There is not enough erosion of the continents for them to be many 10s of millions of years old.

[AdamjEdgar]

He is lost when it comes to the sciences.

ah here we go...its down this pathway is it amigo???

There is still a philosophical debate whether mathematics is a science. However, in practice, mathematicians are typically grouped with scientists, and mathematics shares much in common with the physical sciences....Moreover, most mathematicians were also scientists, and many scientists were also mathematicians​

​

Mathematics - Wikipedia.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

ah here we go...its down this pathway is it amigo???

There is still a philosophical debate whether mathematics is a science. However, in practice, mathematicians are typically grouped with scientists, and mathematics shares much in common with the physical sciences....Moreover, most mathematicians were also scientists, and many scientists were also mathematicians​

​

Mathematics - Wikipedia.​

That does not help you. He still only worked in mathematics and Christian apologetics (AKA lying for Jesus, I have never seen an apologist that was honest). As to mathematicians being grouped with scientists that is generally true. But that makes no difference. Let me be a bit clearer. If a physicist denied evolution he would also be very probably wrong, just as Lennox is. He would be speaking of a science that had no understanding of. It is easy to make scientific mistakes in an area where one has never studied. So Lennox being a mathematician does not help him one iota when it comes to his opinion on evolution.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

If a physicist denied evolution he would also be very probably wrong, just as Lennox is. He would be speaking of a science that had no understanding of. It is easy to make scientific mistakes in an area where one has never studied. So Lennox being a mathematician does not help him one iota when it comes to his opinion on evolution.

Subduction, why are you here on these forums exactly? What is your purpose?

Are you here only because its now your goal in life to defend others against the scourge of Chritianity because its a fairytale? Im trying to remember without going back through posts...were you once a Christian and left the faith? If so, what were the events that lead to that?

Like i sort of get the feeling that Subduction is indicative of your world view journey...that what you once believed was forced underneath a lighter techtonic plate. What i find strange about this...wouldnt one necessarily call the Christian plate lighter? Wouldnt the weight of evidence cause the heavier world view (with evolutionary weight of evidence) to sink down underneath and the Christian one to "rise up"? It seems a bit contradictory to me.

OR is it just that you realise that your on the pathway to Hades and chose an appropriate name?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Subduction, why are you here on these forums exactly? What is your purpose?

Are you here only because its now your goal in life to defend others against the scourge of Chritianity because its a fairytale? Im trying to remember without going back through posts...were you once a Christian and left the faith? If so, what were the events that lead to that?

Like i sort of get the feeling that Subduction is indicative of your world view journey...that what you once believed was forced underneath a lighter techtonic plate. What i find strange about this...wouldnt one necessarily call the Christian plate lighter? Wouldnt the weight of evidence cause the heavier world view (with evolutionary weight of evidence) to sink down underneath and the Christian one to "rise up"? It seems a bit contradictory to me.

OR is it just that you realise that your on the pathway to Hades and chose an appropriate name?

You should not demand answers to poorly asked questions.

I have one question for you: Why do you conflate Christianity and creationism?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You should not demand answers to poorly asked questions.

I have one question for you: Why do you conflate Christianity and creationism?

Well the Christian Bible clearly states that all things were created by God in 6 days about 6000 years ago. And there is no other book that stands the test as the Holy Bible does. So they are equivalent.

 

[Esteban X]

Well the Christian Bible clearly states that all things were created by God in 6 days about 6000 years ago. And there is no other book that stands the test as the Holy Bible does. So they are equivalent.

What test? The Bible is filled with scientific implausibilities, historical inaccuracies and contradictions.

 

[Polymath257]

I would expect much more from someone claiming the education level that you do. Where is it?

Frankly, a 4 year education degree and being raised by a theologian isn't that strong of an education level. In my experience, education majors are those that can't handle a real subject. As always, there are exceptions.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

What test? The Bible is filled with scientific implausibilities, historical inaccuracies and contradictions.

Please prove any if you can.

 

[Esteban X]

Please prove any if you can.

I'm sure you've seen this before

Skeptic's Annotated Bible / Quran / Book of Mormon

www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

 

[Astrophile]

You have heard of Piltown man right? The orangutan/neanderthal lie that went on in secular circles for 5 decades!

Four decades (from 1912 to 1953).

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Four decades (from 1912 to 1953).

is that your evidence that it wasnt a fraud?

What about the Java Man? Are you a believer that Dubois wasnt wrong in his assumptions concerning this specimen?

