to studies.

12 Haematite mining (underground) with exposure to radon: Mining hematite, an underground source of iron, workers are simultaneously exposed to radon – a radioactive carcinogen, which can cause a large increase in the risk of lung cancer.

13 Secondhand smoke: Otherwise known as passive smoking, a non-smoker’s risk of getting lung cancer can increase by a quarter by breathing in other people’s smoke. It may also increase the risk of cancers of the larynx (voice box) and pharynx (upper throat). It’s estimated that every year, secondhand smoke kills over 12,000 people in the UK from lung cancer, heart disease, stroke and the lung condition chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

14 Iron and steel founding: Studies of iron and steel founding workers in various parts of the world showed them to have a significantly increased risk for lung cancer. Exposures in the iron and steel founding industry are complex and include a wide variety of known genotoxic and carcinogenic substances including metals and formaldehyde.

15 Isopropanol manufacture (strong-acid process): People in the isopropanol manufacturing industry may face an increased risk of developing cancer due to exposure to suspected carcinogens, such as diisopropyl sulphate, isopropyl oils and sulphuric acid. The colourless, flammable chemical compound with a strong odour has a wide variety of industrial, household and pharmaceutical uses. Isopropyl alcohol solution is found in rubbing alcohol, hand sanitiser, and disinfecting pads.

16 Magenta dye manufacturing: The production of magenta dyes – purplish-red in colour and among the first synthetic dyes to be produced in the 1850s – has chemicals linked to bladder cancer. Yet some carcinogenic chemicals were banned from hair dyes in the 1970s.

I think there are another 100

And I don't think it even includes all the additives we eat from processed foods.

But I suppose we can use the Adam syndrome and blame God for what man does.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I always wondered what came first, genes that cause cancer or products that changed genes
No need to wonder about the occurrence of cancers that are caused by genetic mutations. Cancers are naturally a part of life, and have been found in dinosaurs.

But I suppose we can use the Adam syndrome and blame God for what man does.
The Adam syndrome is an ancient tribal myth to try and explain why Creation was not perfect as it should be if an omnipotent all-powerful God would Create life and humanity. The accusation is unfortunately put on the frailty of the first mythical humans blaming them for causing all the death, suffering, and evil in the world.

The problem with all ancient tribal religions is that their ancient worldview is from the ancient cultural view of their time, and fails to explain our existence as it is. A great deal of effort is made to make the square pegs fit in round holes often resulting in rejecting or distorting science in one form or another. There are far too many contradictions in the fallible human view of ancient tribal religions to be real for the reality of what a universal, omnipotent, all-powerful, all-knowing God would be.

IF God exists, our physical existence, life, and humanity are Created as is naturally reflecting the attributes without the contradictions and distortions of ancient tribal worldviews. It is time to give up the tribal past that burdens humanity and seek a more Universal 'Source' Some call Gods. These contradictory distorted worldviews give logical justification to atheism and agnosticism.

I believe in God, but I most definitely do not believe that the ancient anthropomorphic hands-on militant Gods of the past do not exist.
 
Last edited:

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
No need to wonder about the occurrence of cancers that are caused by genetic mutations. Cancers are naturally a part of life, and have been found in dinosaurs.

What type of cancer was found?

The Adam syndrome is an ancient tribal myth to try and explain why Creation was not perfect as it should be if an omnipotent all-powerful God would Create life and humanity. The accusation is unfortunately put on the frailty of the first mythical humans blaming them for causing all the death, suffering, and evil in the world.

I'm not convinced at this time that it is tribal mythology. Mathematically, if I go backwards, I think we end up with a couple that started the human kind. I wasn't there along with everyone else so my position is a mathematical conclusion.

And the results of human error seems to produce aberrations of what is normal. Cause and effect as shown with my list
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I always wondered what came first, genes that cause cancer or products that changed genes

Carcinogenic exposure circumstances

1 Tobacco smoking: The most common exposure to the stimulant, prepared from the leaves of the tobacco plant, is through burning it and smoking it from a cigarette or hookah pipe into the mouth and then releasing it. Smoking’s history dates back to as early as 5000–3000BC when the agricultural product began to be cultivated in South America.

2 Sunlamps and sunbeds: A tanning bed, a device that emits ultraviolet radiation for a cosmetic tan, can give humans overexposure to UV radiation, which can cause skin cancer, cataracts, and premature skin ageing.

