Cardinal Pell and Evolution

[1213]

Your posts have gotten worse and worse with fairy tales that are physically and scientifically impossible.

In that case you don't understand correctly, or your "science" is wrong.

...earth requires billions of years for the internal heat of the earth to cause continental drift,

I have no good reason to believe continents drift. In the Biblical idea, continents didn't drift. There was one continent what was broken and large parts of it sunk into the water that was below it.

You have not provided an adequate explanation of limestone hundreds if feet thick forming in the manner limestone and coral reefs form today in the Pacific Islands and the Bermuda limestone and coral plateau.

Before the flood earth (=dry land = first continent), formed dome like structure. And when it collapsed, its edges were pushed. You can compare this to, if you fold a paper and place it on a table so that it forms A. Now, if you push the paper from the top, its edges slide to opposite directions. If you would want to hold it on its form, you would need pressure on the edges to stop it. Now, when the flood came, it begun by water escaping from cracks of the original continent. The water carried stuff towards the edges of the original continent. And because the continent was broken, it was like the paper A that was pushed from the top, causing its edges to push all the material that was carried on the edges of the original continent. Obviously, on the edges there could have been lot of corals, before the flood. And now that it was pushed by the edges of the continent, it formed thicker layer of the all the material that later became limestone.

Mid Atlantic ridge appears to be the main point where the cracks to original continent formed. And from there the flood water carried stuff to east and west. Pacific ocean was the original only ocean before the flood.

 

[1213]

Funny.

Here are the scientific fields that you are saying are "wrong" in just the last few pages:
- geology
- physics
- biology
- genetics
- chemistry
- astronomy
- cosmology

I don't see any reason to think, if someone is wrong in some thing, it means everything they say is wrong.

 

[1213]

The chance of that happening is 1 in trillions upon trillions.
The chance of it being the result of a common ancestor passing on the broken gene to all offspring is.... 1 in 1.

Off-spring inherits DNA from parents.
The same mutation happing twice is ultra-rare. Three times mega-ultra-rare. It only gets exponentially worse the more instances you add to it.

I don't see how you can believe in evolution theory.

Hilariously, to believe that, you would have to believe in "super duper evolution on steroids" to account for all these new species in only a few millenia. It would require evolution to work at a rate hundreds of times faster then presently understood and observed.

I don't see it a great difference, if color or size is little different.

 

[1213]

The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across. Do you know what that means?

I have no good reason to believe that, even though I think it is possible that God would have created it that way.

 

[1213]

...That's a fool's errand. I just like rebutting fallacies. I like sharing ideas like these with like-minded people who might understand and benefit from them, which is seldom the person I'm addressing in rebuttal. I understand that this post will have no impact on you, so I need another reason to write it, don't I?

Why do you expect people to believe your claims?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't see any reason to think, if someone is wrong in some thing, it means everything they say is wrong.

You don't get it, do you?
In those sciences, many theories or intertwined. You can't just take one single aspect, call it wrong and then expect it to not have any ramifications.

Like for example if you claim that radiometric dating is incorrect.
What you are then ALSO saying, is that we don't understand how atoms work, so really you are saying atomic theory is wrong.
That in turn calls into question our very understanding of physics. Of matter and energy. Of quantum / particle physics. Etc.

If you claim that the geological column didn't form over millions / billions of years of erosion and sediment deposits, then you are calling into question loads of things in the entire field of geology.

If you claim evolution is incorrect, then you call into question our understanding of genetics. Evolution is the backbone of modern biology. Evolution being wrong has ramification throughout the entire field.

It's like a house of cards. You can't just pull out a card at the bottom and not expect the entire thing to collapse.
So yes, when you make the claims that you do, you are in fact calling into question the entirety of the fields involved.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't see how you can believe in evolution theory.

I just gave you a very good reason.

In context of evolution, the sharing of all those genetic markers (ERV's, entire gene sequences, broken genes, pseudo-genes, etc) has a probability of 1 in 1.

In context of species being created as-is, without common ancestry, the probability of sharing all those genetic markers is 1 in trillions upon trillions upon trillions upon gazibillion-trillions. When dealing with such low probability, you might as well call it "impossible".

I didn't expect this to sink in though. Your religious bias clouds your judgement far too much.

I don't see it a great difference, if color or size is little different.

Your juvenile, unqualified and uneducated opinion is noted.

All I can tell you is that the idea that all bears share an ancestor only a few millenia ago is beyond prepostrous.
You are going to need to add 4 zero's to that number to get the actual age of that common ancestor.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I have no good reason to believe that

You could have a good reason if only you informed yourself a bit on physics and astronomy.

Off course, if all you do is read the bible and listen to your creationist pastors, then yes... you won't have a good reason.

Not because a good reason doesn't exist off course. Willful ignorance is not a substitute for facts.

 

[shunyadragon]

In that case you don't understand correctly, or your "science" is wrong.

Your lack of knowledge of basic science remains an issue. Please explain your understanding of science that is contrary to 99%+ of the scientists and ALL the major universities of the world.

I have no good reason to believe continents drift. In the Biblical idea, continents didn't drift. There was one continent what was broken and large parts of it sunk into the water that was below it.

The science of continental drift is based on vast objective verifiable evidence. Please provide academic science references that confirm your view. Hint there are none.

