Creationist objections to plant evolution?

[shawn001]

Your personal attacks are typical of frustrated evolutionists who simply cannot convince everyone to drink their propaganda kool-aid. Newspapers, radio, TV, nature series, science programs, schoolbooks, false religions- all repeat this "evolution is a fact" propaganda. Michael Denton called such claims "nonsense", but it is more. It is fraud. The facts are that scientific facts don't support evolution. For every claimed "proof" of evolution, scientists provide facts to debunk such claimed "proof". Many scientists do not accept evolution, a fact embarrassing to the ToE proponents. Their response to such opposing voices is to belittle and marginalize them as much as possible, the same tactics evident in this forum among evolutionists.

I asked name one science that doesn't support evolution! You can't!

It is both a fact and a scientific theory.

Who sholud anyone believe "You" and your interpretation of the bible or DNA and billions of facts.


How does Michael Denton explain the five mass extintion events on earth? Or plate tectonics, or how we got an oxygen atmophere fro the evolution of bacteria, please explain?

But first name one science that doesn't support evolution!

 

[averageJOE]

The brief account in Genesis does not specifically say what was blocking the light on day one, or obscuring the sun, moon, and stars until day 4. Genesis 1:2 reveals that early in earth's history, "the earth proved to be formless and waster and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep." On day one, God apparently cleared the darkness, possibly due to thick clouds. (Job 38:4,9) Thus, diffused light reached earth's surface for the first time. On day two, God created the atmospheric expanse, and on day four made the heavenly bodies visible in the expanse. This implies a gradual clearing of earth's atmosphere during these creative epochs.

Possibly thick clouds you say...hmmmm...seems like your reaching. And what about light from stars that take years to reach earth? How do you think that light got to earth in only four days?

 

[rusra02]

Possibly thick clouds you say...hmmmm...seems like your reaching. And what about light from stars that take years to reach earth? How do you think that light got to earth in only four days?

I will assume you are not being facetious, and reply that the light from the stars had already reached earth. What was blocking the heavenly bodies from view was cleared up on day four, sufficient so these stars could be seen in the atmospheric expanse.

 

[shawn001]

I will assume you are not being facetious, and reply that the light from the stars had already reached earth. What was blocking the heavenly bodies from view was cleared up on day four, sufficient so these stars could be seen in the atmospheric expanse.

Universe Today

The atmosphere we enjoy today is radically different from the atmosphere that formed with the Earth billions of years ago. And yet, the Earth’s early atmosphere somehow transformed into the life giving atmosphere we enjoy today.


The Earth formed with the Sun 4.6 billion years ago. At this point, it was nothing more than a molten ball of rock surrounded by an atmosphere of hydrogen and helium. Because the Earth didn’t have a magnetic field to protect it yet, the intense solar wind from the young Sun blew this early atmosphere away.
As the Earth cooled enough to form a solid crust (4.4 billion years ago), it was covered with active volcanos. These volcanos spewed out gasses, like water vapor, carbon dioxide and ammonia. This early toxic atmosphere was nothing like the atmosphere we have today.
Light from the Sun broke down the ammonia molecules released by volcanos, releasing nitrogen into the atmosphere. Over billions of years, the quantity of nitrogen built up to the levels we see today.


Earth’s Early Atmosphere


It wasn't until cynobacteria evolved photosynthesis somewhere around 3.8 billion years ago that the oxygen atmosphere we have today evolved.

 

[dust1n]

Maybe God created the light, and then he used the light to create the sun? All the way to the point that the sun had all the light, which is why we seeing release light now?


Oh wait, no, that makes no sense.

 

[averageJOE]

I will assume you are not being facetious, and reply that the light from the stars had already reached earth. What was blocking the heavenly bodies from view was cleared up on day four, sufficient so these stars could be seen in the atmospheric expanse.

I don't think your quite following. If you look up at night and see the stars your looking at light that took years to reach earth. Some of those stars even died off but the light is just now getting here.

Starlight

"The next closest star to us is Proxima Centauri. This star is 4.3 light years away which means that light from it takes 4.3 years to reach us. Our galaxy is about 100,000 light years across. This means that it can take tens of thousands of years for light from some stars in our galaxy to reach us."

But your saying that those lights already reached earth and could be seen in only four days?

Also, when you say "seen", seen by whom?

 

[painted wolf]

He's also saying that when the Bible says God "made" them that the Bible is wrong.

God clearly made them earlier but hid them for some reason... maybe he thought it would surprise the trees or dry up the deep.

wa:do

 

[camanintx]

As to plants not mentioned in Genesis, "You are worthy, Jehovah, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created." (Revelation 4:11)

Still doesn't explain why Genesis puts seeded plants before animals when the fossil record shows animals predate seeded plants by 100 million years.