For example:

• Dubois was a medical practitioner, not a geologist nor paleontologist
• Dubois never actually dug out the two bones...they were brought to him by engineers who were working for him
• The two bones were more than 10 metres apart and may not even be from the same specimen and it was not accurately documented what level in the cave the bones were found...there is variation even within Dubois own writings whether they were found 10, 12, or 15m apart!
• The femur was found a year later than the skull
• there is strong evidence the specimen suffered from ricketts and vitamin deficiency common among Neandertals
• It is likely that the specimen is no older than modern humans
• A number of scientists have grave reservations about Dubois claims with this specimen ...ie his claim that it was transitional between ape and human

Lubenow in his book Bones of Contention states "When any other fossils similar to Java man were found, Dubois rejected the evidence out of hand. He laboured hard to find tiny areas where his fossils differed from anything else that had been found so as to defend the uniqueness of his discovery"

GHR von Koenigswald wrote
"on this point he was as unaccountable as a jealous lover. Anyone who disagree with his interpretation of Pithecanthropus was his personal enemy"

Franz Weidenreich, who replaced Black in China after the latter's death in 1933, argued that Sinanthropus was also a transitional fossil between apes and humans, and was in fact so similar to Java's Pithecanthropus that they should both belong to the family Hominidae. Eugène Dubois categorically refused to entertain this possibility, dismissing Peking Man as a kind of Neanderthal, closer to humans than the Pithecanthropus, and insisting that Pithecanthropus belonged to its own superfamily, the Pithecanthropoidea Java Man - Wikipedia

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Frankly, a 4 year education degree and being raised by a theologian isn't that strong of an education level. In my experience, education majors are those that can't handle a real subject. As always, there are exceptions.

You would think that it would mean that we wouldn't see another special on old creationist ideas that have been long refuted.

So far, we've seen the resurrection of Piltdown Man. Now a discussion of Homo erectus (Java man) and how it isn't real. Soon poor Haeckel will be drug from his grave yet again to be beaten on.

There seem to be two traditional tactics at work here. One, attack ancient history and not all the evidence and recent interpretations. Two, controversy in science means that some random person's personal views win by default.

Based on what I've seen so far, it doesn't seem like a profitable four years.

 

[Subduction Zone]

is that your evidence that it wasnt a fraud?

What about the Java Man? Are you a believer that Dubois wasnt wrong in his assumptions concerning this specimen?

Dubois was shown to be not wrong. Are you unaware of that fact?

For example:

• Dubois was a medical practitioner, not a geologist nor paleontologist

Correct. That would mean that his dating might be bit iffy, but as to "not being a paleontologist" that does not matter very much. As a medical practitioner he probably was an expert on the human skeleton and he could tell when the two bones that he saw were well outside of the norm.

• Dubois never actually dug out the two bones...they were brought to him by engineers who were working for him

Okay, but he still knew where they were from. As I said, if he dated the sample it might be dubious. I would have to refresh my memory and where it was found.

• The two bones were more than 10 metres apart and may not even be from the same specimen and it was not accurately documented what level in the cave the bones were found...there is variation even within Dubois own writings whether they were found 10, 12, or 15m apart!

There is a good chance that they were not. So what?

• The femur was found a year later than the skull

And another point so weak that it can be refuted with a "So what?"

• there is strong evidence the specimen suffered from ricketts and vitamin deficiency common among Neandertals

Citation needed.

• It is likely that the specimen is no older than modern humans

Citation needed again.

• A number of scientists have grave reservations about Dubois claims with this specimen ...ie his claim that it was transitional between ape and human

They do? I do not know of any serious scientists that have such reservations today. And once again, his find was confirmed to be a forerunner to man. Did you not know that?

Lubenow in his book Bones of Contention states "When any other fossils similar to Java man were found, Dubois rejected the evidence out of hand. He laboured hard to find tiny areas where his fossils differed from anything else that had been found so as to defend the uniqueness of his discovery"

You need to be more serious. He had far less education than Dubois. He is a worthless source.

GHR von Koenigswald wrote
"on this point he was as unaccountable as a jealous lover. Anyone who disagree with his interpretation of Pithecanthropus was his personal enemy"

Franz Weidenreich, who replaced Black in China after the latter's death in 1933, argued that Sinanthropus was also a transitional fossil between apes and humans, and was in fact so similar to Java's Pithecanthropus that they should both belong to the family Hominidae. Eugène Dubois categorically refused to entertain this possibility, dismissing Peking Man as a kind of Neanderthal, closer to humans than the Pithecanthropus, and insisting that Pithecanthropus belonged to its own superfamily, the Pithecanthropoidea Java Man - Wikipedia

Well guess what, now Dubois was in the wrong there. It may have been because he too could be affected by his emotions.

You are making a typical creationist error here. You are trying to make it about the individuals that made the discoveries. That does not matter very much at all usually. What you need to be concentrating on is the evidence. And the evidence clearly shows that Java Man was the first Homo Erectus found Peking Man was probably the second. And quite a few have been found since then.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

I have one question for you: Why do you conflate Christianity and creationism?

that is a valid question Subduction and deserves an answer.

I will try my best to keep this short...

Genesis = God creates a new heavens and new earth...they are both an extension of, and revelation of his character

Satan attempts to corrupt both heaven and earth and ruins Gods character hoping to overthrow him.