3 Aluminium production: Increased lung and bladder cancer risks have been reported in workers in aluminium reduction plants. The fumes of chemicals the workers may inhale, and exposure to coal-tar pitch volatiles for long periods during the process, can cause cancer.

4 Arsenic in drinking water: The highly toxic chemical which is used to make certain alloys used in the manufacturing industry, can get into the drinking water supply, particularly in ground water. Arsenic is known to cause skin cancer, and linked to causing liver, lung, kidney, and bladder cancer.

5 Auramine production: Auramine can be used as an antiseptic agent as well as to make dyes. A study found there to be an excess of bladder tumoursamong men engaged in the manufacture of auramine, through inhaling harmful agents, such as formaldehyde and sulphur, during the manufacturing process.

6 Boot and shoe manufacture and repair: Linked to increased risk of nasal cancer and leukaemia, due to exposure to suspected carcinogens such as leather dust, benzene and other solvents, yet the risk of cancer in shoe manufacturing may vary depending on the duration and level of exposure.

7 Chimney sweeping: Cleaning chimneys of soot and dust, historically done by small boys who could climb the chimney but now done mechanically, could cause a very specific form of cancer – termed “chimney sweep” cancer. It could be caused by inhalation and accidental ingestion of coal and burnt wood fumes and residue.

8 Coal gasification: Studies of the cancer levels of workers who had occupational exposure to coal gasification – when coal is reacted with oxygen, steam and carbon dioxide to form a gas – showed there to be an excess of lung cancer.

9 Coal tar distillation: Derived from coal, coal-tar pitch is a thick black liquid that remains after the distillation of coal tar. It is used as a base for coatings and paint, in roofing and paving, and as a binder in asphalt products. Both coal tar and coal-tar pitch contain many chemical compounds, including carcinogens such as benzene. Human exposure to coal tars can be through inhalation, ingestion, and absorption through the skin. The general population can be exposed to coal tars in environmental contaminants.

10 Coke (fuel) production: Workers at coking plants and coal-tar production plants – where coal is refined to be used as a solid fuel – may be exposed to coke oven emissions, and have an excess risk of dying from lung cancer and kidney cancer.

11 Furniture and cabinet making: Furniture makers are shown to have a statistical increase in nasal cancer risk, with excessive exposure to wood dust, according to studies.

12 Haematite mining (underground) with exposure to radon: Mining hematite, an underground source of iron, workers are simultaneously exposed to radon – a radioactive carcinogen, which can cause a large increase in the risk of lung cancer.

13 Secondhand smoke: Otherwise known as passive smoking, a non-smoker’s risk of getting lung cancer can increase by a quarter by breathing in other people’s smoke. It may also increase the risk of cancers of the larynx (voice box) and pharynx (upper throat). It’s estimated that every year, secondhand smoke kills over 12,000 people in the UK from lung cancer, heart disease, stroke and the lung condition chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

14 Iron and steel founding: Studies of iron and steel founding workers in various parts of the world showed them to have a significantly increased risk for lung cancer. Exposures in the iron and steel founding industry are complex and include a wide variety of known genotoxic and carcinogenic substances including metals and formaldehyde.

15 Isopropanol manufacture (strong-acid process): People in the isopropanol manufacturing industry may face an increased risk of developing cancer due to exposure to suspected carcinogens, such as diisopropyl sulphate, isopropyl oils and sulphuric acid. The colourless, flammable chemical compound with a strong odour has a wide variety of industrial, household and pharmaceutical uses. Isopropyl alcohol solution is found in rubbing alcohol, hand sanitiser, and disinfecting pads.

16 Magenta dye manufacturing: The production of magenta dyes – purplish-red in colour and among the first synthetic dyes to be produced in the 1850s – has chemicals linked to bladder cancer. Yet some carcinogenic chemicals were banned from hair dyes in the 1970s.

I think there are another 100

And I don't think it even includes all the additives we eat from processed foods.

But I suppose we can use the Adam syndrome and blame God for what man does.
Well if only humans exposed to such things got cancer, you would have a point. But all your list shows us is that your version of God created a world that not only includes natural causes for cancer, but also causes that result from humans going about life trying to survive, and gain advantages. Notice not all people die from cancer.

If you are trying to defend the actions of your version of creator God then you just made it worse. Not only did your God create some humans with genes for cancers, but it created a toxic world for humans. Look at your list, nowhere in any religious text warns humans about these. We had to find out the hard way, and via science, to understand how the environment that your version of God created.

