Evolution My ToE

[Valjean]

One example is that ancient Egypt records cite spirit gods/beings as the first rulers.

Cultures from all over the world talk about all kinds of imaginary beings. What evidence is there that the Egyptian spirits were any more real than the Greek, Chinese, or Aztec?

 

[Valjean]

In this day and age we may see telomeres doing stuff. The reasons that genetics work as it now does is because the atoms and cells and etc all behave a certain way. The reason they all exist and react and behave as they do is because of the laws and forces that exist that determine how atoms work. If nature was not the same, then a different nature would result in genetics conforming to that different nature. Our present genetics conforms to this nature.

Our present everything conforms to natural laws and constants.

No. You don't get to invoke an imaginary godless past just because of some attitude problem that needs adjusting.

No, the burden is on you to show evidence that there is or ever was an invisible wonder-worker. Without evidence there's no more reason to believe in the Abrahamic God than there is to believe in Thor, Quetzalcoatl or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The ancient records abound in what you label as myth. You cannot wave away all spirits and angels as myth just because it suits your religion.

Religion is your weakness not mine. I suggest you drop that particular attack. It got you banned from one website at least. There are myths and there is history. If the story has magic in it you can be pretty sure that it is myth.

 

[Valjean]

No. When I point out that science doesn't know, that does not mean someone else does. What science may know is where the fossil of this horseshoe crab was found.

A quick search found that the oldest fossil was from the time that came after the Cambrian.
Oldest Horseshoe Crab Fossil Found, 445 Million Years Old

8 Oldest Fossils in the World | Oldest.org

So, that means this was looong after Adam was created. Since this was in the former nature rather than the present nature, we can deduce that rapid evolving was the order of the day at that time. (there are many reasons from the bible and science together to think this)

Are you saying that Adam was created >445M years ago?!
Why is there no fossil evidence of this? Why does the fossil record show increasingly simple organisms the further back we go? Why is there no evidence even of primitive primates till ~65M years ago, and none bipedal before 6-7M years ago?

Therefore we cannot say that the crab did not undergo a lot of adapting over time. That means we cannot declare it a created kind.

Huh? "Created kind?" Horseshoe crabs are uncreated 'kinds'?

In that former nature, most life on earth including man likely could not leave fossilized remains. So we do not expect to see man in the fossil record in the very beginning although of course he was here.

"Former nature?" "Present nature?" What on Earth are you talking about?

 

[Valjean]

Doesn't matter. They are part of the record. If you deny it you are denying ancient history.

So is Quetzalcoatl and Ahura Mazda. Do you deny them? Why?

Of course the ancient records are full of myths. We're a story-telling species. What makes the Egyptian or Abrahamic myths any more credible than any other myths?

 

[Subduction Zone]

8 Oldest Fossils in the World | Oldest.org
Are you saying that Adam was created >445M years ago?!
Why is there no fossil evidence of this? Why does the fossil record show increasingly simple organisms the further back we go? Why is there no evidence even of primitive primates till ~65M years ago, and none bipedal before 6-7M years ago?
Huh? "Created kind?" Horseshoe crabs are uncreated 'kinds'?
"Former nature?" "Present nature?" What on Earth are you talking about?

dad has a very strange personal version of Last Thursdayism. He does not seem to realize that means that he is calling his God a liar.

 

[dad]

What are your academic qualifications in science. I have a Masters in Geology and Organic Chemistry, and 40 years work in Geology, and three publications on coastal geology and geochemistry.

The basis for past models are well known. Either discuss them, or admit defeat. Science has no credos for origins!

 

[dad]

No such first hand ancient records exist with objective verifiable evidence.

There is no such thing as verifiable evidence of spirits 4500 years ago. Get a grip. Science can say neither yay nor yay. Might as well ask a goat.

 

[dad]

No it is a matter of the falsification of theories and hypothesis by objective verifiable evidence, which you lack to support your claims.

Nice religious story, but totally false if we are talking about models of the far past by manscience fablemongers.

 

[dad]

Cultures from all over the world talk about all kinds of imaginary beings. What evidence is there that the Egyptian spirits were any more real than the Greek, Chinese, or Aztec?

You are in NO position to call spirit beings imaginary. You are imagining things. You may only say you do not know.

 

[dad]

Our present everything conforms to natural laws and constants.

