• 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!

Evolution, what evidence is there and what does creationism have?

themadhair

Well-Known Member
Every living species on the planet, from the bacteria to the great whale, from unicorns to the woogwooga sesquatch has DNA.

DNA is made up of four letters. Just. Four. Letters.

The difference between me and the banana over there is in the way those four letters are arranged within mine and the banana's DNA.

Every new generation of every species produces new and novel arrangements of those letters, with some of those new patterns becoming new genes.

When I think of DNA in this way, and how it changes from generation to generation, I realise that evolution isn't only probable, its ******* inevitable.
 

bluZero

Active Member
were Adam and Eve bacteria?

wa:do

Only after they were booted out of paradise.:bonk:

It all began 13021 years ago, when God cursed the earth and, A&E inherited death, and their once immortal bodies became mortal, then they became everything that is identified with the earth they lived on. Including the curse that held all manner of disease, and abnormality.
 

bluZero

Active Member
Every living species on the planet, from the bacteria to the great whale, from unicorns to the woogwooga sesquatch has DNA.

DNA is made up of four letters. Just. Four. Letters.

The difference between me and the banana over there is in the way those four letters are arranged within mine and the banana's DNA.

Every new generation of every species produces new and novel arrangements of those letters, with some of those new patterns becoming new genes.

When I think of DNA in this way, and how it changes from generation to generation, I realise that evolution isn't only probable, its ******* inevitable.

Well, you have to realize that all of the changes in the atmosphere and the pesticides you eat on you foods does a lot of things that the rich hide from you. You are not so naive as to believe everything you read are you?
 

bluZero

Active Member
blu: We're talking about Biology. Therefore we use the Biology definition. Makes sense, don't you think?

As long as you put it that way, so be it. It is the term within a term. Kk, so we now know that fish change into something they were not but only partially. because they are still fish Hence, a new species based on the dictionary of biolo:beach:gy, what next?
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
It all began 13021 years ago, when God cursed the earth and, A&E inherited death, and their once immortal bodies became mortal, then they became everything that is identified with the earth they lived on. Including the curse that held all manner of disease, and abnormality.
So the earth is older than 13,012 years ago... just not humanity?
Or is this more god lying stuff?

wa:do
 

themadhair

Well-Known Member
It all began 13021 years ago

Lets try some empiricism shall we?
The Himalayan mountains contain something called sedimentary layers. They look something like this:
foldedmountain.jpg

Do you see those layers blu? We can analyse those layers and their chemical composition. We can determine how those layers were formed. In fact, we can see the same the process creating similar layers today in the world:
250e.jpg

The above is a picture of the sea bed. The sediments that are washed into the sea via the rivers get laid down into layers on the sea bed. This is the same process that created the sedimentary layers we find in the Himalayan mountains.

So we know how the layers of the Himalayan sediment layers were formed, i.e. via undersea sedimentation. So how long would it take for the Himalayan mountains to have risen. We can measure how fast they are currently rising (about 5mm a year) and we know how high they are:
himalayas_map.jpg


So if the Himalayan sedimentary layers started under the sea and rise about 5mm a year to their current height of around 5km above sea level….how old are they?
 

bluZero

Active Member
So the earth is older than 13,012 years ago... just not humanity?
Or is this more god lying stuff?

wa:do

yes, buy 9 years, the earth is 13021 years old, Give or take a few days from Adam& Eve. It took God 6 days to make the world, then he put man in it. It is dated by including the age of the first man. The math as I say may be + or - a few days. But it was made in 11013 B. C. But that is the biblical account.
Did you know that the ark door was shut on May 21, 4990 B.C., about 6000 years ago. And 7000 + 23 years will be May 21, 2011, the time of the date of the rapture, and 5 months before the end of the world. How we derived that date is more time consuming than we have here.

