Darwin's Illusion

[YoursTrue]

I thought you had been involved in discussions about dating. Dating of the earth is done using modern radiometric techniques. Applying those techniques to strata containing no evidence of living things and then strata with evidence of living things gives us estimates of the age of living things. These are estimates using validated techniques and not guesses or speculation.

If cells emerged from some volcanic vent billions of years ago, the emergence of cells was the start of life. Once you have living cells, you have living things.

The evidence indicates that flight evolved well after the colonization of the land. Insects were the first to exploit the atmosphere as a medium of transit. Sometime, between 350 and 400 million years ago. Which puts it significantly much more recent than the estimated age of life on Earth at 3.5 billion years.

Though you are probably correct that life began in water.

The Bible has it that first there was aquatic life along with flying creatures. After that came land animals.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Bible has it that first there was aquatic life along with flying creatures. After that came land animals.

Flying animals came after land animals. And even worse the Bible has plants before the Sun existed.

 

[YoursTrue]

Flying animals came after land animals. And even worse the Bible has plants before the Sun existed.

Evolution is simply no longer a viable solution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evolution is simply no longer a viable solution.

Why? Because it refutes your book of myths? That was done a long time before we knew that life was the product of evolution. Early Christian geologists refuted the Noah's Ark myth. I am not sure when the Moses myths were refuted, but it might have been before Darwin as well.

 

[Valjean]

However it happened, Moses received information as to their creation. And I believe Moses insofar as the creative process goes more than I believe you insofar as things you've heard. Yes, however Moses knew and however he described it, life began in Adam after the "molecules" were put together. Bye for now. I won't say any more now because I could go on to why people and not gorillas or cockroaches have in mind god, gods, or God, however they want to determine it. Maybe later.

You're spouting mythology again. Do you really think the Bible stories are factual? Why -- cause you were raised with them? Because they were installed early in childhood, before you developed any critical thinking skills?

And what difference if only humans have invented religious folklore? That's meaningless.

Subduction Zone said: ↑
Moses was fictional too. Haven't you ever studied the history of the Bible at all?
LOL, I know some believe that. Meantime, he wrote that sea life and flying creatures came before land dwellers.

Why do you believe Moses existed? If he did exist, why do you believe he wrote anything?

 

[Valjean]

Evolution is simply no longer a viable solution.

No longer? Why do you say that? Has something changed, was some new discovery made?

Evidence supporting the ToE increases on a daily basis.
Evolution is the only rational, evidenced explanation for the diversity we see. There are no competing theories. There is only folklore -- all unsupported.

 

[YoursTrue]

Flying animals came after land animals. And even worse the Bible has plants before the Sun existed.

No, it doesn't. But anyway, thinking of you, I quote to you something the Bible says at the beginning. Of the Bible also. Notice,
Genesis 1:1-3
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth was formless and desolate, and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep and God’s active force was moving about over the surface of the waters.
And God said: “Let there be light.” Then there was light."
Please notice that I am not obliged, nor do I have the power to explain every single word in the Bible. But I do understand it to an extent, and I hope you will too.
So the heavens outside of the earth were there in the beginning, so was the "watery deep" and light finally came TO the earth. You have your scientists to explain that to you I guess. I guess they can also guess. It (the earth) was in darkness before God made light to reach the earth. Sorry you don't like that, but then maybe scientists have a different answer?. (Have a nice day.)

 

[YoursTrue]

You're spouting mythology again. Do you really think the Bible stories are factual? Why -- cause you were raised with them? Because they were installed early in childhood, before you developed any critical thinking skills?

And what difference if only humans have invented religious folklore? That's meaningless.
Why do you believe Moses existed? If he did exist, why do you believe he wrote anything?

I see nothing better than what is in the Bible. Yes, I believe that Moses existed and that he wrote what was eventually compiled as the first 5 books. He did not write and publish like we do today. Besides, speaking of "evolution," maybe you think there were not wars? And maybe you think there is no God, is that so?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it doesn't. But anyway, thinking of you, I quote to you something the Bible says at the beginning. Of the Bible also. Notice,
Genesis 1:1-3
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth was formless and desolate, and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep and God’s active force was moving about over the surface of the waters.
And God said: “Let there be light.” Then there was light."
Please notice that I am not obliged, nor do I have the power to explain every single word in the Bible. But I do understand it to an extent, and I hope you will too.
So the heavens outside of the earth were there in the beginning, so was the "watery deep" and light finally came TO the earth. You have your scientists to explain that to you I guess. I guess they can also guess. It (the earth) was in darkness before God made light to reach the earth. Sorry you don't like that, but then maybe scientists have a different answer?. (Have a nice day.)

