Does Science disprove the Genesis description of Creation?

[metis]

If you are a human then you are an ape. If you deny being an ape you are saying that you are not a human. Every single one of your ancestors was an ape.


Tell me, is a German Shepherd "100% dog"? If not when did it stop being "100% dog". For that some reason you are "100% ape". A population cannot evolve out of its past.

Yes, I am an ape, my parents are apes my children are apes. That is because I am a human being and human beings are apes.

I was in gymnastics in high school and college, thus I embraced my ape heritage.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Nice try, and I've heard the above many times before, but it you take it step by step and look at the order and when each supposedly happened, it ain't a match. Let me recommend you go back through what I posted, keep your Bible open, and you should be able to see that I did not twist anything.

Also, it says that God stopped creating after the 6th day, contrary to what you said above:
Gen.2
[1]Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
[2] And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done.
[3] So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he had done in creation.

Genesis2[4] starts another rendition of the creation account, and analysis of this indicates that it was written at a different time and likely by a different author. This should not shock anyone who studies scripture since there many what theologians call "variations" found within. The early Church never believed in scriptural inerrancy as that was an over-zealous response to "modernism".

Oh pal...
I have never seen anyone who grasps at straw halms as the atheist did on this thread.
Yhe Thread describes the creation in relation to science, and my explanation was to
PURELY SHOW THAT THE NEBULAR THEORY WHICH THE ATHEIST USES TO CLAIM THE BIBLE IS WRONG, WAS ACTUALLY PLAGERISED FROM THE BIBLE.
what you are now doing is to talk about everything, but the relation between the Creation story of the Bible, and Science.

You are now demanding to build a strawpuppet by claiming that there were 2 different creation descriptions, written by different people at different times.
There is Zero evidence for this claim, and any child can understand that Genesis 1 is a summary on how God said He created everything, and Genesis 2 goes into details on how God did it on the 6th day.


Do you realise that by doing the above, you are actually displaying that you can not get past the fact that:
TheAuthor of the Bible told the world 3400 years ago how the Universe came into existence, and science today knows that what was written in Genesis 1, IS CORRECT!

I love it when the atheist realises that their previous strawpuppet burned down, and they now have to discuss other strawpuppets to save face.

Greetings.
NS, I will obviously at a later stage discuss the origins of life, and scientific discoveries which the scientistsa dont know is evidence of Biblical descriptions recorded 3500 Years ago.

 

[joelr]

That's not true at all.
It says: In the beginning, God created the Heavens, and the Earth.
Then it continues to say that the Sun gave off a dim red glow, resulting in the first Day, and Time came into existance.
It says that before this first day, the Earth was an unidentifiable blob of Gas, Liquid and solids, with no recognisable shape!
Why do you have the idea that the Bible say something different than science?

Here is a few question syou should answer for yourself before even attempting to disprove what the Bible might or might not say.
Why does scientists agree that Emmanuel Kant's description of the Nebul;ar theory is the time proven correct version of the origins of our solar system?
Did you know Kant got this from the Bible?
Did you know that scientists , especially today's, did not know that the science they use as a model for the formation of the solar system, came out of Genesis?

Let me give you a nice artistic depiction about the nebular theory, where Nigel Henbest in "Exploding Universe" wrote his finding in the late 70's that the only corect model in this regard, is the one from Kant. Oh, and Nigel Henbest is non religious.

As I said, I can paste this in the Bible and it will not be in contradiction with each other.
Again, I rest my case!
The atheist gets crazy when they see their accusation against the Bible from science, actually came from the book which the Christian clain, was the author of Creation.
Why do you fight this truth so vehemently?
Just accept that the Bible and science does not contradict each other because science took their theory from it.
So simple.
View attachment 50658

The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids (/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo (the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan); Gorilla (the eastern and western gorilla); Pan (the common chimpanzee and the bonobo); and Homo, of which only modern humans remain.