Of course this assumes your version of God, and your interpretation of Bible stories, is all true. What's the chance you and other Christians are mistaken? If we follow only the facts it is pretty likely Christians are mistaken.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
What type of cancer was found?
Does it matter? Cancer is prevalent in the natural world. And to certain Christians it is your version of God that caused it.
I'm not convinced at this time that it is tribal mythology. Mathematically, if I go backwards, I think we end up with a couple that started the human kind.
You are backwards alright. What experts back up your "conclusion"? Are you an expert in mathematics? Are you an expert in biology? Why should we take your opinion over the conclusions of actual experts?
I wasn't there along with everyone else so my position is a mathematical conclusion.
And you didn't show your work. Since you claim a mathematical conclusion why not show us your math. I predict you will bow out and run as usual when you get called out on making false claims.
And the results of human error seems to produce aberrations of what is normal. Cause and effect as shown with my list
And not a single world that defends your religious belief that your version of God was the CREATOR of al things. That fault lies with the creator if you claim one exists.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
What type of cancer was found?

Cancerous tumors, that is only one example. Cancers have been observed in the whole history of humanity and beyond. It is not a modern phenomenon. For example, breast cancer was observed by ancient Greeks.
I'm not convinced at this time that it is tribal mythology. Mathematically, if I go backwards, I think we end up with a couple that started the human kind. I wasn't there along with everyone else so my position is a mathematical conclusion.

Your math is unbelievably flawed. Some with an agenda mistakenly refer to the hypothetical first genetic Eve and fail to realize this 'Eve' was part of a population of humans we descend from. Evolution is by populations, not individuals. If you follow the real math our immediate descendants go back hundreds of thousands of years at least, and beyond that over half a million years and beyond.

The Biblical mythology of Genesis and the Pentateuch remains a reality you have to confront and fail. There is nothing you can offer here that remotely corresponds to actual real human and geologic history.
And the results of human error seems to produce aberrations of what is normal. Cause and effect as shown with my list.
Yes, some of the list are aberrations of what is normal, but that is a superficial view of the origins of cancer
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Well if only humans exposed to such things got cancer, you would have a point. But all your list shows us is that your version of God created a world that not only includes natural causes for cancer, but also causes that result from humans going about life trying to survive, and gain advantages. Notice not all people die from cancer.

If you are trying to defend the actions of your version of creator God then you just made it worse. Not only did your God create some humans with genes for cancers, but it created a toxic world for humans. Look at your list, nowhere in any religious text warns humans about these. We had to find out the hard way, and via science, to understand how the environment that your version of God created.

Of course this assumes your version of God, and your interpretation of Bible stories, is all true. What's the chance you and other Christians are mistaken? If we follow only the facts it is pretty likely Christians are mistaken.

I'm not quite comprehending... It sounds like you are saying that you can violate natural laws and have no consequences. Of course no all people die of cancer. Some die because they drink and drive, some die because they didn't eat right and go diabetes, some die of old age.

Muy point was simply we like to blame God for what man does. I don't have to defend God. I'm just trying to find truth.

We are back to the chicken and the egg. Did God create a toxic world or did man recreate the world toxic.

Who is mistaken? Well, that is an opinion that can differ from person to person.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I'm not quite comprehending... It sounds like you are saying that you can violate natural laws and have no consequences. Of course no all people die of cancer. Some die because they drink and drive, some die because they didn't eat right and go diabetes, some die of old age.

Muy point was simply we like to blame God for what man does. I don't have to defend God. I'm just trying to find truth.

You neglect the fact that the Genesis text blames the failing of Adam and Eve for the Fall, end of God's perfect world, and Original Sin,
We are back to the chicken and the egg. Did God create a toxic world or did man recreate the world toxic.

Who is mistaken? Well, that is an opinion that can differ from person to person.
You have to deal with the Biblical Fall and Original Sin as the cause. It is obvious that the unfortunate fallible Adam and Eve were setup to fail in the Garden of Eden.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Cancerous tumors, that is only one example. Cancers have been observed in the whole history of humanity and beyond. It is not a modern phenomenon. For example, breast cancer was observed by ancient Greeks.

I just found it interesting that they found it in dinosaurs. I guess no way to find whether it was genetic or caused by other factors.

Your math is unbelievably flawed. Some with an agenda mistakenly refer to the hypothetical first genetic Eve and fail to realize this 'Eve' was part of a population of humans we descend from. Evolution is by populations, not individuals. If you follow the real math our immediate descendants go back hundreds of thousands of years at least, and beyond that over half a million years and beyond.

