New discoveries of 'missing links.'

[dad]

There is overwhelming evidence of time throughout our universe.

?? Did someone ask that?
No. The issue is whether time exists out there exactly as it does here and how you would know!

There are unlimited scientific references that document time on earth,

Yes, so? Not an issue.

our solar system and beyond in the cosmos.

You just made that up. Prove it. Show any science at all even dealing with the issue??

Simple geometric triangulation documents distances and time in terms of billions of year and miles in the cosmos.

Sure if you want to draw lines and pretend that there is no time in the distances and that space is the same all the way. Heck, you could pretend the lines are anything you like. The reality is that you have not been out there to observe time or space. You only see things here. Including light or anything else from there.
Stop making stuff up, and misrepresenting what other posters say.

 

[dad]

All you need to do is provide objective verifiable evidence concerning your claims.

You were not there to observe plants grow at any speed in Noah's day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

? Did someone ask that?
No. The issue is whether time exists out there exactly as it does here and how you would know!

I gave you evidence for that. You denied it one time too many. That was why I created dad rule number 1.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You were not there to observe plants grow at any speed in Noah's day.

I might have to make a second rule on the burden of proof.

 

[dad]

I might have to make a second rule on the burden of proof.

Make all the imaginary rules no one cares about that you like. Have fun in your head.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Make all the imaginary rules no one cares about that you like. Have fun in your head.

What if others get tired of your empty denials and start to invoke it? You constantly deny evidence and never refute it. It gets tiresome. If others agree that you need to learn what evidence is to demand it where will you be then? Just think, if everyone tells you that first you need to learn what is and what is not evidence before you demand any how will you debate then? Especially if they all offer to help you with the concept.

Just in case, this is not "my" definition of evidence. Since we are discussing science one should be using scientific evidence and that is the definition that you need to learn. It makes it rather hard to deny evidence without openly lying.

 

[shunyadragon]

You were not there to observe plants grow at any speed in Noah's day.

We can see ancient trees with consistent annual growth tree rings up to 80,000 years old around the world.

The trees were there at the time of Noah.

 

[Bear Wild]

Show the evidence that science knows what the forces and laws in place on earth were? There is none and it is foolishness to claim there is.

The evidence is in the world we live in and it is measurable and has been measured over time. Your lack of understanding of this only places the foolishness on you. The fact that your beliefs have no evidence just makes you deny all the evidence presented to you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Well, watch an olive tree. Let us know if it grows fruit and leaves in a week.

I have not seen one grow to maturity in a week. No one has.

Science has no evidence that people did or did not live for 1000 years.

Science has no evidence that anyone has lived that long. No one does. The claim that they lived that long is made, supporting evidence must be provided. As far as we know, we have about 120 years max. The body wears out.

So I see no reason to question the record God gave us.

It lacks evidence to support many of its claims. That's good enough reason.

 

[dad]

I have not seen one grow to maturity in a week. No one has.

The garden of Eden did. The garden was planted on day three and man ate fruit from a tree the same week.

Science has no evidence that anyone has lived that long. No one does. The claim that they lived that long is made, supporting evidence must be provided. As far as we know, we have about 120 years max. The body wears out.

False. No one has evidence of man living any age in Noah's day, 1000 or 120. So the record of lives in the bible cannot be questioned by science.

It lacks evidence to support many of its claims. That's good enough reason.

It lacks nothing. The bible is evidenced in a myriad of ways. Science lacks the ability to deny or verify or test the past. It must shut its mouth on what God says in His word since it is absolutely ignorant and unable to test or verify anything.

 

[dad]

The evidence is in the world we live in and it is measurable and has been measured over time. Your lack of understanding of this only places the foolishness on you. The fact that your beliefs have no evidence just makes you deny all the evidence presented to you.

Then post the source and relevant quotes from it that show it was verified.

 

[dad]

We can see ancient trees with consistent annual growth tree rings up to 80,000 years old around the world.

The trees were there at the time of Noah.

False. The oldest tree has something like several thousand rings. Those rings would not represent a year if the tree also grew in the former nature. Trees grew in weeks then.

 

[dad]

Since we are discussing science one should be using scientific evidence.

Impossible since you have no evidence you are related to a banana.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Impossible since you have no evidence you are related to a banana.

dad, I do have evidence. I have evidence that you are related to a banana. I have evidence that you are related to a flatworm. Unfortunately you cannot demand it due to rule no. 1. Are you ready to learn what is and what is not evidence yet?

 

[Subduction Zone]

False. The oldest tree has something like several thousand rings. Those rings would not represent a year if the tree also grew in the former nature. Trees grew in weeks then.

please try to understand what he said.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The garden of Eden did. The garden was planted on day three and man ate fruit from a tree the same week.

Evidence?

False. No one has evidence of man living any age in Noah's day, 1000 or 120. So the record of lives in the bible cannot be questioned by science.

It can be questioned by science because science requires and demands evidence.

Science lacks the ability to deny or verify or test the past.

It does that pretty well. Such as, we have learned the ground amd ancient ice caps are records of the past, including traces of the environment from thousands and millions of years ago amd preserving the remains of some that lived.

It must shut its mouth on what God says in His word since it is absolutely ignorant and unable to test or verify anything.

That makes no sense as to why god would set up a system that would inevitably mislead people.

 

[shunyadragon]

False. The oldest tree has something like several thousand rings. Those rings would not represent a year if the tree also grew in the former nature. Trees grew in weeks then.

ll you need to do is provide objective verifiable evidence concerning your claims.

You di not read my previous post. There are ten known trees far older then several thousand years.

We have ancient trees counted by annual growth rings up ~89,000 years; A quaking Aspen in Fishlake National Forest, Utah, USA that is still alive. 10 Oldest Trees in the World (Updated 2019)

 

[Heyo]

The garden of Eden did. The garden was planted on day three and man ate fruit from a tree the same week.

How do you know? Where you there?
The trees could have been planted fully mature with fruit already on them. There is no need that the trees grew in a week or the fruit.

 

[dad]

dad, I do have evidence. I have evidence that you are related to a banana. I have evidence that you are related to a flatworm.

We know, but you just can't post it because people are not nice enough to you. We get it. I am not here to force you to admit you actually have nothing, we see that in the posts.

 

[dad]

please try to understand what he said.

I do.