I
itinerant1
Guest
I have no idea. You leave me clueless every time you neglect to answer one of my questions about what you been thinkin’ 'bout.
- Status
I
itinerant1
Guest
I don’t think Venus is where it is happening. Let me explain. YEC is the only argument I will accept for the existence of another universe, or a parallel universe in which the laws of nature are completely different than what we know. This other universe could be billions of years old, even though it was created just last Thursday at 13:33:45 hrs.
And God is an old man with a long, white beard who got tired of creating after six days and had to take a day off to rest up. He was so tired he had to wait to create many new species on some other days when he was completely rested and up for the job… And for fun, God sets off volcanoes by touching their tops with His finger. Hope He doesn’t ever burn his finger. That would make God cry. God crying is what makes it rain, you know.
There could have been a global deluge on this outer world and an ark with kangaroos and polar bears and stuff. On this amazing planet men take dinosaurs for strolls in the evening. I not sure why the dinos weren’t taken aboard on the ark.
Oh, it’s such a lovely Peter Pan world with Tinkerbell and all. I would really like to visit it someday. How about you?
B
buffalo
Guest
Itinerant1 - listen to this podcast between Davies and Lennox - around 30 minutes in - supernatural intervention and leaves His imprint as a real sign of His intelligence vs a tinkerer. Fascinating…
creation and upholding creation and His personal communication with us…
creation and upholding creation and His personal communication with us…
I
itinerant1
Guest
I see, send me all over the internet, rather than answer my questions?
I
itinerant1
Guest
I found the introduction to the talk rather amusing. It says “Davies is also the Chair of the SETI post detection task force.” What is the heck is the SETI post detection task force? Do they make contingency plans for when SETI supposedly makes contact? Will they invite ET to McDonald’s for lunch? What’s the plan? Doesn’t matter. I don’t expect the task force will have the opportunity to implement its plans, whatever they might be, any time soon. Perhaps Davies should get a real job.
The whole SETI idea presupposes that ETs are altruistic and would want to have lunch with us. Well, if this is a Darwinian universe, we might very well end up being lunch for ET. (Even Dawkins said he would not want to live in a Darwinian society.)
Perhaps we should not be advertising our presence in the universe. We might end up being a good protein source for ET.
I recommend that the SETI post detection task force should formulate as “Plan A” that in the event of contact with aliens we all go into hiding. If ET can make to earth, then he is so far advanced over us that we would be no match for him. ET go home, please!Needless to say, I never made past the billing to the podcast.
H
hugh_r.miller
Guest
A more simplistic view of the above would be that these folks can’t see the forest for the trees so each has found a tree to “bark at” as they leisurely try and work their way out of the forest discussing with each other which is the best route. Of course modernist theologians love playing in the forests and if they have plenty of money in their pay grade they don’t mind being lost; it is very comforting to be among other elitists in academia.
Just a thought as I pursue the more simplistic, more scientific view like in:
Occam’s razor
a principle named after William of Occam, a 14th century philosopher. The generalization states that, if there are a number of explanations for observed phenomena, the simplest explanation is preferred.
The one that has been ommitted from the above list and the many new ones propounded on this thread in the field genetics is simply:
Big Jack Horner sat in a corner**
scraping a dinosaur bone.**
Some soft tissue appeared
And he said, "Just what I feared!
**Evolution’s long ages are gone!" **
I
itinerant1
Guest
You must have used over-used Occam’s razor on your post, because I don’t know what it is exactly you are trying to say.A more simplistic view of the above would be that these folks can’t see the forest for the trees so each has found a tree to “bark at” as they leisurely try and work their way out of the forest discussing with each other which is the best route. Of course modernist theologians love playing in the forests and if they have plenty of money in their pay grade they don’t mind being lost; it is very comforting to be among other elitists in academia.
Just a thought as I pursue the more simplistic, more scientific view like in:
Occam’s razor
a principle named after William of Occam, a 14th century philosopher. The generalization states that, if there are a number of explanations for observed phenomena, the simplest explanation is preferred.
The one that has been ommitted from the above list and the many new ones propounded on this thread in the field genetics is simply:
Big Jack Horner sat in a corner**
scraping a dinosaur bone.**
Some soft tissue appeared
And he said, "Just what I feared!
**Evolution’s long ages are gone!" **
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Hugh, I sympathize with your predicament. You might agree with Pastor Ray Mummert, who during the Dover trial pleaded plaintively, “We’ve been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture.” Or with Don McLeroy, former head of the Texas State Board of Education: “Someone has to stand up against experts.”
StAnastasia
B
buffalo
Guest
There is a trend here - you never stay till the end when the important stuff is discussed.I found the introduction to the talk rather amusing. It says “Davies is also the Chair of the SETI post detection task force.” What is the heck is the SETI post detection task force? Do they make contingency plans for when SETI supposedly makes contact? Will they invite ET to McDonald’s for lunch? What’s the plan? Doesn’t matter. I don’t expect the task force will have the opportunity to implement its plans, whatever they might be, any time soon. Perhaps Davies should get a real job.
The whole SETI idea presupposes that ETs are altruistic and would want to have lunch with us. Well, if this is a Darwinian universe, we might very well end up being lunch for ET. (Even Dawkins said he would not want to live in a Darwinian society.)
Perhaps we should not be advertising our presence in the universe. We might end up being a good protein source for ET.
Needless to say, I never made past the billing to the podcast.
The intro doesn’t suit you so you book. Start at 30 minutes then. Geesh.
R
ricmat
Guest
I’m the one who mentioned Venus. I didn’t ask in the context of “how old the universe is, or how old the earth is.” I wasn’t making a YEC argument because I’m not a YEC.
I asked how old do you think it is.