 

[Iti oj]

http://www.amazon.com/Tree-Life-Sto...=1340330061&sr=1-1&keywords=tree+david+suzukihttp://www.amazon.com/Tree-Life-Sto...=1340330061&sr=1-1&keywords=tree+david+suzuki

 

[Hawkins]

Possibilities and assumptions.

God created%2

 

[rusra02]

I don't think your quite following. If you look up at night and see the stars your looking at light that took years to reach earth. Some of those stars even died off but the light is just now getting here.

Starlight

"The next closest star to us is Proxima Centauri. This star is 4.3 light years away which means that light from it takes 4.3 years to reach us. Our galaxy is about 100,000 light years across. This means that it can take tens of thousands of years for light from some stars in our galaxy to reach us."

But your saying that those lights already reached earth and could be seen in only four days?

Also, when you say "seen", seen by whom?

I did understand you. The Genesis account is written from the standpoint of an observer on earth. Of course, there were no humans until the sixth creative day. Nonetheless, God described his creative activity toward Earth as a human would understand it.
Regarding light from stars, this light had long since reached the vicinity of the earth, but could not penetrate to Earth's surface until God first created Earth's atmosphere and then gradually cleared it on day four.

 

[mycorrhiza]

I did understand you. The Genesis account is written from the standpoint of an observer on earth. Of course, there were no humans until the sixth creative day. Nonetheless, God described his creative activity toward Earth as a human would understand it.
Regarding light from stars, this light had long since reached the vicinity of the earth, but could not penetrate to Earth's surface until God first created Earth's atmosphere and then gradually cleared it on day four.

That's not what it says in my Bible or any of the other 19 I looked up. The hebrew word used when the sun, moon and stars are created on the fourth day is the same word used when the land animals and the firmament was created. There is nothing in the Bible that points towards the stars, moon and sun being created earlier and then just becoming visible on the fourth day. There is no mention of the atmosphere gradually clearing on day four.

Could you provide me with a translation that fits your description?

 

[rusra02]

Universe Today

The atmosphere we enjoy today is radically different from the atmosphere that formed with the Earth billions of years ago. And yet, the Earth’s early atmosphere somehow transformed into the life giving atmosphere we enjoy today.


The Earth formed with the Sun 4.6 billion years ago. At this point, it was nothing more than a molten ball of rock surrounded by an atmosphere of hydrogen and helium. Because the Earth didn’t have a magnetic field to protect it yet, the intense solar wind from the young Sun blew this early atmosphere away.
As the Earth cooled enough to form a solid crust (4.4 billion years ago), it was covered with active volcanos. These volcanos spewed out gasses, like water vapor, carbon dioxide and ammonia. This early toxic atmosphere was nothing like the atmosphere we have today.
Light from the Sun broke down the ammonia molecules released by volcanos, releasing nitrogen into the atmosphere. Over billions of years, the quantity of nitrogen built up to the levels we see today.


Earth’s Early Atmosphere


It wasn't until cynobacteria evolved photosynthesis somewhere around 3.8 billion years ago that the oxygen atmosphere we have today evolved.

How God formed the Sun, Moon, and Earth "in the beginning" is not described in detail in the Bible. At the time God began his creative work toward the Earth, the Earth was apparently covered with water. (Genesis 1:2)
As to photosynthesis having "evolved", photosysnthesis is "technology far superior to anything mankind has devised- self-regulating, self-maintaining, submicroscopic "machines" that operate at thousands or even millions of cycles per second (without noise, pollution, or ugliness), turning sunlight into sugar." (g97 1/22 p.22) To claim it "evolved", in my opinion, is equivalent to claiming the international space station evolved. No, wait, the ISS is not nearly as complex as photosynthesis. What photosynthesis reveals (and all other creation) is a small portion of the mind of God.
(Psalm 104:14-24)

​

​

​

 

[rusra02]

That's not what it says in my Bible or any of the other 19 I looked up. The hebrew word used when the sun, moon and stars are created on the fourth day is the same word used when the land animals and the firmament was created. There is nothing in the Bible that points towards the stars, moon and sun being created earlier and then just becoming visible on the fourth day. There is no mention of the atmosphere gradually clearing on day four.

Could you provide me with a translation that fits your description?

To make the statement you made above, "There is nothing in the Bible that points towards the stars, moon and sun being created earlier" , you must ignore the very first verse in the Bible.