Nebular theory is not in line with biblical cosmology. The sun formed first then clouds of gas and dust eventually orbitted around it and became planets. Stars are flung from nebulas at great speed, when they settle down in a location then they begin the long process of attracting dust around their orbit.
Your biblical version has light come later. Why would planets fall into an orbit around nothing? Or be drawn into the solar system in the first place? This doesn't work in any way. Without a sun it's just empty space of which there are trillions of miles of. You need a star first so the light was already shining from the start. The Earth didn't have a lack of form either. As dust collects it always forms a round object which grows as more mass is added.

What is actually true is the Israelites thought the Earth was flat and a dome resided over it hholding back water. This is exactly what we would expect from Bronze age people taking older creation myths.

"Besides that Genesis 1–11 as a whole is imbued with Mesopotamian myths most of the cosmology is nonsense - "The Earth itself was a flat disc, surrounded by mountains or sea. Above it was the firmament, a transparent but solid dome resting on the mountains, allowing men to see the blue of the waters above, with "windows" to allow the rain to enter, and containing the Sun, Moon and stars. The waters extended below the Earth, which rested on pillars sunk in the waters, and in the underworld was Sheol, the abode of the dead"

The myths are borrowed, both creation stories and the flood myth:
"Comparative mythology provides historical and cross-cultural perspectives for Jewish mythology. Both sources behind the Genesis creation narrative borrowed themes from Mesopotamian mythology,[17][18] but adapted them to their belief in one God,[2] establishing a monotheistic creation in opposition to the polytheistic creation myth of ancient Israel's neighbors."


But to take it literal there are still issues, even with 1 "kind" of every animal this would take far too much space and food.
An ex-JW did a pretty complete job in debunking the Noah story for literalists, I was surprised how in depth he got with the science and calculations.

 

[metis]

Do you realise that by doing the above, you are actually displaying that you can not get past the fact that:
TheAuthor of the Bible told the world 3400 years ago how the Universe came into existence, and science today knows that what was written in Genesis 1, IS CORRECT!

All you've done is to portray your beliefs, such as with the above, as miraculously being slam-dunk facts. When one separates their religious faith from objectively-derived facts, one basically slips backwards into medieval superstition as it's science that's based on objectivity, not religion.

I grew up in a fundamentalist Protestant church with thoughts about going into the ministry but that church's rejection of basic science stopped me. It was a bit later that I ran across a pastor in another denomination that said there is no real conflict if one realizes that the creation accounts are not objective history but more allegorical in nature. It was much later yet that I found out that it's a very good likelihood that it was a subjective response to the Babylonian polytheistic creation narratives that was written earlier and was much more widespread in that region.

BTW, how in the world did you draw a conclusion that I'm an "atheist"? Also, do you ever get out of your comfort zone and actually read articles by serious theologians?

 

[SA Huguenot]

OK, so what does this guy Lloyd's video has to do with teh Creation of the Universe and the Solar system?
All I see is a JW that got very poor answers from his elders in his organisation, and he claimed he started to look for answers.
First one he uses to say the Bible is wrong, is he looks at the different flood stories around the world, and ancient stories from the middle east, realises thay are not similar, them comes to the conclusion the Bible is wrong!
Here he is wrong, for who on earth claims the flood stories all over the world is evidence that the flood of Noah realy occured? Only people that heard 3 hand information. I never used, or thought that the different flood stories are evidence to Noah's flood, but that there are many mythological naratives that might just have its origin in one single event. Remember the myth about Thea, and its discovery. what about Troy in the Illiad? Mythology, and archaeology. All that Christian apologists are saying is that there are Mythologies stories about Noah, it might be more than just Myths. Nothin more, nothing less, and if some JW told him it is evidence, tough luck if you think it is the understanding of all christiansd.

Then Lloyd says Christians are using Woolly Mammoths, Shells on mountains and the Chinese alphabet as evidence that there was a global flood.
Realy, EVIDENCE? says who?
It is interesting to know these factors, but I am the first to agree that it is no evidence at all!
Does this claim disprove the Bible?
Not at all! Strawman again!

