Two pics from Oilantaytambo that 100% defy evolution

a reply to: randyvs

read up on the Great Schism of 1054 and how the Papal Church changed ancient Christian Creeds and assigned the Pope power which he was never supposed to have, and how since then the Roman Catholic Church has just gone hog wild adding heresy upon heresy.

Catholic has a double meaning, it means fullness of faith and universal, if you research the Orthodox Church you will see they truly have kept the full Universal faith down through the ages

a reply to: godlover25

Alright I'll read up on that. I knew there must be some
misunderstanding between us. One question tho,
am I wrong?

And link please?

a reply to: randyvs

Here's a great place to begin my friend: orthodoxinfo.com...

and you are 100% right to believe Jesus is the Son of God and that The LORD God is the Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things and that Genesis is a reliable testimony of Gods creation.

But remember:

Science is not theology, and Theology is not science.

You wouldn't take a college course on Biology and show up with your Bible and start looking in the Scriptures for answers about how DNA affects mutation in organisms,

and you wouldn't take a Theology course and bring your biology textbook and start looking in the section on how mammals digestive systems function when the Professor starts asking about the Body and Blood of Christ,

it's absurd to try and mesh the two together when they are completely different.

Although, it is my personal belief and the belief of many a Christian scientists, that studying theology can give a much deeper appreciation of the natural sciences, and that studying the natural sciences can give a tremendous sense of wonder, awe and respect for the Divine.

God bless

Here is a new one randy
Genes Of ‘Sea Aliens’ Stir Up Theory Of Evolution And Offer New Insight Into Origin Of Life On Earth

According to a new study published Wednesday in the journal Nature, researchers from the University of Florida in Gainesville found that the little-understood translucent comb jelly, whose scientific name is ctenophores, has a nervous system that's distinct from any other living creature. This suggests that comb jellies evolved independently from the rest of the animal kingdom.

"It's a paradox," Leonid Moroz, a neurobiologist at the university and lead author of the study, told National Geographic. "These are animals with a complex nervous system, but they basically use a completely different chemical language" from every other animal.

www.ibtimes.com...

So what sent comb jellies on such a drastically different course from everyone else?

So what sent comb jellies on such a drastically different course from everyone else? Researchers say a parallel evolution occurred some 550 million years ago when comb jellies split off from other animal lineages.

parallel evolution

have a wonderful day

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

a reply to: godlover25

and you are 100% right to believe Jesus is the Son of God and that The LORD God is the Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things and that Genesis is a reliable testimony of Gods creation.

That, in trurh, is the only compliment that could possibly
ever mean anything to me.

Thank you.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Wow thank you Storm. I'm finally getting some clarification.

I have never once in all of this thread claimed to be so
righteous a human being that I am infallible. But at the
same time, I will not give remittance to those who insult
my Father in Heaven.

As an ancient history buff whom has read all three religion denominations biblical references, I sate..
"..they know not what they do!" which I make in direct reference to those whom Do Not understand
Commandment Number ONE, which your personal Saviour exclaimed in Matthew 7: 21-23

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them,
‘[i]I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

Understand the version of your religion's Buy~Bull.
It is a plaguerized modern version of hidden history dilution from Sumerian/Egyptian/Babylonian mythology created
through the first misunderstood, then understood and - USED to CONTROL! the Genesis [gene-assisted] story of humanity's fundamentally misappropriated history.

originally posted by: HumAnnunaki
According to scripture, the argument for or against displayed in this thread is fundamentally flawed.

Scripture accounts that after the primeordeal one's initial creation, on the seventh day, H/E rested
also giving life form's "free will".
This is the fundamental flaw religion has incorporated.

After creation - we were given free will, which means FREE WILL, exacting that H/E will not intervene.

This means after creation, we are free to make our own choices...which is a foretelling statement of
creation followed by evolutionary distinction.
Creation and evolution are in truth - one design incorporated TOGETHER in stages.

Be well.

Although I grew up R.C. - I am NOT a believer in religion, however, I am a believer in the monuments strewn across our planet and the visual story they exclaim regarding the Tower of Babel theory..
..and to those religions whom wish to wear blinders not understanding this message -
Matthew 10: 14

14"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.