(Genesis​

1:14-19) . . .And God went on to say: “Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night; and they must serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years. 15 And they must serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it came to be so. 16 And God proceeded to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. 17 Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth, 18 and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that [it was] good. 19 And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a fourth day. (New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures) [highlights added]

The luminaries, Sun, moon, stars make a division between day and night, and divide our seasons, and year here on earth. Many calendars are based on such luminaries.God "made" them in the sense that he put them in earth's expanse, making them visible to those who would live on earth. btw, the Hebrew verb ba ra' meaning "create" is not used at Genesis 1:16, but rather the Hebrew verb a sah', meaning "make".
​

​

​

 

[mycorrhiza]

To make the statement you made above, "There is nothing in the Bible that points towards the stars, moon and sun being created earlier" , you must ignore the very first verse in the Bible.

(Genesis​

1:14-19) . . .And God went on to say: “Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night; and they must serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years. 15 And they must serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it came to be so. 16 And God proceeded to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. 17 Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth, 18 and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that [it was] good. 19 And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a fourth day. (New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures) [highlights added]

The luminaries, Sun, moon, stars make a division between day and night, and divide our seasons, and year here on earth. Many calendars are based on such luminaries.God "made" them in the sense that he put them in earth's expanse, making them visible to those who would live on earth. btw, the Hebrew verb ba ra' meaning "create" is not used at Genesis 1:16, but rather the Hebrew verb a sah', meaning "make".
​

Let me highlight a different part for you. That part clearly shows that he created the sun, stars and moon. The same verb is used when he makes the land animals and the firmament, so are you suggesting that he just made the animals visible? and made the firmament visible?

It clearly says come to be in the expanse, indicating that they weren't there before. It doesn't say "come to be visible in the expanse".

 

[mycorrhiza]

As to photosynthesis having "evolved", photosysnthesis is "technology far superior to anything mankind has devised- self-regulating, self-maintaining, submicroscopic "machines" that operate at thousands or even millions of cycles per second (without noise, pollution, or ugliness), turning sunlight into sugar." (g97 1/22 p.22) To claim it "evolved", in my opinion, is equivalent to claiming the international space station evolved. No, wait, the ISS is not nearly as complex as photosynthesis. What photosynthesis reveals (and all other creation) is a small portion of the mind of God.

I wouldn't call chloroplasts submicroscopic, and photosynthesis is well understood. It's very complex, but not nearly as complex as some of man's creations. Complexity doesn't imply design* and we know some things about the origins of photosynthesis and how it was incorporated into plants, even if we know far from everything about how it evolved. God of the gaps is never a good argument.

That it turns light into sugar is an oversimplification and it does bring pollution: it's called oxygen. One of my plants makes sounds when I water it, and there are some ugly plants out there .


*A good example of this is the eye, where we have plenty of intermediate stages. From photosensitive cells, to a dedicated photosensitive dot, to a simple eye to a more complex eye to an even more complex eye. So the complexity of the current eyes is due to evolution, it doesn't mean that it suddenly popped into existence.

 

[camanintx]

God "made" them in the sense that he put them in earth's expanse, making them visible to those who would live on earth. btw, the Hebrew verb ba ra' meaning "create" is not used at Genesis 1:16, but rather the Hebrew verb a sah', meaning "make".

Is it also your interpretation that Gog "made" seeded plants on the third day but didn't make them visible until after animals were made on the fifth day?
​

 

[rusra02]

I wouldn't call chloroplasts submicroscopic, and photosynthesis is well understood. It's very complex, but not nearly as complex as some of man's creations. Complexity doesn't imply design* and we know some things about the origins of photosynthesis and how it was incorporated into plants, even if we know far from everything about how it evolved. God of the gaps is never a good argument.

That it turns light into sugar is an oversimplification and it does bring pollution: it's called oxygen. One of my plants makes sounds when I water it, and there are some ugly plants out there .


*A good example of this is the eye, where we have plenty of intermediate stages. From photosensitive cells, to a dedicated photosensitive dot, to a simple eye to a more complex eye to an even more complex eye. So the complexity of the current eyes is due to evolution, it doesn't mean that it suddenly popped into existence.

Really? Oxygen is pollution? And the human eye engineered itself? Complexity doesn't imply design? Really? A piece of wood with a name carved into it implies design.

 

[mycorrhiza]

Really? Oxygen is pollution? And the human eye engineered itself? Complexity doesn't imply design? Really? A piece of wood with a name carved into it implies design.

Not pollution the way we see it, but it severely changed our athmosphere.

It came to be through evolution, yes. We see several intermediate stage in the difference between modern mammal eyes and earlier eyes and photosensitive cells.

There's a difference between a carved name and an eye. The carved name implies language, while the eye is just an effect of adaption, natural selection and mutation. Evolution very well explains the complexity of life.

 

[camanintx]

Really? Oxygen is pollution?

For plants, yes it is.

And the human eye engineered itself? Complexity doesn't imply design? Really? A piece of wood with a name carved into it implies design.

Last time I checked, wood wasn't able to carve itself which is why design is implied. Since life is perfectly able of changing itself through random mutation and natural selection, design is not required.