Then he says the Christians claim Noahs ark was discovered, and he searched and found no such evidence.
Well, I agree, I also heard about a russian pilot in 1918 who flew from Belisi in Russia over the mountain Agri Daegi, and saw a boat of which he later took a photo wich was destroyed by the Bolshevics in the russian revolution. what about Flavius Josephus that said the ark was on a mountain in Turkey with the same name, and people dug beechemin out of it and soldit as beads? Then we have Ron Wyatt's discovery of an anomaly close to Ararat where he found magnetic indications of the ribs of a large ship? Does this mean Noah's flood was proven?
Nope! Not even close, so why use this as an argument against the Bible.

Then Lloyd comes up with a beautifull argument. He says, If Noah was 600 years old when the flood came, he had only 3 children! Surely in a world where there was no contraceptives, Noah must have had much more children. When Lloyd asked his elders, they told him Noah had some control over the conception methods os something. This made Lloyd realise that the christian people who takes the Bible literally will make up facts, therefore he cant believe the Bible. Well, I dont know who the heck told such a stupid story to him, I have never heard about it. I can only reply that it is just as likely that Noah had only 3 children due to other circumstances, such as that his wife became barren after the birth of his 3rd son. Remember that whilst there was no contraceptives, there was also no pennecilin or other medication, and women did die 100 times as much only 150 years ago than woman giving birth today. She could have had some medical trauma, and lost her fertility. Now, take note of the nice straw Puppet Lloyd concocted, whilst ignoring the fact that there was no reason that Noah only had 3 children. Lloyd is guilty of making up external evidence to the narative.

Lloyd then continues to tell us that there was 2.063 million animals that must have boarded the ark. He insists that insects also had to be taken onto the ark. He asks, how did Noah supply food, fresh water etc to all these insects. He demands that if these insects were not on board the ark, they would have dissappeared. lateron he asks why God allowed Mosquitos, ticks, and lice to enter the ark, and surely this loving God could have known that these insects would kill millions in future.
Please note, Lloyd would demand that even amphibians board the ark. He sneers at the Christian apologist when they say, ONLY ANIMALS WHO BREATHED THROUGH THEIR NOSTRILS was saved.

Now, It is a fact that the Bible says only animals and humans who remained on the land, and breathed through their nostrils, only they died! (gen 7: 22)
What about frogs, turtles, for which also spends a few minutes on telling the listener how he has huge difficuilties in caring for his turtle, and it would surely have died on the ark.
Now, lets see how Lloyd sellectively chooses to guide his own version of events. First of all, if there was a global flood with water bursting out from the earth, and filled the earth with rain for 40 days, this flood would be catastrophic. all the trees and plantlife will be washed from its soil, and as we see at Mnt St Helen, that erupted 40 years ago, these trees filled lake Spirit and as they floated for 40 years, their bark was the first to fall off, and sunk to the bottom. The trees still floated, and the softer wood soaked, and sank first, then the hardwood started to float vertically, revealing to scientists that the bark of thesae trees created coal, and petrified trees standing upright, in and upon these coal beds was due to these mechanics.

Therefore, Lloyd does not know that there was huge islands, many meters thick, of trees and plantmaterial floating on the surface of this water mass, covering an area from Texas to Siberia, that eventually created these fossil beds. Now, why would there be insects on the Ark, if they had decomposing plantlife, rottin corpses etc available for insects to feed and live upon?

These wood islands will be a paradise for amphibeans, so why the need to load them on the ark?
Lloyd would not have survived this flood, he would have taken baggage not needed, and would have sunken this ship before the water rose to its deck.

Sorry, But this guy realy does create strawpuppets, and thinks the Christian apologists are stupid. I know there are some, but not this time pal.
Lloyd talks about how long it will take to board these animals on the ark, and even works out the seconds needed to get every animal on this ark. He does this in calculating 2.63 million animals, but as we see, he made a huge boo boo on what was saved on the ark.

Lloyd tells us tha tNoah had Mature animals on the ark, such as elephants. He calculates the ammount of fodder Noah had to load on his ship.
Who says these animals were mature. I think Noah himself would have known such an error. Having 7 pairs of cattle on the ark, could have produced enough milk to feed baby elephants, rhinos ect. Who knows.
Perhaps Noah being 600 years old had much more managerial skills as we grant the ancients to have had?