But, SE LA VE! IT IS NOT MY SAYING, IT IS BIBLICAL ACCOUNT. 90% OF THE CHRISTIAN WORD REFUSE TO ACCEPT THAT TRUTH BEAUSE THEY ARE MORE INTERESTED IN MAKING MONEY, AND EATING AND DRINKING AND GIVING IN MARRIAGE.
 

themadhair

Well-Known Member
But, SE LA VE! IT IS NOT MY SAYING, IT IS BIBLICAL ACCOUNT.
If you are going to use this ‘biblical account’ to deny what science has discovered about the world then at least have the guts not to cop by proclaiming “it is not my saying, it is biblical account”. Have some responsibility over what you believe and proclaim.
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Or because they realize that God is not in the habit of lying.
God wouldn't try to trick humanity by planting false evidence such as a fossil record or nuclear decay, just to give himself an excuse to send people to hell.
Like Jesus taught in parables... so to did god when he gave people these morality tales.

wa:do
 

bluZero

Active Member
If you are going to use this ‘biblical account’ to deny what science has discovered about the world then at least have the guts not to cop by proclaiming “it is not my saying, it is biblical account”. Have some responsibility over what you believe and proclaim.

You talk like you have paper brain. I cannot take the credit from where credit is due, Is that what biologist do, steal from each other.:troll:
 

bluZero

Active Member
Or because they realize that God is not in the habit of lying.
God wouldn't try to trick humanity by planting false evidence such as a fossil record or nuclear decay, just to give himself an excuse to send people to hell.
Like Jesus taught in parables... so to did god when he gave people these morality tales.

wa:do

You never had learned the truth of the love of bible, or have never yet come close, according to you attitude toward God. God does test man to see if he is worthy of going into the new heaven and earth that he has prepared for those who love and obey his commandments. Certainly there will never be any biologist there because it will be pure.
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
You never had learned the truth of the love of bible, or have never yet come close, according to you attitude toward God. God does test man to see if he is worthy of going into the new heaven and earth that he has prepared for those who love and obey his commandments. Certainly there will never be any biologist there because it will be pure.
You paint with a broad brush... and the paint stinks of self-rightiousness.
Loving and obeying god isn't the same as blindly following what a preacher tells you is the one truth.

My attitude toward god is that he isn't a liar... he isn't cruel and he wouldn't put evidence in front of me to fool me. I trust God and I don't limit him to the confines of a fairy tale, however good that fairy tale may be.
By saying god couldn't have made the Earth billions of years ago, you are the one limiting god to your narrow box. I let God speak for God and that is in the evidence in the world around us, not the pages of a man written book.

wa:do
 

bluZero

Active Member
You paint with a broad brush... and the paint stinks of self-rightiousness.
Loving and obeying god isn't the same as blindly following what a preacher tells you is the one truth.

My attitude toward god is that he isn't a liar... he isn't cruel and he wouldn't put evidence in front of me to fool me. I trust God and I don't limit him to the confines of a fairy tale, however good that fairy tale may be.
By saying god couldn't have made the Earth billions of years ago, There is no source of information in the bible to support anything other than what is written in God's timeline, and God's time line tells us the earth was made in 11013 B. C. If God wanted us to have any notions other than that, he would have told us so. .you are the one limiting god to your narrow box. I let God speak for God and that is in the evidence in the world around us, not the pages of a man written book. God is limited to His word.

wa:do
Sounds great, God be with you. But I think that the book is the best defense against all unrighteousness when combating false doctrine. Because that is what most preachers today hide behind in their defense of false doctrine. But trusting in God and having God teach me how to use his word, They do not stand a chance no matter how clever that become.

Even so, the Lord says that if they take of the body and blood unworthily they will reap damnation unto themselves. I suppose that will show up in 24 months and 9 days from now when they find themselves being left behind to face the judgment without any hope of salvation, ever.:preach:
 
Last edited:

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Even so, the Lord says that if they take of the body and blood unworthily they will reap damnation unto themselves. I suppose that will show up in 24 months and 9 days from now when they find themselves being left behind to face the judgment without any hope of salvation, ever.:preach:

Off topic, start a Harold Camping thread to push the "End is Nigh" BS.
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
As long as you put it that way, so be it. It is the term within a term. Kk, so we now know that fish change into something they were not but only partially. because they are still fish Hence, a new species based on the dictionary of biolo:beach:gy, what next?

O.K., great. You now understand the core of ToE, and you agree with it. Congratulations. You only disagreed with it because you didn't know what it actually was. More tomorrow.
 
Top