Gaps in Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter SoulBeaver
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
edwest2:
Some people wish that the Bible cannot be taken literally, but this is not true.Peace,Ed

Well, maybe not a global flood to a depth of 29,051 feet…
 
40.png
edwest2:
The bible is the final authority. In fact, it is the first authority. Some people wish that the Bible cannot be taken literally, but this is not true. What is made plain to the faithful is hidden from those outside the faith. Adam and Eve were two individuals, made by God.

If the bible must be taken literally than please answer me this- the water that flooded the Earth: was it salt water or fresh water?
 
Mersenne said:
Can you quote the verse that says 29,051 feet?
Click to expand...
what is with people digging a year back to respond to dead topics?

I assume that number comes from the highest elevation any piece of land is above sea level. Of course, sea level would have been much lower prior to such a floor and Mt. Everest would presumably have been significantly taller before the massive erosion such an intense storm would have caused.
 
grannymh said:
Unfortunately, I’m leaving town so I need to be brief. However, there was some interesting research done during “Awake Brain Surgery” in France. The brain is only half the answer. Speaking as an evolutionist, the brain is very important – don’t get me wrong. But when one dissects the report, it is clear that the brain is not the whole answer. Do be careful of the opening “conclusions” especially when one considers the use of a bipolar electrode.

Source: Desmurget et al, Movement Intention after Parietal Cortex Stimulation in Humans, Science 324 811 – 813 (2009)

For an understanding of “Awake Brain Surgery”: www.mayoclinic.org/awake-brain-surgery/brain-mapping,html
Click to expand...
I didnt see any reference to a soul in that report. :confused:
 
tjm190 said:
The bible is the final authority. In fact, it is the first authority. Some people wish that the Bible cannot be taken literally, but this is not true. What is made plain to the faithful is hidden from those outside the faith. Adam and Eve were two individuals, made by God.
Click to expand...
If the bible must be taken literally than please answer me this- the water that flooded the Earth: was it salt water or fresh water?

Anyone that believes there was a world wide flood 4000 years is beyond help.
 
grannymh said:
There is a process of analytical thought which asks the question – What is not there?
The inventors responsible for the industrial revolution constantly asked that question.
If Edison did not ask that question, we would be using our computers by candle light.

If the material physical human body does not provide the answer to a question concerning the origin of a particular human action, then the question has to be asked – What is missing from the definition of human nature?

Do alley cats design the acoustics of an opera house so that their singing can be appreciated by large crowds? Where is the evidence regarding alley cats’ engineering feats?
Click to expand...
Again this simply comes down to a big brain.
 
Charles_Darwin said:
I didnt see any reference to a soul in that report. :confused:
Click to expand...
The report in question was a reply to your comment about “brain” in post 691. There was no reference to a soul per se. However, the researches were trying to figure out where the human ability of choice is located. This ability is part of soul in the understanding of spiritual soul.

The researchers were going on the assumption that humans are matter which evolved, therefore our free will has to be in the brain. Since your comment referred to brain, I thought this report was interesting in its attempt. Nonetheless, the attempt ended with identifying which parts of the brain were connected to certain body actions. A bipolar electrode was used to stimulate the brain. Obviously, in life, humans can make choices without the application of a bipolar electrode. How?
 
Charles_Darwin said:
Again this simply comes down to a big brain.
Click to expand...
Yes, the cavity to hold a brain has increased. But size does not indicate quality of thought.

The gap in evolution is that there is no material evidence as to where one’s ability to choose is located. With the new techniques of anesthesiology, people can now answer direct questions while their brain is being stimulated by bipolar electrodes. This does not translate to real life.
 
grannymh said:
Yes, the cavity to hold a brain has increased. But size does not indicate quality of thought.

The gap in evolution is that there is no material evidence as to where one’s ability to choose is located. With the new techniques of anesthesiology, people can now answer direct questions while their brain is being stimulated by bipolar electrodes. This does not translate to real life.
Click to expand...
I’ve not looked into this, but even if we don’t know so what? We dont know != god did it.
 
Charles_Darwin said:
Anyone that believes there was a world wide flood 4000 years is beyond help.
Click to expand...
I used to think that, but then it occurred to me that there are a plethora of authors and organizations deliberately spreading misinformation to this end.
 