Then Lloyd has a problem with Micro Evolution, and dont like the idea that, for instance, only one pair of dog was loaded and condemns the idea that, as he said Christians denies evolution, but when it suits them they use a "more progressice and rapid evolution" , than what evolutionists believes in.
This is obviously a total lie from his part, for it is a scientific fact that Micro Evolution is considered as valid in science as is Macro evolution! And that scientists observed Micro evolution to occur very quick!
Why would he lie about this?
Opinion | Evolution Is Happening Faster Than We Thought (Published 2016)
Evolution Is Slower Than It Looks and Faster Than You Think

OK, so what did I find when I looked at the video so admired by the atheist?

Strawman, after strawman, concocted lies, non scientific claims.
Ignorance to what teh Bible say, and what science says.

Thank you soooo much for posting that video.
It proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the atheist will grab hold of vevry piece of straw, to feed their monstrous bias, and they sunk their ark in a global flood, whilst Noah anchored on Arrarat!!!!

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, so what does this guy Lloyd's video has to do with teh Creation of the Universe and the Solar system?
All I see is a JW that got very poor answers from his elders in his organisation, and he claimed he started to look for answers.
First one he uses to say the Bible is wrong, is he looks at the different flood stories around the world, and ancient stories from the middle east, realises thay are not similar, them comes to the conclusion the Bible is wrong!
Here he is wrong, for who on earth claims the flood stories all over the world is evidence that the flood of Noah realy occured? Only people that heard 3 hand information. I never used, or thought that the different flood stories are evidence to Noah's flood, but that there are many mythological naratives that might just have its origin in one single event. Remember the myth about Thea, and its discovery. what about Troy in the Illiad? Mythology, and archaeology. All that Christian apologists are saying is that there are Mythologies stories about Noah, it might be more than just Myths. Nothin more, nothing less, and if some JW told him it is evidence, tough luck if you think it is the understanding of all christiansd.

Then Lloyd says Christians are using Woolly Mammoths, Shells on mountains and the Chinese alphabet as evidence that there was a global flood.
Realy, EVIDENCE? says who?
It is interesting to know these factors, but I am the first to agree that it is no evidence at all!
Does this claim disprove the Bible?
Not at all! Strawman again!

Then he says the Christians claim Noahs ark was discovered, and he searched and found no such evidence.
Well, I agree, I also heard about a russian pilot in 1918 who flew from Belisi in Russia over the mountain Agri Daegi, and saw a boat of which he later took a photo wich was destroyed by the Bolshevics in the russian revolution. what about Flavius Josephus that said the ark was on a mountain in Turkey with the same name, and people dug beechemin out of it and soldit as beads? Then we have Ron Wyatt's discovery of an anomaly close to Ararat where he found magnetic indications of the ribs of a large ship? Does this mean Noah's flood was proven?
Nope! Not even close, so why use this as an argument against the Bible.

Then Lloyd comes up with a beautifull argument. He says, If Noah was 600 years old when the flood came, he had only 3 children! Surely in a world where there was no contraceptives, Noah must have had much more children. When Lloyd asked his elders, they told him Noah had some control over the conception methods os something. This made Lloyd realise that the christian people who takes the Bible literally will make up facts, therefore he cant believe the Bible. Well, I dont know who the heck told such a stupid story to him, I have never heard about it. I can only reply that it is just as likely that Noah had only 3 children due to other circumstances, such as that his wife became barren after the birth of his 3rd son. Remember that whilst there was no contraceptives, there was also no pennecilin or other medication, and women did die 100 times as much only 150 years ago than woman giving birth today. She could have had some medical trauma, and lost her fertility. Now, take note of the nice straw Puppet Lloyd concocted, whilst ignoring the fact that there was no reason that Noah only had 3 children. Lloyd is guilty of making up external evidence to the narative.