Satan succeeds in corrupting the earth necessitating a plan of salvation from God to answer the charge against him made by satan and satisfying the consequences of breaking Gods eternal law (ie the wages of sin is death)...by dying on the cross for his own creation. Death is a consequence becauser fundamentally, God and evil cannot coexist...for us mortals that is really bad...sinful mortal humans die in the presence of God! And before you go down a rabbitt warren, consecrating oneself just before meeting God overcomes at least the immediate consequence (but not the long term one).

The old testament is filled with narratives explaining why and how God has tried to redirect man back to the pathway of redemption and also predicting what will ultimately happen to those who do not believe and obey Gods word and his laws.

New testament, God incarnate dies for the sins of his own creation. The gospel of how that salvation process works is spread throughout the world.

OK

so given all of the above. I conflate Christinaity and Creationism because they are both in the bible.

The Old Testament Creation account explains exactly how a personal God created man in his own image.

The New Testament shows us how those who follow Gods law and have the faith of Jesus may be redeemed back to God and restored to the sinless state in which we were created.

I woudl suggest that those who do not agree that God created Adam and Eve exactly as he said in the Bible are denying Christianity and the gospel and therefore, reject salvation!

 

[John53]

that is a valid question Subduction and deserves an answer.

I will try my best to keep this short...

Genesis = God creates a new heavens and new earth...they are both an extension of, and revelation of his character

My question is why?

This God sits around for an infinite period of time doing nothing then decides to create a universe. It makes no sense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

that is a valid question Subduction and deserves an answer.

I will try my best to keep this short...

Genesis = God creates a new heavens and new earth...they are both an extension of, and revelation of his character

Satan attempts to corrupt both heaven and earth and ruins Gods character hoping to overthrow him.

Satan succeeds in corrupting the earth necessitating a plan of salvation from God to answer the charge against him made by satan and satisfying the consequences of breaking Gods eternal law (ie the wages of sin is death)...by dying on the cross for his own creation. Death is a consequence becauser fundamentally, God and evil cannot coexist...for us mortals that is really bad...sinful mortal humans die in the presence of God! And before you go down a rabbitt warren, consecrating oneself just before meeting God overcomes at least the immediate consequence (but not the long term one).

The old testament is filled with narratives explaining why and how God has tried to redirect man back to the pathway of redemption and also predicting what will ultimately happen to those who do not believe and obey Gods word and his laws.

New testament, God incarnate dies for the sins of his own creation. The gospel of how that salvation process works is spread throughout the world.

OK

so given all of the above. I conflate Christinaity and Creationism because they are both in the bible.

The Old Testament Creation account explains exactly how a personal God created man in his own image.

The New Testament shows us how those who follow Gods law and have the faith of Jesus may be redeemed back to God and restored to the sinless state in which we were created.

I woudl suggest that those who do not agree that God created Adam and Eve exactly as he said in the Bible are denying Christianity and the gospel and therefore, reject salvation!

That is not a good excuse. Most of Jesus's parables are not real life events. They are stories told to get a point across, to teach morals. etc. Why can't the myths of Genesis be the same?

In fact if you actually understood those myths and truly read them literally God is the bad guy in most of them. In the Garden of Eden myth God screws up by setting Adam and Eve up to fail and then blaming them for their failure. That is not a good lesson to teach others as being literally true.

You last paragraph is clearly wrong since the number of Christians that claim that God is a liar as you do are in the majority. Most Christians do not read the book of Genesis literally.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

That is not a good excuse. Most of Jesus's parables are not real life events. They are stories told to get a point across, to teach morals. etc. Why can't the myths of Genesis be the same?

In fact if you actually understood those myths and truly read them literally God is the bad guy in most of them. In the Garden of Eden myth God screws up by setting Adam and Eve up to fail and then blaming them for their failure. That is not a good lesson to teach others as being literally true.

You last paragraph is clearly wrong since the number of Christians that claim that God is a liar as you do are in the majority. Most Christians do not read the book of Genesis literally.

Genesis is an historical record and is in no way a parable.

How can you explain these fossil graveyards?

Fossil Graveyards | Genesis Park

www.genesispark.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

Genesis is an historical record and is in no way a parable.

How can you explain these fossil graveyards?

Fossil Graveyards | Genesis Park

www.genesispark.com

Yes, I can. Too bad that you cannot do so.

 

[McBell]

Genesis is an historical record and is in no way a parable.

Bold empty claim that does not align with the evidence.

How can you explain these fossil graveyards?

Fossil Graveyards | Genesis Park

www.genesispark.com

https://brainly.com/question/38568050

 

[McBell]

Yes, I can.

As did I.
Though in all honesty it was probably to much info in to short a space...

Too bad that you cannot do so.

When one is completely satisfied with "GodDidIt" as the answer for all they do not know....