Be well

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: godlover25

BioLogos, ReasonsToBelieve and the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church can all educate you on why evolution and science need not contradict theology, but can even be complimentary...

I disagree 100%.
So burn me. Have me drawn and quatered.
The Catholics have done nothing for Christianity.
And what does a pack of child molesters have to do with this
anyway? My faith is logical period. Sorry about yours.

Hmmm, I guess that is your choice to be seen as an, ummm....aaaa
(how does one say 'ignorant religious zealot' in a nice way?)

Evolution is fact, theology is mythology, get over it.

ALL HAIL THOR!

originally posted by: Toadmund

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: godlover25

BioLogos, ReasonsToBelieve and the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church can all educate you on why evolution and science need not contradict theology, but can even be complimentary...

I disagree 100%.
So burn me. Have me drawn and quatered.
The Catholics have done nothing for Christianity.
And what does a pack of child molesters have to do with this
anyway? My faith is logical period. Sorry about yours.

Hmmm, I guess that is your choice to be seen as an, ummm....aaaa
(how does one say 'ignorant religious zealot' in a nice way?)

Evolution is fact, theology is mythology, get over it.

ALL HAIL THOR!

The ultimate of ignorance is not that which I enjoy.

a reply to: randyvs
I was a bit rude there randyvs.
I really just meant to say that godlover25 I agree with and was trying to help you to understand that you cannot deny science in the name of god.

You can accept god and science.

It does make one look like an ignorant religious zealot to others that accept science, and to other religious people though, and it doesn't do much for your argument.

You are letteng god supercede common sense.
Lower your holy shield, just a touch.

And before I became agnostic my thoughts were this:
'If god was smart, god would not create beings that could not adjust according to their environment,
that would be a dumb god.'
Just like I believe we were created by the Universe, and then evolution started from abiogenisis, you could just insert god where 'the Universe' and 'abiogenisis' is in that sentence, and/or 'lord'.

Even Thor for gods sake!

The imagination is your oyster!
(but I don't like oysters)

Oh, and......

All hail Thor!

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: flyingfish

I will be back..

Hopefully when you have time to say more than just NO!

I got bored, I detest posts that take up screens of text, addressing each and every point in great detail would clearly be a waste of my time in light of creo's using some definition other than the one used by scientists. You are not addressing the real ToE, you are only attacking a strawman.
Think about it, do you want to argue over the real ToE? Or what was made up by some creationist propaganda merchants?

I am under no obligation to spoon feed the populace who might choose to use the wrong definitions through ignorance, it's the creationists who use the wrong definitions in a deliberate attempt to sow confusion and controversy. I try my best to carefully define the words I use to avoid confusion.
You have been caught with your pants down by your religious beliefs and forced into defending a ridiculous position. And, no doubt, you'll defend that absurdity to the end. I get that, I just don't always want to play..

As Heinlein noted:

Belief gets in the way of learning.

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973

This thread:

a reply to: DeadSeraph


I'm sorry Seraph I know it's been a monstrosity.
Crazy pills

a reply to: Toadmund

you to understand that you cannot deny science in the name of god.

But of course this isn't true. I sure don't believe we should do with out
science.

I didn't look like anybody responded to this, and I have a few questions:

originally posted by: dlbott
I did not read whole thread, sorry too hard on this tablet. But, I do believe I understand what he is trying to say. Many of you get hung up in your mind about the flood. First, there is evidence around the world of ancient flood events.

This is true. There were tons of isolated flood events. The last ice age (glacial period to be exact) ended 10-12 thousand years ago. There was flooding all over the place as the planet warmed up combined with crazy weather patterns. There is however a huge difference between lots of isolated floods and one big giant global flood. There is absolutely no evidence of the latter.

The OP is attempting to say that we are discovering formations in rock in and around things that can be dated. What this does mean and prove is that evolution could not have happened the way some believe and across the time frame that some believe.