Lloyd then continues to tell us that there was 2.063 million animals that must have boarded the ark. He insists that insects also had to be taken onto the ark. He asks, how did Noah supply food, fresh water etc to all these insects. He demands that if these insects were not on board the ark, they would have dissappeared. lateron he asks why God allowed Mosquitos, ticks, and lice to enter the ark, and surely this loving God could have known that these insects would kill millions in future.
Please note, Lloyd would demand that even amphibians board the ark. He sneers at the Christian apologist when they say, ONLY ANIMALS WHO BREATHED THROUGH THEIR NOSTRILS was saved.

Now, It is a fact that the Bible says only animals and humans who remained on the land, and breathed through their nostrils, only they died! (gen 7: 22)
What about frogs, turtles, for which also spends a few minutes on telling the listener how he has huge difficuilties in caring for his turtle, and it would surely have died on the ark.
Now, lets see how Lloyd sellectively chooses to guide his own version of events. First of all, if there was a global flood with water bursting out from the earth, and filled the earth with rain for 40 days, this flood would be catastrophic. all the trees and plantlife will be washed from its soil, and as we see at Mnt St Helen, that erupted 40 years ago, these trees filled lake Spirit and as they floated for 40 years, their bark was the first to fall off, and sunk to the bottom. The trees still floated, and the softer wood soaked, and sank first, then the hardwood started to float vertically, revealing to scientists that the bark of thesae trees created coal, and petrified trees standing upright, in and upon these coal beds was due to these mechanics.

Therefore, Lloyd does not know that there was huge islands, many meters thick, of trees and plantmaterial floating on the surface of this water mass, covering an area from Texas to Siberia, that eventually created these fossil beds. Now, why would there be insects on the Ark, if they had decomposing plantlife, rottin corpses etc available for insects to feed and live upon?

These wood islands will be a paradise for amphibeans, so why the need to load them on the ark?
Lloyd would not have survived this flood, he would have taken baggage not needed, and would have sunken this ship before the water rose to its deck.

Sorry, But this guy realy does create strawpuppets, and thinks the Christian apologists are stupid. I know there are some, but not this time pal.
Lloyd talks about how long it will take to board these animals on the ark, and even works out the seconds needed to get every animal on this ark. He does this in calculating 2.63 million animals, but as we see, he made a huge boo boo on what was saved on the ark.

Lloyd tells us tha tNoah had Mature animals on the ark, such as elephants. He calculates the ammount of fodder Noah had to load on his ship.
Who says these animals were mature. I think Noah himself would have known such an error. Having 7 pairs of cattle on the ark, could have produced enough milk to feed baby elephants, rhinos ect. Who knows.
Perhaps Noah being 600 years old had much more managerial skills as we grant the ancients to have had?

Then Lloyd has a problem with Micro Evolution, and dont like the idea that, for instance, only one pair of dog was loaded and condemns the idea that, as he said Christians denies evolution, but when it suits them they use a "more progressice and rapid evolution" , than what evolutionists believes in.
This is obviously a total lie from his part, for it is a scientific fact that Micro Evolution is considered as valid in science as is Macro evolution! And that scientists observed Micro evolution to occur very quick!
Why would he lie about this?
Opinion | Evolution Is Happening Faster Than We Thought (Published 2016)
Evolution Is Slower Than It Looks and Faster Than You Think

OK, so what did I find when I looked at the video so admired by the atheist?

Strawman, after strawman, concocted lies, non scientific claims.
Ignorance to what teh Bible say, and what science says.

Thank you soooo much for posting that video.
It proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the atheist will grab hold of vevry piece of straw, to feed their monstrous bias, and they sunk their ark in a global flood, whilst Noah anchored on Arrarat!!!!

Oh please. It is far more likely that you misunderstood the arguments against the Flood myth. The problem is that like many other Christian beliefs there are endless variations of it within Christianity.

Here is an offer. Tell me what your version of the Flood myth is and I will explain to you how it has been shown to be false. I may need to get details from you. I cannot refute an idea if you do not tell me what the idea is. You would likely just claim "strawman" if I did so and you might even be right.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Oh please. It is far more likely that you misunderstood the arguments against the Flood myth. The problem is that like many other Christian beliefs there are endless variations of it within Christianity.