Before the flood earth (=dry land = first continent), formed dome like structure. And when it collapsed, its edges were pushed. You can compare this to, if you fold a paper and place it on a table so that it forms A. Now, if you push the paper from the top, its edges slide to opposite directions. If you would want to hold it on its form, you would need pressure on the edges to stop it. Now, when the flood came, it begun by water escaping from cracks of the original continent. The water carried stuff towards the edges of the original continent. And because the continent was broken, it was like the paper A that was pushed from the top, causing its edges to push all the material that was carried on the edges of the original continent. Obviously, on the edges there could have been lot of corals, before the flood. And now that it was pushed by the edges of the continent, it formed thicker layer of the all the material that later became limestone.

Limestone takes hundreds of thousands of years to form at minimum in shallow oceans ALL over the world. Nothing above makes any sense. The strata limestones are in are thousands of feet thick and no evidence of a world flood.. Please provide academic science references that confirm your view. Hint there are none.

Mid Atlantic ridge appears to be the main point where the cracks to original continent formed. And from there the flood water carried stuff to east and west. Pacific ocean was the original only ocean before the flood.

The Mid-Atlantic Ridge is evidence of continental drift. The rate of continental drift is happening today at the measured rate that can be seen in the ocean floor for millions of years.

You have failed to respond to the physics of heat in the billions of years history of the earth.

You have not responded to the question. What is your academic and work background in geology and related sciences?

 

[shunyadragon]

Why do you expect people to believe your claims?

The objective verifiable evidence of the history of the earth. You are stuck in an ancient tribal agenda without science.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If all apes has same broken thing, it does not necessary mean it was created in to them. It is possible that same error happened and caused the broken thing.

Also, in this case, I think it is possible that in the ark there was only one kind of apes and all modern apes are offspring of those that were in the ark. So, it may be that they inherited that from the common ancestor.

Okay, so you actually believe in a super-fast version of evolution?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Not necessary, it is possible to get the same thing broken in different cases, by the same method it happened in some case.

And that all species evolved to this diversity from single cell is several times more improbable.

It is not the same. It can be seen that offspring is not identical to their parents, there are variations in between certain limits. For example the color and size of people can vary, similarly as with all living things. But we don't see for example mouse turning into a mini whale, which should be possible, if the evolution theory is correct. This is why I can believe there was for example one kind of bears and all modern bear "species" are offspring of those.

Ah, I see the problem here. You seem to have attended the Kent Hovind school of evolution lies.
The guy is not a scientist and has no idea what he's talking about. And on top of that, he's a fraud and a liar.


The dude has no idea what he's talking about. You should go read the work of some actual scientists.

 

[SkepticThinker]

For me any definition that is logical is ok. In this case I think more important question is, what was the Biblical definition. It seems in Bible "family" is the same as nowadays "species".

Why on earth would you turn to the Bible for your scientific information?????

 

[shunyadragon]

I don't see any reason to think, if someone is wrong in some thing, it means everything they say is wrong.

As far as science is concerned your batting average is 0, or in other words 100% wrong.

Limestone occurs in individual cyclic layers over 100 feet thick with coral reefs formed in place as they do today between very orderly layers of sandstone and shale formed in other environments, sandstones form mostly in beach and wind-blown deposits the same way they are forming today.

It takes hundreds of thousands if not millions of years for limestone and coral to form layers hundreds of feet thick as Calcium and Magnesium Carbonate Precipitate Deposits.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Why do you expect people to believe your claims?

I don't expect any faith-based thinker to believe anything anybody else says that challenges their beliefs.

If I offer an unsupported claim or one supported by a fallacious argument, I expect the critical thinkers to join them and reject either of those claims.

If I offer a claim backed by a shared premises/evidence and valid arguments based on them, I expect the critical thinkers to be convinced.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have no good reason to believe that, even though I think it is possible that God would have created it that way.

I know. You keep disqualifying yourself from this debate by telling us that you do not even have a fifth grade level of science education. That means sadly that you will keep calling your God a liar even though you do not understand how you are doing it.

Can you answer this question: Is it a serious sin for someone to call God a liar?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't see any reason to think, if someone is wrong in some thing, it means everything they say is wrong.

You keep demonstrating that you are wrong in everything. And you have no interest in learning how others know that you are wrong.

 

[metis]

I have no good reason to believe continents drift.

We with certainty that they have and still are. Relative to Asia, North America is drifting westward an average of 2" per year, so ya better get used to Asian food soon!

In the Biblical idea, continents didn't drift.

How could you possibly derive that from scripture?

 

[Subduction Zone]

We with certainty that they have and still are. Relative to Asia, North America is drifting westward an average of 2" per year, so ya better get used to Asian food soon!

How could you possibly derive that from scripture?

The continents not moving comes from some of the "Flat Earth" verses in the Bible:

11 Bible verses about Earth Being Fixed And Immovable

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

 

[Audie]

You don't get it, do you?
In those sciences, many theories or intertwined. You can't just take one single aspect, call it wrong and then expect it to not have any ramifications.

Like for example if you claim that radiometric dating is incorrect.
What you are then ALSO saying, is that we don't understand how atoms work, so really you are saying atomic theory is wrong.
That in turn calls into question our very understanding of physics. Of matter and energy. Of quantum / particle physics. Etc.

If you claim that the geological column didn't form over millions / billions of years of erosion and sediment deposits, then you are calling into question loads of things in the entire field of geology.

If you claim evolution is incorrect, then you call into question our understanding of genetics. Evolution is the backbone of modern biology. Evolution being wrong has ramification throughout the entire field.

It's like a house of cards. You can't just pull out a card at the bottom and not expect the entire thing to collapse.
So yes, when you make the claims that you do, you are in fact calling into question the entirety of the fields involved.

As I've mentioned before, disprove ToE
and you blow up all the hard sciences