Instead of dismissing claims of a young earth, have you studied them? There are depictions of dinosaurs drawn by men. I find the age of the earth to be an open question. The relatively recent eruption of Mt. Saint Helens carved out a large canyon in a very short time. There are reports of trees buried under many layers of rock, called polystrate fossils. If the trees had been exposed to the elements they would have rotted away. Some of these trees extend into coal seams that supposedly took millions of years to form. There is evidence of catastrophic events in earth’s history. Formerly ‘extinct’ plants have turned up alive. The coelocanth has turned up alive.

Dismissing something is easy, doing research is more difficult.

Peace,
Ed
 
tjm190 said:
I used to think that, but then it occurred to me that there are a plethora of authors and organizations deliberately spreading misinformation to this end.
Click to expand...
Then sick to peer reviewed.
 
edwest2 said:
Instead of dismissing claims of a young earth, have you studied them? There are depictions of dinosaurs drawn by men. I find the age of the earth to be an open question. The relatively recent eruption of Mt. Saint Helens carved out a large canyon in a very short time. There are reports of trees buried under many layers of rock, called polystrate fossils. If the trees had been exposed to the elements they would have rotted away. Some of these trees extend into coal seams that supposedly took millions of years to form. There is evidence of catastrophic events in earth’s history. Formerly ‘extinct’ plants have turned up alive. The coelocanth has turned up alive.

Dismissing something is easy, doing research is more difficult.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I have studied it in great detail. Much of it at university. Like i said anyone that believes there was a world wide flood 4000 years ago is beyond help.
 
edwest2 said:
Instead of dismissing claims of a young earth, have you studied them? There are depictions of dinosaurs drawn by men. I find the age of the earth to be an open question. The relatively recent eruption of Mt. Saint Helens carved out a large canyon in a very short time. There are reports of trees buried under many layers of rock, called polystrate fossils. If the trees had been exposed to the elements they would have rotted away. Some of these trees extend into coal seams that supposedly took millions of years to form. There is evidence of catastrophic events in earth’s history. Formerly ‘extinct’ plants have turned up alive. The coelocanth has turned up alive.

Dismissing something is easy, doing research is more difficult.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Given that a young earth creationist must deny-
the speed of light
carbon dating
paleontology
and much geology

I find such claims unreasonable
 
tjm190 said:
Given that a young earth creationist must deny-
the speed of light
carbon dating
paleontology
and much geology

I find such claims unreasonable
Click to expand...
The Church recognizes the role of God in the development of life and in the process of Creation. Science cannot study miracles though it can study the effects of contemporary miracles. This is done today to verify miracles attributed to those who may become saints.

In the strictly scientific sense, there are some occurrences beyond its grasp. A scientist standing next to Jesus Christ would find no explanation for raising Lazarus, and others, from the dead. These events, however, are recorded and did happen.

It cannot be verified or demonstrated by science, certain miraculous things that God did indeed do.

The Church has declared the age of the Universe to be finite. For a God that can calm a storm with His word, claims regarding the speed of light, especially in the past, cannot be confirmed. I am suspicious of all dating methods since tree fossils passing through many strata do exist. Paleontology is a broad field, can you be more specific?

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The Church recognizes the role of God in the development of life and in the process of Creation. Science cannot study miracles though it can study the effects of contemporary miracles. This is done today to verify miracles attributed to those who may become saints.

In the strictly scientific sense, there are some occurrences beyond its grasp. A scientist standing next to Jesus Christ would find no explanation for raising Lazarus, and others, from the dead. These events, however, are recorded and did happen.

It cannot be verified or demonstrated by science, certain miraculous things that God did indeed do.

The Church has declared the age of the Universe to be finite. For a God that can calm a storm with His word, claims regarding the speed of light, especially in the past, cannot be confirmed. I am suspicious of all dating methods since tree fossils passing through many strata do exist. Paleontology is a broad field, can you be more specific?

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Not sure I can allow you to get away with your speed of light claim- given that even a slight shift in the speed of light would have massive relativistic consequences.

And I was referring to the methods used by paleontologists to date fossils based on where they lie.

And your gripe with dating seems to lack any relevance to carbon dating.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top