Actually if you are going to use that nonsense you do need to be able to explain it. I can explain it, I doubt if you can. Oh, by the way, on the fourth day according to the fairy tale:

"14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day."

 

[gnostic]

I see nothing better than what is in the Bible. Yes, I believe that Moses existed and that he wrote what was eventually compiled as the first 5 books. He did not write and publish like we do today.

Except there are no literary evidence that such books existed in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, or the Late Bronze Age in Canaan.

We do find texts written in cuneiform, eg in the palace archives at Megiddo, but there are absolutely nothing in the 15th and 14th centuries BCE pertaining to Moses or Joshua or to events that supposedly took place in Exodus to Joshua (book). Not even inscriptions of biblical texts on scraps of parchment or papyrus, or fragments of clay or stone tablets.

And in those two centuries, there are correspondents (letters) in Egyptian hieratic & hieroglyphs, and tablet fragments in Akkadian cuneiform (eg portions of the Epic of Gilgamesh) discovered at Megiddo.

Also, in the 15th & 14th centuries BCE, proto-Canaanite or paleo-Hebrew alphabet didn’t in this period; such alphabet existed before 11th century BCE.

So I would ask you, hypothetically, if Moses was historical person, in what language did Moses supposedly write Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, etc, if Hebrew scripts weren’t even invented yet?

The fact is, there are zero evidence of the Exodus existing in the late 15th century BCE. There are no tablets or scrolls or parchment of Exodus or other books attributed to Moses.

Plus, Egypt have no records of Moses, who was supposedly adopted by Egyptian princess or of him liberating his people from slavery.

Plus, the city of Rameses (Pi-Ramesses, which mean “house of Ramesses) supposedly built by Hebrew slaves according to the Exodus. However, this city wasn’t built until the 13th century BCE, named after the founder of the 19th century pharaoh, Ramesses I.

Pi-Ramesses was only under construction during the reign by Ramesses’ son, Seti I, and grandson Ramesses II.

So, basically, the author of Exodus, really have very limited knowledge of Egyptian history.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So I would ask you, hypothetically, if Moses was historical person, in what language did Moses supposedly write Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, etc, if Hebrew scripts weren’t even invented yet?

Jacobean English? No wait, that would have been Adam. I could not help myself since I did know of a poster on another forum that argued that the language in the Garden of Eden was the same as in the KJV Bible.

 

[YoursTrue]

Except there are no literary evidence that such books existed in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, or the Late Bronze Age in Canaan.

We do find texts written in cuneiform, eg in the palace archives at Megiddo, but there are absolutely nothing in the 15th and 14th centuries BCE pertaining to Moses or Joshua or to events that supposedly took place in Exodus to Joshua (book). Not even inscriptions of biblical texts on scraps of parchment or papyrus, or fragments of clay or stone tablets.

And in those two centuries, there are correspondents (letters) in Egyptian hieratic & hieroglyphs, and tablet fragments in Akkadian cuneiform (eg portions of the Epic of Gilgamesh) discovered at Megiddo.

Also, in the 15th & 14th centuries BCE, proto-Canaanite or paleo-Hebrew alphabet didn’t in this period; such alphabet existed before 11th century BCE.

So I would ask you, hypothetically, if Moses was historical person, in what language did Moses supposedly write Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, etc, if Hebrew scripts weren’t even invented yet?

The fact is, there are zero evidence of the Exodus existing in the late 15th century BCE. There are no tablets or scrolls or parchment of Exodus or other books attributed to Moses.

Plus, Egypt have no records of Moses, who was supposedly adopted by Egyptian princess or of him liberating his people from slavery.

Plus, the city of Rameses (Pi-Ramesses, which mean “house of Ramesses) supposedly built by Hebrew slaves according to the Exodus. However, this city wasn’t built until the 13th century BCE, named after the founder of the 19th century pharaoh, Ramesses I.

Pi-Ramesses was only under construction during the reign by Ramesses’ son, Seti I, and grandson Ramesses II.

So, basically, the author of Exodus, really have very limited knowledge of Egyptian history.

In reference to the language, it is considered as part of the Paleo Semitic group of languages. You might want to refer to Hebrew language - Wikipedia for some interesting information. This is not to say that the language of the group called the Hebrews has not changed in form, but it is and was used within the context of the group sometimes called the Hebrews.

 

[YoursTrue]

Except there are no literary evidence that such books existed in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, or the Late Bronze Age in Canaan.

We do find texts written in cuneiform, eg in the palace archives at Megiddo, but there are absolutely nothing in the 15th and 14th centuries BCE pertaining to Moses or Joshua or to events that supposedly took place in Exodus to Joshua (book). Not even inscriptions of biblical texts on scraps of parchment or papyrus, or fragments of clay or stone tablets.

