• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

About fossils -- would you say this is true?

Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Apostle John said:
“varves were considered likely to give similar information to dendrochronology”. It is already proven in dendrochronology that tree rings are not always annular rings. Many can be formed over a year. Another inaccurate dating system. How do you know there has been uniformity over the millennia and can you offer irrefutable proof there was no worldwide flood 5000 years ago.
Click to expand...
Yup, occasionally, but very rarely there can be more than one tree ring a year. You might be able to very very rarely be able to have more than one varve a year. I will be very generous and give you one year out of a hundred there could be two varves. How does that help you"
 
exchemist

exchemist

Veteran Member
Apostle John said:
“varves were considered likely to give similar information to dendrochronology”. It is already proven in dendrochronology that tree rings are not always annular rings. Many can be formed over a year. Another inaccurate dating system. How do you know there has been uniformity over the millennia and can you offer irrefutable proof there was no worldwide flood 5000 years ago.
Click to expand...
Demanding "proof" is misplaced, as you ought to know if you have studied science, as you claim. But we've been over this already. There is zero evidence of a worldwide flood, something that would be expected to leave traces. Just as there is no evidence of unicorns.

As for uniformity of geological processes over time, this is simply Ockham's Razor. By assuming the laws of nature have remained constant, we can construct theories of geology that can predict what observstions we should expect. That, as any scientist should know, is the mark of a successful theory. So uniformity appears to be a valid assumption.
 
Apostle John

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
That’s just wishful thinking then. You hope there has been uniformity over the millennia because you do not, and cannot know any better. Assumption and guesswork all the way.
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Apostle John said:
That’s just wishful thinking then. You hope there has been uniformity over the millennia because you do not, and cannot know any better. Assumption and guesswork all the way.
Click to expand...
Ah, so you're one of those "you can't prove things weren't completely different in the past" creationists.

Do you apply that to everything? Do you think gravity existed in the past? Erosion? Was the earth still spherical? Did it still orbit the sun?
 
Apostle John

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
Jose Fly said:
Ah, so you're one of those "you can't prove things weren't completely different in the past" creationists.

Do you apply that to everything? Do you think gravity existed in the past? Erosion? Was the earth still spherical? Did it still orbit the sun?
Click to expand...
Yes, I don’t mind being known as a creationist. The evolution theory about us coming from mud then monkeys involves so much change it’s difficult to believe. You and anyone can only assume and guess what it was like back then. That is an irrefutable fact the sane minded can agree on.
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Apostle John said:
Yes, I don’t mind being known as a creationist. The evolution theory about us coming from mud then monkeys involves so much change it’s difficult to believe. You and anyone can only assume and guess what it was like back then. That is an irrefutable fact the sane minded can agree on.
Click to expand...
You didn't answer the questions I asked. Again....

Do you think gravity existed in the past? Erosion? Was the earth still spherical? Did it still orbit the sun?
 
Apostle John

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
Jose Fly said:
You didn't answer the questions I asked. Again....

Do you think gravity existed in the past? Erosion? Was the earth still spherical? Did it still orbit the sun?
Click to expand...
I was giving you something easy to think about first. Our solar system is not a centrifuge. How therefore did our sun form first. How did the earth end up in the Goldilocks zone (it’s orbit so that life can exist).
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Apostle John said:
I was giving you something easy to think about first. Our solar system is not a centrifuge. How therefore did our sun form first. How did the earth end up in the Goldilocks zone (it’s orbit so that life can exist).
Click to expand...
You're still dodging the issue. How about actually engaging, instead of acting like a guilty defendant?

Again....Do you think gravity existed in the past? Erosion? Was the earth still spherical? Did it still orbit the sun?
 
Apostle John

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
You all cannot prove uniformity, even believing wholeheartedly in evolution theory. You’re going around in circles trying to make unprovable points. That’s a fact. It’s all assumption and guesswork.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Apostle John said:
You all cannot prove uniformity, even believing wholeheartedly in evolution theory. You’re going around in circles trying to make unprovable points. That’s a fact. It’s all assumption and guesswork.
Click to expand...
No, and now you are bearing false witness against your neighbor. Unjustified assumptions and guesswork are not allowed in the sciences. Concepts can be tested. Once one does that they are no longer assumptions. It is no longer guesswork.
 
Apostle John

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
By the questions you ask and points you make, it‘s evident you both have accepted evolution theory, that humans have come from mud then monkeys, you accept that as a fact even though it hasn’t been tested and proven beyond doubt. Evolution theory is a stark example of non-uniformity. You are both trying to say you believe in uniformity. Do you see you’re argument is schizophrenic?
Jose Fly said:
You're never going to answer the questions I asked you, are you?
Click to expand...
No, because they’re pointless and go nowhere. You cannot answer mine, I know that.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Apostle John said:
By the questions you ask and points you make, it‘s evident you both have accepted evolution theory, that humans have come from mud then monkeys, you accept that as a fact even though it hasn’t been tested and proven beyond doubt. Evolution theory is a stark example of non-uniformity. You are both trying to say you believe in uniformity. Do you see you’re argument is schizophrenic?

No, because they’re pointless and go nowhere. You cannot answer mine, I know that.
Click to expand...
The theory of evolution has been tested millions of times. You simply do not understand how testing is done.
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Apostle John said:
By the questions you ask and points you make, it‘s evident you both have accepted evolution theory, that humans have come from mud then monkeys, you accept that as a fact even though it hasn’t been tested and proven beyond doubt. Evolution theory is a stark example of non-uniformity. You are both trying to say you believe in uniformity. Do you see you’re argument is schizophrenic?

No, because they’re pointless and go nowhere. You cannot answer mine, I know that.
Click to expand...
LOL...so you make claims about evolutionists "believing in uniformity" and when I ask you if you believe in uniformity regarding things like gravity and the earth, you declare that to be "pointless" and refuse to answer.

Obviously your talking point about "uniformity" has been effectively negated and you have no idea how to answer the questions, so now you're just waving them away.

This is why creationists always lose in court. In places like this one, you can get away with that sort of transparently dishonest behavior, but if you do that in court there will be consequences.

Thanks for once again demonstrating the fundamentally dishonest nature of creationism.
 
Apostle John

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
The Bible hasn’t been disproved by anyone anywhere. Have you or any evolutionists made sentient life from mud? Life from mud that has consciousness. Can you explain why humans haven’t evolved into a new species yet going by evolutionary timescales?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Apostle John said:
The Bible hasn’t been disproved by anyone anywhere. Have you or any evolutionists made sentient life from mud? Life from mud that has consciousness. Can you explain why humans haven’t evolved into a new species yet going by evolutionary timescales?
Click to expand...
That is no how one disproves the Bible. And if anyone did that you would simply find another excuse. One disproves Genesis with evidence. A concept that is currently beyond you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top