The Biblical mythology of Genesis and the Pentateuch remains a reality you have to confront and fail. There is nothing you can offer here that remotely corresponds to actual real human and geologic history.

I know you say it is flawed but we really don't have all the information. If you want to say it is by populations and not one population that expanded throughout the world, that gives rise to racism. IMV

I'm still not convince that Genesis is a Biblical mythology. No one has really given me a conclusive evidence that it is a mythology.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
What type of cancer was found?

Several ones.
Here's one example on a 240 million year old fossil of bone cancer

How Old Is Cancer? At Least as Old as the Start of the Dinosaurs, Fossil Shows | HISTORY

I'm not convinced at this time that it is tribal mythology. Mathematically, if I go backwards, I think we end up with a couple that started the human kind.

Which is a very naive and juvenile calculation almost as if it is designed to give wrong answers. I'm familiar with that fallacious "argument".

I wasn't there along with everyone else so my position is a mathematical conclusion.

Based on ridiculous math that makes no sense whatsoever.
The actual proper and valid science shows that human population NEVER was below several 1000, and that particular period is considered a severe genetic bottleneck that coincides with the Toba volcano eruption some 70.000 years ago. So it is hypothesized that that event and the drop in population size, are causally connected.

And the results of human error seems to produce aberrations of what is normal. Cause and effect as shown with my list
That's just the ad hoc myth off course
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I'm not quite comprehending... It sounds like you are saying that you can violate natural laws and have no consequences.
Where did I say humans can violate natural laws? Only religious folk think this can happen via the magic of their gods.
Of course no all people die of cancer.
Of course, which casts doubt on your list of causes which most all humans are exposed to, but not all get cancer. That tells us there is a natural element in biology that is at natural risk of cancer. Where did that come from to Christians like you? Your version of God. Is that the God you want, a God that causes children to develop cancer, and suffer, and die? Explain the morality and love that your version of God wants us to understand from observing reality. If you have answers, here's your chance to show us atheists that your religious belief is true and valid.
Some die because they drink and drive, some die because they didn't eat right and go diabetes, some die of old age.
Which tell us your version of God plays dice with the universe when it created humans.
Muy point was simply we like to blame God for what man does. I don't have to defend God. I'm just trying to find truth.
Man didn't cause cancer. As you admitted not all die despite being exposed to carcinogenics. And you admit that carcinogenics are part of the world that your version of God created.

Of course you can't defend your belief in God, it makes no sense. But you will keep on believing in an irrational concept, won't you? Do you have any idea why you would decide to keep believing in a God that not only is the cause of cancers, but is also contradictory to what you think it is: loving?

If you have pets, would you deliberately introduce things you know will cause them cancer? If you say no, then why did your God? Why are you a better person than your God?
We are back to the chicken and the egg. Did God create a toxic world or did man recreate the world toxic.
Are you suggesting your version of God didn't create all things that exist? Or saying that your God made the universe but didn't realize it would make things that are harmful to all living organisms?
Who is mistaken? Well, that is an opinion that can differ from person to person.
And do you understand that reasoning and following evidence is the best way to come to a valid conclusion? You don't seem to acknowledge that. It works in science and law, but you seem oblivious.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I'm not quite comprehending... It sounds like you are saying that you can violate natural laws and have no consequences.
Hey, that is our line. You are the ones believing in magic. In our world view, you can't break natural laws. Period.
Muy point was simply we like to blame God for what man does. I don't have to defend God. I'm just trying to find truth.
When **** happens, there are two options: either it had natural causes or it had "supernatural" causes. You believe in supernatural causes, we don't. We are just saying, only if you blame the good stuff on supernatural causes is it possible to blame the bad stuff on supernatural causes. And in your book pretty bad stuff happens caused by the supernatural head honcho. Don't cherry pick, either accept natural causes for good and bad or accept supernatural causes for good and bad, everything else is hypocritical.
We are back to the chicken and the egg. Did God create a toxic world or did man recreate the world toxic.

Who is mistaken? Well, that is an opinion that can differ from person to person.
Mistaken is the one who is a hypocrite.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I just found it interesting that they found it in dinosaurs. I guess no way to find whether it was genetic or caused by other factors.