And in those two centuries, there are correspondents (letters) in Egyptian hieratic & hieroglyphs, and tablet fragments in Akkadian cuneiform (eg portions of the Epic of Gilgamesh) discovered at Megiddo.

Also, in the 15th & 14th centuries BCE, proto-Canaanite or paleo-Hebrew alphabet didn’t in this period; such alphabet existed before 11th century BCE.

So I would ask you, hypothetically, if Moses was historical person, in what language did Moses supposedly write Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, etc, if Hebrew scripts weren’t even invented yet?

The fact is, there are zero evidence of the Exodus existing in the late 15th century BCE. There are no tablets or scrolls or parchment of Exodus or other books attributed to Moses.

Plus, Egypt have no records of Moses, who was supposedly adopted by Egyptian princess or of him liberating his people from slavery.

Plus, the city of Rameses (Pi-Ramesses, which mean “house of Ramesses) supposedly built by Hebrew slaves according to the Exodus. However, this city wasn’t built until the 13th century BCE, named after the founder of the 19th century pharaoh, Ramesses I.

Pi-Ramesses was only under construction during the reign by Ramesses’ son, Seti I, and grandson Ramesses II.

So, basically, the author of Exodus, really have very limited knowledge of Egyptian history.

In reference to records there are some civilizations that have doctored up histories, or no mention of anything that was not flattering to the rulers. You can't always depend on a nation's teachings to tell the truth about themselves. What Japanese history lessons leave out - BBC News That's just one example there are many UNTOLD experiences by many nations.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why? Because it refutes your book of myths? That was done a long time before we knew that life was the product of evolution. Early Christian geologists refuted the Noah's Ark myth. I am not sure when the Moses myths were refuted, but it might have been before Darwin as well.

As I read more and more about the history of scientific consideration of biologic evolution it really does sound like a conjectured account based on the format the various scientists embrace. Now looking at branches, and the ideas of moving from eukaryotes and prokaryotes to greater things, it is conjecture.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As I read more and more about the history of scientific consideration of biologic evolution it really does sound like a conjectured account based on the format the various scientists embrace. Now looking at branches, and the ideas of moving from eukaryotes and prokaryotes to greater things, it is conjecture.

Really? And how would you prove that claim? I could probably say the same about being a child molester since there probably is equal evidence for both. It is never wise to make claims about others that not one can not only not back up at all, but also appear to be false and defamatory. That is why I would not do such a think. I have no such evidence against you. It also would appear to be false. Do you have any evidence for your claim which is also apparently false?

 

[YoursTrue]

Really? And how would you prove that claim? I could probably say the same about being a child molester since there probably is equal evidence for both. It is never wise to make claims about others that not one can not only not back up at all, but also appear to be false and defamatory. That is why I would not do such a think. I have no such evidence against you. It also would appear to be false. Do you have any evidence for your claim which is also apparently false?

There is absolutely nothing to show that life happened to happen from a chemical reaction of some kind in the watery bubbly deep. And then moved on from there. If I am wrong, I'll be happy to rescind that statement. Thank you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is absolutely nothing to show that life happened to happen from a chemical reaction of some kind in the watery bubbly deep. And then moved on from there. If I am wrong, I'll be happy to rescind that statement. Thank you.

Not true. Unfortunately there is no point in providing you with any evidence. You have already decided that you can accuse others of wrongs that you cannot support.

Tell me, would I be in the wrong if I accused you of being a child molester? I have no more evidence for that than you do for your claims against scientists. Why is what you do acceptable but me making unsupported accusations against you wrong?

 

[YoursTrue]

Not true. Unfortunately there is no point in providing you with any evidence. You have already decided that you can accuse others of wrongs that you cannot support.

Tell me, would I be in the wrong if I accused you of being a child molester? I have no more evidence for that than you do for your claims against scientists. Why is what you do acceptable but me making unsupported accusations against you wrong?

Talk about changing topics... By this time I truly don't expect you to explain anything about your beliefs. It's been interesting though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Talk about changing topics... By this time I truly don't expect you to explain anything about your beliefs. It's been interesting though.

How was that changing the topic? I used that argument to show how wrong you are in your false claims about others.

It is amazing that you cannot see that.

 

[YoursTrue]

How was that changing the topic? I used that argument to show how wrong you are in your false claims about others.

It is amazing that you cannot see that.

Really? Try looking at the following:
How did life begin? | New Scientist
Very interesting article -- begins this way:
"The question of how life began is one of the most profound in science, and although many theories exist, scientists still cannot agree on an answer. It continues to be a topic for debate... "