How do rock formations prove anything at all about evolution? I still don't see the correlation as evolution is a biological process.

originally posted by: Quadrivium
a reply to: Barcs
Exaggeration Barcs? I don't think so.
The earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old.
Simple celled organisms have been around roughly 3.5 billion years.
20 million is a small nuber compared to the billions of years the Earth has been around.
As I said 0 to 60 in 1 second.

20 million is a small number when compared to 3.5 billion years, but it is still enough time for millions upon millions of generations of life that is surviving in incredibly tough and constantly changing earth. That's what matters, not the total timeframe of life on earth. Do you believe that in 20 million years from now humans will pretty much be exactly the same? It's far more likely humans won't exist any more, but they will be ancestors to whatever species are dominant on the planet. 20 million years is a very long time, it's incomprehensible to most people. The fact that the earth is 4.5 billion years old is irrelevant. 20 million years is longer than it took to go from ancient ape to modern human. i don't see why it's so ridiculous to you that evolution would accelerate in a harsh extreme constantly changing environment of early earth.

I always hear that "you don't know how evolution works, that's why you don't understand".
I understand the concept, Its the Macro part that throws it all out of wack.
First macro evolution is simply evolution over a very long period of time.
Yet, if the fossil record shows different, then it happens quickly.
I believe you and I have had this discussion before, a couple of years ago. I don't remember the title of the thread bt I remeber a member by the name of "itsthetooth".
I stated then that the "theory" of evolution had become bloated and basically resembles a string theory at this point.
My views have changed little since then.
Quad

Ah yes, it's been a while since I've been here. I do remember that ridiculous thread by tooth. Great comedy in that thread I just don't see how macro evolution, as you call it, throws anything out of whack. Evolution doesn't have a set pace or timeline that it follows, so when folks talk about not having enough time, they are only showing misconceptions of the theory. The pace of evolution is dictated by how quickly the environment changes. The crazier the environment, the faster the changes because so many creatures die out. This is why the Cambrian explosion arguments kind of irk me. They often ignore the fact that the environment was so harsh back then that probably 75% of life forms didn't pass down genes at the time. You only had a select amount of survivors that were fortunate enough to develop traits that helped them survive multi extreme environments. It makes perfect sense.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Toadmund

you to understand that you cannot deny science in the name of god.

But of course this isn't true. I sure don't believe we should do with out
science.

You really should realize some of the stuff that you write indicates that you do, do without science.

Wanna know whats funny, we have agnostics and non-believers giving you advice on how to fight agnostics and non-believers.

Weird huh!
And free advice!

a reply to: Barcs
Lol, how does that possibly make perfect sense?
You have harsher, more difficult conditions for life on earth yet somehow this is when evolution supposedly thrives and life flourishes?
You supposedly go from a bottle neck for all life on earth to the Cambrian Explosion because it was harder for life to survive?
The theory really needs more people asking questions. Too often people believe what ever Scientists tell them without ever stopping to think for themselves. I see it all the time here.
You have people like Prezbo who try and use Evolution to disprove "gawd". Evolution is not a theory to them, it's a tool.
Yet others on the Evolutionary side will say nothing to this type of poster, even though it makes you all look bad.
Because if anyone questions the Theory based on the Science backing it, suddenly evolutionist come out of the woodwork with a comment to add.
Evolution can not prove or disprove Intelligent disign.

a reply to: Quadrivium

It's not just about being harder to survive, it's about the faster paced changes. When the environment changes, organisms either adapt or die out. When this happens abruptly and often, the weaker genes die out faster which means bigger changes to the dominant genes of the species, over a quicker period of time. Logical and scientific.

When I talk about evolution, I only really care about the science. I don't care how a bunch of sensationalists describe it or what they try to say about god. God has absolutely nothing to do with evolution and the science therein. It's just always the believers in god (mostly biblical literalists) who are ones denying the science. Rocks are dated into specific strata because it matches 100% of the time. It's not just guess based on other fossils. It's testable, repeatable, and more than one other method exists to confirm its accuracy. When 100% of the fossils found in a certain strata contain organisms from the same period 100% of the time you no longer have to confirm each one individually. It's like trying to calculate the orbit of the earth around the sun, and asking why we didn't factor in the Sun going around the earth. It's been tested thousands of times.