I know you say it is flawed but we really don't have all the information. If you want to say it is by populations and not one population that expanded throughout the world, that gives rise to racism. IMV

It has been well documented that adaptation to climate as humans migrated around the world is responsible for the different races of humans as well as other characteristics over recent human history
I'm still not convince that Genesis is a Biblical mythology. No one has really given me a conclusive evidence that it is a mythology.

You are not convinced based on belief not the facts of recent history and mythology of the Middle East as well as other ancient cultures. You have, as well as any other believer, have failed to justify any factual basis of the stories of Genesis beyond anything, but mythology.

It is well-documented that the mythology of Genesis evolved from among various Creation mythologies of the Middle East going back to the Sumerians and Babylonians and oral stories before writing. This is basically true of all ancient cultures of the world in their own variations.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
At time=0, the universe is a point, and what would become the earth, is part of that point. Like a modern computer programmer, God could write a program, that will simulate a flower growing from a seed. In this case the seed is the primordial atom and the flower will be the expanding universe all the way to our solar system. The details of the flower will be that of a daisy, which is analogous to the rest of the days of creation; life. Once the programmer pushes the start button; let there be light, the rest is already programmed to unfold, with the programmer watching the simulation as it unfolds. Brooding over the deep is trouble shooting the program to get the bugs out.

In this case, the universe undergoes a relativistic slow down; Special and General Relativity from a dense point all the way to the modern still expanding reference of the universe. The flower is now forming seeds. But when the universe was young, space-time was very contracted and seconds in that reference were equivalent to years in our expanded modern earth space-time reference; earth was the fast aging twin from that reference.

It is a good academic exercise of relativity, which seemed to be known in ancient times.
An omnipotent deity could do that. It could realize that evolution is not a perfect process and that there would be all sorts of flaws in life but if one had a goal of humanity or something like it it is about the most remote probability ever. But why believe that? Why make up such an outrageously unlikely being?

Of course an omnipotent being could have also made Adam and Eve and lied by covering up the evidence. He could have done the same with Noah, he could have used an endless stream of miracles to keep Noah and family alive (which was silly because it would have been far easier and more just to eliminate only the evil humans and leave the rest alone. Or he need not even have killed evil humans. If they were breeding and taking over the world he could have sterilized them. A small snip snip and no more evil people babies. With the Noah's Ark myth he would have had to have used endless miracles to make it happen and then endless miracles for generations after the event to cover up his evil deed. That story makes no sense.


Have you ever looked at your beliefs and wondered why you had those particular beliefs?
 
Last edited:

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Several ones.
Here's one example on a 240 million year old fossil of bone cancer

How Old Is Cancer? At Least as Old as the Start of the Dinosaurs, Fossil Shows | HISTORY
Very informative... thank you

Which is a very naive and juvenile calculation almost as if it is designed to give wrong answers. I'm familiar with that fallacious "argument".

opinion...

Based on ridiculous math that makes no sense whatsoever.
The actual proper and valid science shows that human population NEVER was below several 1000, and that particular period is considered a severe genetic bottleneck that coincides with the Toba volcano eruption some 70.000 years ago. So it is hypothesized that that event and the drop in population size, are causally connected.
opinion...

But you are welcome to have it.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Where did I say humans can violate natural laws? Only religious folk think this can happen via the magic of their gods.

Of course, which casts doubt on your list of causes which most all humans are exposed to, but not all get cancer. That tells us there is a natural element in biology that is at natural risk of cancer. Where did that come from to Christians like you? Your version of God. Is that the God you want, a God that causes children to develop cancer, and suffer, and die? Explain the morality and love that your version of God wants us to understand from observing reality. If you have answers, here's your chance to show us atheists that your religious belief is true and valid.

Which tell us your version of God plays dice with the universe when it created humans.

Man didn't cause cancer. As you admitted not all die despite being exposed to carcinogenics. And you admit that carcinogenics are part of the world that your version of God created.

Of course you can't defend your belief in God, it makes no sense. But you will keep on believing in an irrational concept, won't you? Do you have any idea why you would decide to keep believing in a God that not only is the cause of cancers, but is also contradictory to what you think it is: loving?

If you have pets, would you deliberately introduce things you know will cause them cancer? If you say no, then why did your God? Why are you a better person than your God?

Are you suggesting your version of God didn't create all things that exist? Or saying that your God made the universe but didn't realize it would make things that are harmful to all living organisms?

And do you understand that reasoning and following evidence is the best way to come to a valid conclusion? You don't seem to acknowledge that. It works in science and law, but you seem oblivious.
this made me chuckle... thank you. :)
 
Top