......
Posted on 03/01/2009 5:30:40 AM PST by Salman
The old *If only you really understood the ToE, then you'd believe it* canard.
And yes, it's a matter of believing that it's right.
Everything is. You believe what you're convinced of based on the evidence you see, science included.
What’s that got to do with what he said?
Can an evo ever stay on topic?
A very foolish statement. I also notice you didn't answer my question.
Depends on your relativisic point of reference...maybe this will help you understand if you're not too close-minded:
15 billion or six days? Today, we look at time going backward. We see 15 billion years. Looking forward from when the universe is very small - billions of times smaller - the Torah says six days. In truth, they both may be correct.
What's exciting about the last few years in cosmology is we now have quantified the data to know the relationship of the "view of time" from the beginning, relative to the "view of time" today. It's not science fiction any longer. Any one of a dozen physics text books all bring the same number. The general relationship between time near the beginning and time today is a million million. That's a 1 with 12 zeros after it. So when a view from the beginning looking forward says "I'm sending you a pulse every second," would we see it every second? No. We'd see it every million million seconds. Because that's the stretching effect of the expansion of the universe.
The Torah doesn't say every second, does it? It says Six Days. How would we see those six days? If the Torah says we're sending information for six days, would we receive that information as six days? No. We would receive that information as six million million days. Because the Torah's perspective is from the beginning looking forward.
Six million million days is a very interesting number. What would that be in years? Divide by 365 and it comes out to be 16 billion years. Essentially the estimate of the age of the universe. Not a bad guess for 3000 years ago.
The way these two figures match up is extraordinary. I'm not speaking as a theologian; I'm making a scientific claim. I didn't pull these numbers out of hat. That's why I led up to the explanation very slowly, so you can follow it step-by-step.
Now we can go one step further. Let's look at the development of time, day-by-day, based on the expansion factor. Every time the universe doubles, the perception of time is cut in half. Now when the universe was small, it was doubling very rapidly. But as the universe gets bigger, the doubling time gets exponentially longer. This rate of expansion is quoted in "The Principles of Physical Cosmology," a textbook that is used literally around the world.
(In case you want to know, this exponential rate of expansion has a specific number averaged at 10 to the 12th power. That is in fact the temperature of quark confinement, when matter freezes out of the energy: 10.9 times 10 to the 12th power Kelvin degrees divided by (or the ratio to) the temperature of the universe today, 2.73 degrees. That's the initial ratio which changes exponentially as the universe expands.)
The calculations come out to be as follows:
• The first of the Biblical days lasted 24 hours, viewed from the "beginning of time perspective." But the duration from our perspective was 8 billion years.
• The second day, from the Bible's perspective lasted 24 hours. From our perspective it lasted half of the previous day, 4 billion years.
• The third day also lasted half of the previous day, 2 billion years.
• The fourth day - one billion years.
• The fifth day - one-half billion years.
• The sixth day - one-quarter billion years.
When you add up the Six Days, you get the age of the universe at 15 and 3/4 billion years. The same as modern cosmology. Is it by chance?
But there's more. The Bible goes out on a limb and tells you what happened on each of those days. Now you can take cosmology, paleontology, archaeology, and look at the history of the world, and see whether or not they match up day-by-day. And I'll give you a hint. They match up close enough to send chills up your spine.
Go directly to Dr. Schroeder's book, Genesis and the Big Bang, at Amazon books.
Dr Gerald Schroeder received PhD's in Oceanography and Nuclear Physics from MIT, and was on their staff for seven years. He did extensive work with the Atomic Energy Commission. Dr. Schroeder now lives with his family in Jerusalem, Israel. He is the author of Genesis and the Big Bang and The Science of God, which has been translated into six languages.
Great picture of the Leggus Chomppi, the missing link between one and two legged people.
Here’s a summation: God created evolution. It’s what I believe.
You left out the word “major”, that means there were many more but their ranks is personal opinion.
So is gravity!!
Zing!!!!!
All of those humans in the photos show typical Homo sapiens traits - high forehead, distinctive chins, low brow ridges, etc - that are not present in the skull you show. A grapefruit is not an orange just because there are a large variety of oranges.
A thread on that topic virtually ignored by the frevos even though they’ve been given links to it many times.
The Age of the Universe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1576941/posts
No, but a grapefruit can resemble an orange enough to make identification chancy by looking at just the outside.
What's a "frevo"?
I generally stay off of evo/creo threads because very few are open minded about the topic. I have my set of beliefs based on my experience in the Catholic Church and how I came to understand God in AA.
No one is hijacking this thread. The thread is about Darwin and therefore it's only natural that there would be discussions about evolution. And then, of course, the creationists can't possibly stay away.
......
Someone says that they don’t believe in evolution and you immediately ask what their view on the age of the earth is.
That has nothing to do with the thread. There was nothing in ml’s post that would indicate their belief in the age of the earth. Just because someone says they don’t accept evolution, doesn’t automatically imply that they think the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
Bringing up something that is totally irrelevant to the topic of the thread or the comment the person made (aka going off topic) , certainly gives the appearance of thread hijacking.
If the shoe fits.....
So too the jaw, whereas the skull of eohippus doesn't have the bone structure to produce such a jaw line, the modern horse does.
see now that’s just naughty, dude. you’re gonna get in trouble >)
The article does not state that there "are" seven. The article states that scientists were asked to "pick" seven.
Of the tens of thousands of ancestors you have dating back to the time the Romans ruled Britain, can you show us where more than one hundred of them were buried?
If not, does that mean the rest of them did not exist?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.