Darwin's Illusion

[YoursTrue]

That article is about plants on land. Did you not notice that? But yes, plants would j have appeared first.. They had to. Think about it.

I have decided that much of the dates and explanation of evolution is hooey. Like as if they know 240 million years ago, etc. Thank you very much for allowing me to question you and others, sometimes you may offer an explanation or copy from an article.

 

[rational experiences]

A day never ends.

The humans experience of the day ends.

Why a human has to exist to count.

If a human says mutual 12/12.

It was because a circuit O and a planet O around the lighted sun body that gave immaculate it's sacrifice...is 12 too.

Why men said earth Timing was 12 yet it was constant so it was zero actual. O.

To return to a review 0 was always behind you a teaching in a human only experience.

Reason you aren't science.

Numbers maths calculated about mass presence...is added. Yet adding does not own you human self as if you are creating.

It's a thesis I must apply to convert mass to get energy as I minus.

So man said I get energy only in the minus position.

Minus back in time in bio life he said is just one cell.

Humans as a human to be body functional and conscious owns as many multi cells as a human being human owns instantly.

Thesis isn't about instant it's about the past only.

And humans know they didn't own thesis of any animal it's only medical advice.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I read that the light was evidently diffused and altered over time.

That is apologetics . It also runs counter to the Genesis myth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have decided that much of the dates and explanation of evolution is hooey. Like as if they know 240 million years ago, etc. Thank you very much for allowing me to question you and others, sometimes you may offer an explanation or copy from an article.

Why are the dates "hooey"? You can't just say that. You have to be able to show that the science is wrong. And no creationist has been able to do that.

You are not questioning right now. You are denying. Do you realize that it is highly hypocritical to deny science while relying on science to get that message out? Others can see this.

 

[cladking]

I have decided that much of the dates and explanation of evolution is hooey. Like as if they know 240 million years ago, etc. Thank you very much for allowing me to question you and others, sometimes you may offer an explanation or copy from an article.

Much of the dating is actual science. Of course believers in science don't understand that it is still dependent on axioms and definitions.

The physical sciences are much more rigorous than nonsense like "Evolution".

 

[cladking]

Yes, science is ever changing. Our scientific views are relative to our knowledge at a given point in time. Right or wrong, Darwin provided his input; the concern now is not Darwin as a person/scientist but rather the validity of ideas. Not original evolutionary ideas but rather the contemporary evolutionary theory, i.e., the modern synthesis. the focus of my argument has always been the "MS" (#753 & #781)

Yes. Darwin was wrong about everything and belief in his conclusions have led to great evil.

But he also led to the modern confusion about the nature of change in species. We can't shake his influence even though even biologists often agree that most of it is overturned. "Origin of species" is still waved in the face of heretics as though it is a magical talisman that can ward off evil, the religious, and the unconvinced.

When Darwin is seen as a buffoon and a simpleton we might have a viable theory about life and how it changes.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, it really does not. And don't forget that there are two versions of the myth in Genesis.

They relate to creation in different ways. The first account is in chronological order, divided into six “days.” The second is written in order of topical importance. After a brief prologue, it goes right to the creation of Adam, since he and his family are the subject of what comes after, not that of plants and molecules. We learn that after his creation Adam was to live in a beautiful garden in Eden. So the planting of the garden of Eden is mentioned. More is introduced as needed.

 

[YoursTrue]

Much of the dating is actual science. Of course believers in science don't understand that it is still dependent on axioms and definitions.

The physical sciences are much more rigorous than nonsense like "Evolution".

Billions of years ago can hardly be tested.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes. Darwin was wrong about everything and belief in his conclusions have led to great evil.

But he also led to the modern confusion about the nature of change in species. We can't shake his influence even though even biologists often agree that most of it is overturned. "Origin of species" is still waved in the face of heretics as though it is a magical talisman that can ward off evil, the religious, and the unconvinced.

When Darwin is seen as a buffoon and a simpleton we might have a viable theory about life and how it changes.

To speak of genetic change is not unscientific or unrealistic.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They relate to creation in different ways. The first account is in chronological order, divided into six “days.” The second is written in order of topical importance. After a brief prologue, it goes right to the creation of Adam, since he and his family are the subject of what comes after, not that of plants and molecules. We learn that after his creation Adam was to live in a beautiful garden in Eden. So the planting of the garden of Eden is mentioned. More is introduced as needed.

No, the order of appearance of life and plants is very different between the two of them. Honest scholars admit that they are two different myths joined together. When your standards for the Bible are "it is literal until it contradicts itself" you are only admitting that it is a book of myths and cannot face that fact.

Lets' go over the Genesis 2 myth:

This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

<Please note that Man was the first organism, before all other animals. Before plants even.>



8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.


,<Trees did not exist, The garden was "planted" but if you ever raised a garden you would know that the plants do not come up instantly. So once again, not even plant life before Adam>


10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

<Man is to work the garden>



18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

,<Man is lonely and needs some "help">


19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

<Poor Adam, he was not into animals>

21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

25 Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

,<Translation, Bom Chica Wah Wah>

At any rate, the order is completely different in Gen 2.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Billions of years ago can hardly be tested.

