Quote:You should probably take this up more with the people who translated the Bible into English, not the original inspired text (which was in Hebrew).

Actually, sonny, as far as we can tell the original text was written in Greek. There are no hebraic texts which pre-date the Septuagint which only dates from c 275 BC. That's what made the Dead Sea Scrolls so important. They are the earliest "Hebrew" texts available and date from the mid 2d century BC to the Mid first century AD. Of course, some of them are written in Greek and Aramaic.

Kindly go ask you 'experts' to provide you with examples of the original 'hebrew' version. Let's see what kind of answers you get.

Should be good for a laugh.

Quote:Did your "B.S.-meter" go off while you were typing this?

It certainly went off when I read the following...

Quote:If it did not then maybe you need to get it looked at. Obviously genetics is not your strong point. Where did I say anything about races? Talk about strawman arguments.

You tell me to stay on topic and yet you bring in Adolf Hitler (A Darwinst btw)? I am sure you are aware that Darwin believed that Europeans were vastly superior to Blacks and he predicted the Blacks would be exterminated along with the other great apes right? So don't lecture me about racism, at least the Bible realized that all races are still humans and not different species like Darwin believed.

Anywways, back to my original point which you obviously didn't comprehend, so I will keep this very very simple for you. As humans genetic material replicates it does so with errors. It accumulates these errors over time. Outside events can also increase entropy and increase the rate at which these errors occur. Humans would have been created with a pure genome free of error. As more generations accumulate, these errors would also accumulate so our DNA is not a pure today as it would have been in the time of Noah. Pretty simple 7th grade stuff. Any geneticist will tell you that our genome today has more errors and harmful mutations in it than our great grandfather's would have. You should probably avoid genetics from now on.

If you still don't understand this I will use a really simple analogy for you. If you right a computer code for a software program, you can run that program for long periods of time without experiencing any problems. However, when you copy that program errors occur in the replication. So a copy of a copy of a copy of the original code will crash more often and experience far more problems than tthe original program because it was more "pure". Get it? Kind of funny though, since you are a Darwinist you actually believe that you could start off with a floppy of code and copy it enough times and end up with Windows Vista, just a side note haha.

So when someone says that "nobody could build a boat that large out of only wood!", and the fact that the Chinese did built a boat the same size out of wood is irrelevant? I see how you form your arguments now, ignore the evidence that refutes your claims. Nice.

The DNA of all species studied to date have mutations and copy errors. Furthermore, many fossils contain gross morphologies that clearly indicate the presence of genetic mutations. As such, no species is "pure", per your definition. Your argument actually supports evolution, dude. Oh, and whether the Chinese (the most advanced civilization of its day) built large boats is irrelevant to whether or not one was actually built by a nomadic tribesman in the Middle East, nor does it address the fact that there is no evidence for a global flood, much less the fact that no ship today can hold two of every "kind" of animal, much less two of every species. Boy, you are dumb.

Oh boy. Your post has so many problems it would take a day to dissect it all. Others are trying... However, I will pick up on the following points.

(November 3, 2010 at 6:41 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Getting published in a journal that is reviewed by a bunch of like minded reviewers really is not all that impressive. You should try and get published in one where not everyone is pulling for your side sometime.

Ignorance is something to be hidden not flaunted. You obviously have no concept of what peer review means and its implications. Tiberius made a good example in the other thread and I will mimic him here.

Quote:The Earth was created last Thursday by God

Prove me wrong! Its not peer reviewed but don't worry about that eh? What? You remember last Thursday? Nah, that's just God fucking with you man. He created you (and everything else) last Thursday, memories of an earlier life, everything.
Prove me wrong!

(November 3, 2010 at 6:41 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Don't pretned for a second that you have any idea how the dinosaurs went extinct. Nobody on your side of the aisle can even remotely agree on that issue. It's a pretty simple question to answer on my side of the aisle. There was a great bottleneck at the flood. Dinosaurs were very rare after the flood due to a scarcity of their primary food.

Jesus fucking christ. Again displaying your complete ignorance of the scientific process. That is right, we don't know for sure and the scientists disagree and argue and publish papers and call each other names. This is the scientific process.

What the scientific process does is comes up with hypothesis until such a time (if ever) one of them can be proven or at least be reasonably certain of being more or less accurate, then it gets upgraded to being a theory (and I hope you understand the correct meaning of the word theory.

What the scientific process does not do is insert "God" as the answer to things we do not understand. This is the route to stagnation as then you can explain everything and no need for further inquiry. It also does not base scientific theories on things written centuries/millennia (eg: the bible) ago unless they are verifiable. Hypotheses, sure, why not? But not things we accept as fact. For example, while we have no proof for this, you could hypothesize that people did indeed live longer a few thousand years ago because it says so in the bible. It won't be accepted as scientific fact though until it can be corroborated with some evidence.

Let me expound on scientific process vs theistic acceptance further. You seem to like using the internet and your computer to talk on forums. Now, for computers to work one of the requirements is power, specifically electricity. Now, let us go back in time a couple of centuries to when people started experimenting with controlling electricity. What would have happened if everyone was really theistic.

