Posted on 09/02/2009 8:23:21 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Curious, that a purported Christian such as yourself, would be so eager to contradict Genesis.
Wouldn’t such a contradiction undermine even the allegorical interpretation that you seem to espouse?
Why, I do believe it would.
Not at all. Creation “science” is merely the acceptance of Genesis as the end state, followed by the construction of silly rationalizations in support thereof. I could just as easily have asked for the falsifiability conditions for creation “science”, but the adherents to that snake oil discipline here argue that falsifiability is not necessary in the pursuit of science/knowledge.
Besides, Genesis, being allegory, is contradicted all the time—by evolution, for example.
My Christian faith is strengthened by knowing that I am pleasing God by using the brain he gave me.
If dinosaurs lived a few thousand years ago there would be dinosaur bone mixed with the lion bear and tiger bone, not fossils of dinosaurs that can be demineralized such that you can discern the underlying structure and recover the fragment of the structural proteins.
You give yourself a tad too much credit, Bucky.
Nah, I’m pretty much spot on.
Dino-bump.
Thanks for the post.
Dinosaur bones lie just under the surface of the Earth in many places. They actually stick out of the ground in SOuth Dakota. Where is the millions of years of organic matter covering them?
“Where is the millions of years of organic matter covering them?”
Just throwin’ this one out there, you know, thinkin’ out loud—erosion, perhaps?
I’d like to see some T-Rex and Allosaurs turned lose on DC. I mean they gave us back wolves right? The least we can do is return the favor, make DC a Dino predator preserve.
Dinosaur fossils are just under the surface of the earth where those old strata are exposed. And they are fossils not bones. And the bones of large mammals are not found in and among them in similar levels of fossilization.
No, actually, it sums up the “creationist” position.
I am constantly amazed by a Lord that created a Universe designed to discover itself. Dizzyingly beautiful design. I am awed and thankful that I am lucky enough to experience it and see the glory. Thankful.
The deeper question is “What happened to the saddle”?
hmmm. I always thought that the great flood covered them with feet and feet of mud. Apparently that theory doesn't hold. Thank you for enlightening me to the fact that the fossils must be millions of years old so that natural erosion has uncovered them. Couldn't have happened in a few thousand years. Gratefully, coldwater.
More Brian Thomas BS. These days I mostly just pick out a couple of examples of how he practices to deceive. For example:
- He writes, “Either the vast evolutionary ages assigned to these finds are dramatically erroneous, or ‘we really don’t understand decay’ rates of the soft tissues and proteins.” But if you follow his reference, there’s no indication the person he’s quoting is talking about decay rates. The sentence in full is “Schweitzer’s work is ‘showing us we really don’t understand decay,’ Holtz says.” But Brian needs him to mean decay rates, so Brian will put those words in his mouth.
- He writes, “soft, squishy tissues have been discovered inside fossilized dinosaur bones.” This is the first time I’ve heard them described as “squishy” (”soft and wet...softly gurgling or splashing”). I really don’t think they’re wet enough to do any splashing.
- He writes “Paleontologists who have analyzed the tissues...insist that something is fundamentally wrong with laboratory data on biochemical decay rates” and adds a footnote. Yet his reference is to a paper by a professor of marine chemistry, not a paleontologist, and the abstract available at the reference doesn’t show any “insisting that something is fundamentally wrong.”
Face it, Brian Thomas BS is a propagandist and a deceiver. It’s a shame that you promote his work.
Nebraska man was a fraud which is usually passed over as just some minor aberration of H.F. Osborn's mind. But there's much more to it. If you read these quotes, it becomes clear that Nebraska man was a character-assassination scam concoted to destroy William Jennings Bryan's reputation. Read this too: A Fresh Look at Nebraska Man:
"While the evolutionary community would like to play down this mistake as a simple case of over-enthusiasm, there are aspects of it that look like a deliberate plan of deception on the part of Osborn and the evolutionary establishment."The deeper one digs into evolution science history, the more one comes to realize that one is digging into vast strata of putrid rot and fossilized feces. Nebraska man is particularly disturbing because Osborn, aside from being a very famous evolution scientist, was curator and president of the American Museum of Natural History.
Yes, that's correct. The theory of evolution says that man exists because of a naturalistic process. No supernatural acts of creation are necessary. God, if He exists at all, is not directly involved in the creation of man. If someone fully believes this -- as opposed to 'compartmentalizing' it in a far-off portion of their brain where it does less damage, as some do -- then it has two implications: 1) we must renouce theism and accept either deism, atheism or monism. And 2) man has no soul.
Thanks to the internet, these lies can easily be exposed.
Indeed, I am greatly in debt to the internet which provided me the means to read and enjoy dozens and dozens of hard-to-find classic evolution books, which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolutionism is worthless as a science, but makes for entertaining reading. You can enjoy them too:
The Rubber Science of Evolution
Haeckelology
Eugenics books
The following quote from David Stove's Darwinian Fairytales sums up the history of Darwinian literature:
"[An] injurious attribute which persists in our species -- and a biological error which I greatly regret having been guilty of myself -- is, the reading of hundreds of books about evolution, which abound with idiotic statements such as the ones I have just quoted from Alexander and Darwin... If it is human life that you would most like to know about and to understand, then a very good library can be begun by leaving out Darwinism, from 1859 to the present hour."
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.