Why can't it be?

You made the claim, you need to be able to support it.

 

[rational experiences]

Biology except the wood body garden is mainly water percentile with natural minerals that exist first in its mass the mineral.

Humans or life is not waters mass nor minerals mass says I contradict my life as I compare.

Minerals in waters chemical biology presence ever changes interactive results.

Humans answer what is a theist as a dangerous human mind.

Genetics is medical advice of any type of biological form present that a human reviewed. Medical science is specific stated only about the living bodies I see. Healer terms.

Genesis just a basic shared biological condition of living presence by billions of forms and each separate. Known exact when a human thinks.

Humans hence said it's gods advice. Not that it was a God. In the presence of mass was a relativity teaching. Medical.

Is not a day by day accounting only discussed as you are a human and a scientist saying each day genetics seemed to change? Yes.

As we experience time on earth in and as biological life. Relativity.

Nowhere else is the experience compared but as a human.

So legally other humans had to advise scientists as human theists no man is God ...
as you pretend you invented created all things yourself. Occult thinker not medical science...the healer.

The big con was human scientists false preached humans consciousness had existed before it's biology had.

Actually.

 

[YoursTrue]

Much of the dating is actual science. Of course believers in science don't understand that it is still dependent on axioms and definitions.

The physical sciences are much more rigorous than nonsense like "Evolution".

I can't speak for evolution, but some of it (not all of it) makes sense.
I have questions about many things pertaining to the theory of evolution and right now they mostly center on the way of measuring dates for bones. I know what scientists say about that but I have questions. As an example, a rock that seems to have been etched or carved out looking somewhat like a human albeit very primative in the construction was given a date wayyyy back as if it was carved out by some type of human a looonnnggg time ago but really the date is of the rock. That's just one example.
As for science, I do believe that, as an example, vaccines are helpful, and I appreciate those who develop such things by the science that is involved in testing and developing.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why can't it be?

You made the claim, you need to be able to support it.

lol, .....ok...maybe later. Next time I come across a number like "billions" of years ago, I'll see if the writers of those things support their claim.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why can't it be?

You made the claim, you need to be able to support it.

So you think billions of years ago is testable? lol, just asking...

 

[YoursTrue]

No, the order of appearance of life and plants is very different between the two of them. Honest scholars admit that they are two different myths joined together. When your standards for the Bible are "it is literal until it contradicts itself" you are only admitting that it is a book of myths and cannot face that fact.

Lets' go over the Genesis 2 myth:

This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

<Please note that Man was the first organism, before all other animals. Before plants even.>



8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.


,<Trees did not exist, The garden was "planted" but if you ever raised a garden you would know that the plants do not come up instantly. So once again, not even plant life before Adam>


10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

<Man is to work the garden>



18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

,<Man is lonely and needs some "help">


19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

<Poor Adam, he was not into animals>

21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

25 Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

,<Translation, Bom Chica Wah Wah>

At any rate, the order is completely different in Gen 2.

I read it again and see, unlike what you see, that the two accounts coordinate well with each other. (Have a good one...)

 

[YoursTrue]

No, the order of appearance of life and plants is very different between the two of them. Honest scholars admit that they are two different myths joined together. When your standards for the Bible are "it is literal until it contradicts itself" you are only admitting that it is a book of myths and cannot face that fact.

Lets' go over the Genesis 2 myth:

This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

<Please note that Man was the first organism, before all other animals. Before plants even.>



8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.


,<Trees did not exist, The garden was "planted" but if you ever raised a garden you would know that the plants do not come up instantly. So once again, not even plant life before Adam>


10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

<Man is to work the garden>



18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

,<Man is lonely and needs some "help">


19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

<Poor Adam, he was not into animals>

21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

25 Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

,<Translation, Bom Chica Wah Wah>

At any rate, the order is completely different in Gen 2.

It seems that the garden was planted and flourishing before God made Adam from the dust. You say trees did not exist? When? When Adam was placed in the garden?

 

[Subduction Zone]

lol, .....ok...maybe later. Next time I come across a number like "billions" of years ago, I'll see if the writers of those things support their claim.

Trust me, they have. You would need to do your homework and go back to the original peer reviewed article to see where the dates came from and how they were supported. But you have just admitted that you made a false accusation. It does not matter if you are right or not, if you do not know something a person has no business accusing others of serious wrongs.

Let's say that you actually were a child abuser, I seriously doubt if you are, a person that made that accusation without actual evidence would be guilty of a very serious sin. When a person accuses someone of something and they do not actually know that their accusation is true makes their accusation indistinguishable from a lie.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It seems that the garden was planted and flourishing before God made Adam from the dust. You say trees did not exist? When? When Adam was placed in the garden?

No. If anything the Bible contradicts that. Read it again. Where do you get that from?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I read it again and see, unlike what you see, that the two accounts coordinate well with each other. (Have a good one...)

That is only because you are unable to reason rationally when your beliefs are threatened. They are clearly two different stories. If you cannot see that that is your problem.

Let's just take the animals. Adam was the first animal created in Chapter two and the last animal created in Chapter one. That is a major contradiction.