For a long time, scientists thought that Venus was created along with the other planets of the solar system. That is in serious question now. For a long time (until the 1970s) scientists informed us that Venus was very earthlike, except maybe a touch warmer but definitely capable of supporting life. They were wrong.
Science can be wrong. Science ALWAYS has been wrong, right up to the present. Of course, today it’s absolutely correct
. That’s why I mentioned Venus.Itinerant, the above mockery is below you. Not StA, but you know better.
I’m not a YEC but can manage to respect, and discuss the YEC position without mockery or condescension. I’ve noticed that Buddhist Rossom doesn’t mock, he responds (usually tactfully) with what he believes to the facts, or in general the truth as he sees it.
It seems that you can’t convince some people of your position, and that makes you very angry. Why is that? To Ed’s point, “so what if they don’t agree?” Must the reflex be “Mock, Mock, and more Mock?”
B
buffalo
Guest
That is the way of coercion.
H
hugh_r.miller
Guest
I am standing with the experts! These include (1) Ph.D. physicists who operate the radiocarbon dating labs. (2) The archaeologists who have discovered distinct dinosaur depictions by their fellow human ancestors world-wide and those who understand that soft tissue and collagen do not last more than 1000’s of years not 10’s of millions.
Who are you standing with?
Big Jack Horner sat in a corner**
scraping a dinosaur bone.**
Some soft tissue appeared
And he said, "Just what I feared!
**Evolution’s long ages are gone!" **
E
edwest2
Guest
I find it again relevant to stress that not believing the earth is billions of years old will lead to no catastrophes. The mind of man has been turned into an idol for some, aided and abetted by the Great Nothing that made them. Genes that self-upgraded along with a mind that did the same.
Can anyone say Technocracy? And while you ponder that thought, keep in mind that what some call human nature means that anyone who lives in such a state will likely not be treated very well. The Elite look after the elite and not the peasants.
God bless,
Ed
Can anyone say Technocracy? And while you ponder that thought, keep in mind that what some call human nature means that anyone who lives in such a state will likely not be treated very well. The Elite look after the elite and not the peasants.
God bless,
Ed
I
itinerant1
Guest
I know that you are not a YEC and I was not joking about your views. However, you sound a little too thin-skinned. You need not take it personally that I joke about the absurdity of YEC.I’m the one who mentioned Venus. I didn’t ask in the context of “how old the universe is, or how old the earth is.” I wasn’t making a YEC argument because I’m not a YEC.
I asked how old do you think it is.
For a long time, scientists thought that Venus was created along with the other planets of the solar system. That is in serious question now. For a long time (until the 1970s) scientists informed us that Venus was very earthlike, except maybe a touch warmer but definitely capable of supporting life. They were wrong.
Science can be wrong. Science ALWAYS has been wrong, right up to the present. Of course, today it’s absolutely correct
Itinerant, the above mockery is below you. Not StA, but you know better.
I’m not a YEC but can manage to respect, and discuss the YEC position without mockery or condescension. I’ve noticed that Buddhist Rossom doesn’t mock, he responds (usually tactfully) with what he believes to the facts, or in general the truth as he sees it.
It seems that you can’t convince some people of your position, and that makes you very angry. Why is that? To Ed’s point, “so what if they don’t agree?” Must the reflex be “Mock, Mock, and more Mock?”
That science is always revising its theories is irrelevant to the truth or falsity YEC. Hence, your comment has no logical relevance to YEC. The fallacy is similar to the one I have pointed out a number of times – it is a logical fallacy by YEC and ID advocates to think their criticisms of Darwinian ideology constitute proof for their own positions. When one has no respect even for the fundamentals of logic are they not mocking rational discourse itself?
Furthermore, it says something about how much one values his own opinions over truth when he is more concerned about some mockery of fundamentalist creationism rather than the mockery that fundamentalist creationism brings on the Church and Bible.
I
itinerant1
Guest
Coercion? Every comedian then coerces his audience.That is the way of coercion.
BTW, you claimed to have evidence for 500 core genes. What is up with that?
R
ricmat
Guest
Since I’m not a YEC, I was not taking it personally.
Correct. My comment was not intended to have relevance to YEC.
You seem to think that every comment made by everybody is intended as a proof of something-or-other. The only point of my comment was that science is often wrong. Perhaps you are too thin-skinned about this. Why is that?
Values my own opinions over truth? Whose truth? Yours?
The Church and Bible will survive mockery. They have for thousands of years. On the other hand, the souls of those people whose inflated pride give them much satisfaction from the process of mockery will not.
B
buffalo
Guest
How many do you need?
Slide 9 -
and…
Darwin’s Predictions
Scientists comparing the genomes of members of the three domains of life—archaea, bacteria, and the eukaryotes (animals, plants, fungi, and protists)—have discovered about 500 genes that all living things share. These “immortal” genes have survived essentially unchanged for over two billion years (including the portion of a protein’s sequence seen here, with shared amino acids indicated by shading). Says Brown’s Ken Miller: “Despite the extraordinary diversity of life, all living organisms share a nearly identical set of essential genes, reflecting their evolutionary development from a common ancestor.”
I
itinerant1
Guest
Great! I’ll check it out. Now you say that these genes have survived unchanged over two billion years. How does that claim jive with your earlier statement that the world is only several (#?) thousand years old?
B
buffalo
Guest
Are you for real? Do you actually think that they are going to go the modern synthesis. They have to try to force fit the data to the current paradigm. The cracks are many and growing but the wall hasn’t yet come down although the “tree of life” has fallen with a crash.
I
itinerant1
Guest
A counter-argument could be that you are trying to force-fit genetics data into a YEC paradigm, one in which there is the added feature of a biological Big Bang.
- Status