Of course God set it up that way. The different nature of the past also conformed to the laws of that day! Your mistake was to think it was all the same.

No, the burden is on you to show evidence that there is or ever was an invisible wonder-worker.

Hey, believe what you like. We can all do that. You could believe a turtle shot the hot soup speck singularity that grew to the universe if you like. Billions of people through history know spirits are real, good and bad. You are in NO position to confirm or deny. Yet you deny. Ha.

Without evidence there's no more reason to believe in the Abrahamic God than there is to believe in Thor, Quetzalcoatl or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Intelligent men can look at the source of tales. As for Thor, there could be a demon called that. Actually it looks like that may be where Santa came from!

 

[Valjean]

There is no such thing as verifiable evidence of spirits 4500 years ago. Get a grip. Science can say neither yay nor yay. Might as well ask a goat.

And science makes no positive claims, for or against. Science holds the default position, pending evidence.

No verifiable evidence of spirits 4500 years ago? Was there ever verifiable evidence of spirits?

 

[Valjean]

You are in NO position to call spirit beings imaginary. You are imagining things. You may only say you do not know.

Until evidence for a thing is produced, its foolish to believe in it.
You're in no position to call the Flying Spaghetti Monster imaginary.

 

[dad]

8 Oldest Fossils in the World | Oldest.org
Are you saying that Adam was created >445M years ago?!

I am saying your belief based dating is wrong.

Why is there no fossil evidence of this? Why does the fossil record show increasingly simple organisms the further back we go?

Why would not the smaller things die first? After all, some things could leave fossil remains. But since man could not, probably, we would not expect man to be found along with the little things that first died that COULD leave remains. Exactly what the evidence shows! Your religion just had no clue how to properly read the record!

Why is there no evidence even of primitive primates till ~65M years ago, and none bipedal before 6-7M years ago?

Because they, as well as lions, and most birds, and man, and wolves etc etc could not leave fossil remains in that former different natured world!

Huh? "Created kind?" Horseshoe crabs are uncreated 'kinds'?

Hard to say, as I said we don't know. The original created kinds adapted and evolved a lot over time. So how would we know if the horseshoe crab was the original, or an adaptation?

"Former nature?" "Present nature?" What on Earth are you talking about?

Both the future world and the pre flood world in the bile seem to be different in nature. Usually nature is meant to refer to the forces and laws that exist. (strong nuclear force etc etc etc)

 

[dad]

And science makes no positive claims, for or against. Science holds the default position, pending evidence.

No. Science holds the 'johhny come lately' cluelss guesses and hunches and assumptions and beliefs position. A position which attacks and opposes the default position that existed before it peeked it's wicked little head out from hell.

 

[dad]

So is Quetzalcoatl and Ahura Mazda. Do you deny them? Why?

I do not deny that many of the ancient demons that men worshiped did and do exist. Which ones, exactly is somewhat lost in history.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do not deny that many of the ancient demons that men worshiped did and do exist. Which ones, exactly is somewhat lost in history.

No one is talking about demons. They are talking about Gods. In the Bible it is clear in the early books that there were other gods. That is one of the reasons that Yahweh was jealous.

 

[Valjean]

Of course God set it up that way. The different nature of the past also conformed to the laws of that day! Your mistake was to think it was all the same.

What evidence do you have that there were different natural laws in the past? Aren't you making up realities to fit your mythology?

Hey, believe what you like. We can all do that. You could believe a turtle shot the hot soup speck singularity that grew to the universe if you like. Billions of people through history know spirits are real, good and bad. You are in NO position to confirm or deny. Yet you deny. Ha.

So you believe in all mythological gods, spirits and beasts, on the evidence that someone once wrote about them? That's quite a big bestiary!

Intelligent men can look at the source of tales. As for Thor, there could be a demon called that. Actually it looks like that may be where Santa came from!

The source is folklore. Why is your folklore any more credible than that of anyone else?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What evidence do you have that there were different natural laws in the past? Aren't you making up realities to fit your mythology?
So you believe in all mythological gods, spirits and beasts, on the evidence that someone once wrote about them? That's quite a big bestiary!
The source is folklore. Why is your folklore any more credible than that of anyone else?

Questions that dad cannot answer.

 

[dad]

And science makes no positive claims, for or against. Science holds the default position, pending evidence.

Science uses beliefs to soil evidences and then makes positive claims.