Here is an offer. Tell me what your version of the Flood myth is and I will explain to you how it has been shown to be false. I may need to get details from you. I cannot refute an idea if you do not tell me what the idea is. You would likely just claim "strawman" if I did so and you might even be right.

Well, I do not have a problem with that at all.
before the end of the day, I will open a thread where we can discuss it and lets see what WE, including I, will learn.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I think logic and reason is enough to discredit the creation story of the bible. Light before a light source? Hmmm.

 

[joelr]

Thank you soooo much for posting that video.
It proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the atheist will grab hold of vevry piece of straw, to feed their monstrous bias, and they sunk their ark in a global flood, whilst Noah anchored on Arrarat!!!!

It doesn't prove anything, the exercise is hypothetical because a world flood has been ruled out by modern flood geology.
We have already established this fact with plenty of evidence.
Also the evidence is overwhelming that the OT is a collection of re-worked myths and laws extremely close similar to surrounding cultures. The creation/flood myths are not original, Exodus is shown by archeologists to be a national foundation myth with no bearing on any thing that actually happened and the 10 commandments are a rip-off of the Code of Hammurabi, also written in stone given by a deity. We are not taking the stories literal any more than a Greek myth. At the time of the flood myth most Israelites were still poly-theistic worshipping Yahweh and Ashera, his consort a goddess taken from the Canaanites where the Israelites emerged from.
This is just an intellectual exercise to debunk bronze age myths.


Talk origins has a debunking of more specific concepts:

Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition

-demonstrates the possible amount of animals and what would be needed for care and feeding.

"In conclusion, an ark of the size specified in the Bible would not be large enough to carry a cargo of animals and food sufficient to repopulate the earth, especially if animals that are now extinct were required to be aboard."

All of these possible senarios for water accumulation result in boiling water or water becoming steam:
Vapor canopy, Hydroplate, Runaway subduction, comet, New ocean basins,

calculations of how much water needed to be added to produce water that high in that amount of time would also result in terrible conditions.
"How did the ark survive the process? Such a wholesale restructuring of the earth's topography, compressed into just a few months, would have produced tsunamis large enough to circle the earth. The aftershocks alone would have been devastating for years afterwards."

Tree logs would not be floating around, the conditions would be extremely harsh.


Then there are issues with geology, some not mentioned in the Wiki page on global flood geology:


"A global flood would have produce evidence contrary to the evidence we see.

How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. [Johnsen et al, 1992,; Alley et al, 1993] A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?

How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, the Greenland ice cap would not regrow under modern (last 10 ky) climatic conditions.

Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why do none of these show up?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time. [Becker & Kromer, 1993; Becker et al, 1991; Stuiver et al, 1986]"

 

[gnostic]

I was in gymnastics in high school and college, thus I embraced my ape heritage.

I was never really flexible, pulling muscles that I never knew I had, so I had failed in the ape department.

 

[gnostic]

What is actually true is the Israelites thought the Earth was flat and a dome resided over it hholding back water.

Genesis also think that the Sun, Moon and all stars were created (4th day) within that dome, the same place where the clouds move and birds fly.

 

[Meow Mix]

1. In the beginning God created the Heavens and Earth.

2. The Earth was without shape, empty, and it was a dark and wet collection where the Spirit of God hovered above.

3. Then God said “Let there be Light!”, and it was evening and morning. Day 1.

4. Then God divided waters above a “Firmament”, from waters below this firmament. Day 2.

5. God then separated Land and Sea and made plant life. Day 3.

6. God made the great and lesser light to be signs of time, seasons etc. Day 4.

7. God made animals in the ocean and Birds that could fly. Day 5.

8. God made Land animals, and Man. Day 6.

There was light before there was any baryonic matter from which the Earth could form. Baryogenesis couldn't occur right away because the quark-gluon plasma was too hot. So this list is already wrong at step number one.