Theist 1: "Where does lightening come from?"
Theist 2: "God"
Theist 1: "Can we control it? Generate it? Could be useful!"
Theist 2: "No, only God has the right and power to do this. To try and control it would be heretical and a sin"
Theist 1: "Oh, bugger, so we will never have Internet porn then?"
Theist 2: "No. Now stop talking and help me push my cart. I'm sure there must be a better design for wheels than a square"

Finally...
And yes, regarding your not providing of a list, well excuse me, but if you are going to claim it is possible that Noah built an ark big enough (to the exact specifications) and claim there are only a certain number of "kinds" that needed to be on the ark, then surely you must know what each of these "kinds" are. Otherwise how can you be so certain about it? I read through several of those apologetics articles on Noah and they are all making some sort of assumptions (different assumptions as well... i thought you all had access to the same sources and the same ultimate truth).

I suspect the real reason why there is no list is because if someone did produce a fixed list then within about 1 second of it being posted biologists would already spot so many holes in the list of "kinds" that it would be very embarrassing for the creationists.

Slightly on-topic, just read something interesting in an article (not published yet) where some Russian scientists have linked (they say proved... we will have to wait and see on that) the mass extinction events with the periodic magnetic polar inversions.

If right, it will give a partial reason... but why would this happen i have no idea, unless the reversal of the poles sends creatures mad. Still, we don't need to worry, the next one is not scheduled for something like another 80-100 million years...

Unless you are a god-botherer in which case you probably believe that the earth will not be around for that long because Gawd will end the world long before then.... for some evil reason that his worshippers think will be their reward. Go figure.

Isn't polar shift linked to climate change??

If correct it would lend MORE credence to the "extinction events" of the fossil records nes pas?

I just love the fact that we don't really know for sure

(November 3, 2010 at 6:41 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Actually we have eye wittness acounts that the flood did occur.

There are "eyewitness accounts" that the flood occurred?



Well, since only 8 people survived this "flood", then I guess you must have some type of original written account from one of these survivors.

Right?

Quote:That alone is infinitely more evidence than you have since you have no direct obsrvation of your claims.

There must "direct observation" that no flood took place? And how exactly do you come up with that? Do you expect us to provide ancient writings where the authors wrote something like, "No flood today."? But we don't even need this! If there was a global flood of the magnitude you believe within the last 10,000 years, there would be archaeological and geological evidence. There is none.

Quote:To go along with the eye wittness account we actually have mountains of evidence that supports a global flood event.

And this "evidence" is....?

(November 4, 2010 at 9:49 am)Thor Wrote:

Quote:To go along with the eye wittness account we actually have mountains of evidence that supports a global flood event.

And this "evidence" is....?

ITS IN THE DAMN BIBLE! NOW STOP QUESTIONING THINGS AND REPENT!!!

The evidence consists of a mountain of coprolite.

(November 4, 2010 at 6:47 am)Loki_999 Wrote: Slightly on-topic, just read something interesting in an article (not published yet) where some Russian scientists have linked (they say proved... we will have to wait and see on that) the mass extinction events with the periodic magnetic polar inversions.

If right, it will give a partial reason... but why would this happen i have no idea, unless the reversal of the poles sends creatures mad. Still, we don't need to worry, the next one is not scheduled for something like another 80-100 million years...

Unless you are a god-botherer in which case you probably believe that the earth will not be around for that long because Gawd will end the world long before then.... for some evil reason that his worshippers think will be their reward. Go figure.

I've seen quite a few references to the coincidence of magnetic field inversions and Mass Extinction Events in the literature. I'm not sure in this case but many studies tend to link these reversals with periods of increased volcanic activty (related to the controversial issue of mantle plumes), or more specifically the occurence of Large Igneous Provinces such as the Siberian & Deccan Traps.

Very interesting area of the geosciences right now.

Sam

(November 3, 2010 at 9:20 pm)orogenicman Wrote: I might add that if you knew anything about publishing in such journals, then you would know how difficult it is to acheive publication regardless of your background. Even the most respected paleontologists have to wade through the backlog, and convince the peer reviewers of the validity of their arguments.

If it is this difficult then do you think the editors would even bother to consider articles which disagree with their opinions? If someone presented evidence against evolution they would be more likely to reject it without even checking its validity.

Quote:Secondly, your argument that the biblical "kinds" of animals included on Noah's ark refer to the Linean "family" classification is simply ludicrous since it assumes that tribal peoples of the Middle East some 4,000 years ago had any concept of such a classification,

God guided the choice of animals and he certainly knew how to classify them because he was the one who created them in the first place.

(November 4, 2010 at 9:49 am)Thor Wrote: If there was a global flood of the magnitude you believe within the last 10,000 years, there would be archaeological and geological evidence. There is none.

John 12:28,29 says,

Quote:Then a voice came from heaven: "I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again." The crowd that stood there and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, "An angel has spoken to him."

When God spoke with an audible voice not everyone understood it but interpreted it according to their beliefs. Some thought that it was just thunder, a natural phenomenon, and not supernatural at all. God has revealed himself through his creation but those who don't believe in him interpret the evidence to fit their preconceived ideas. The fossils are evidence of a global flood but those who refuse to believe in the flood interpret them as evidence of evolution.