”it [the Modern Synthesis] doesn’t capture the full richness of evolution."
Exactly!
But you stated in post 139, that “familiar, everyday mechanisms are sufficient”.
Apparently not.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
”it [the Modern Synthesis] doesn’t capture the full richness of evolution."
No, you are conflating arguing about the details with the already well proven fact of evolution. And just in case you are wondering I am using the legal standard of proof. If you reject the theory of evolution then by the same logic you should reject any and every "guilty" verdict by every jury everywhere since none of them have the level of evidence that there is that supports evolution.Exactly!
But you stated in post 139, that “familiar, everyday mechanisms are sufficient”.
Apparently not.
Nope..doesn’t fit.And odd that all of those other articles are apparently legitimate, yet mysteriously he writes one pro-bible, pro-Noah's ark paper... and suddenly his status is elevated from perhaps hard-working nobody to highly credentialed superstar incapable of being wrong.
And so what if he is right - that a box with scaled-down dimensions supposedly matching those of this ark showing that it could have floated does not by any means indicate that the flood really happened, that the animals were brought from afar to this ark, etc.
Sort of like claiming that I drive the fastest car in the world, and supporting that by showing a publication demonstrating that wheels roll.
It's important to understand that @Hockeycowboy believes the world's scientific community is, and has been, under the influence of Satan (apparently in order to turn all of us away from Jehovah).Science is entirely indifferent to god. It follows evidence. If evidence of a god meddling in things exists, science would be glad to consider it.
So far no such evidence exists.
The Ark does not work either. People have tried to build reproductions and they all have one thing in common. None of them are seaworthy. And that is in normal seas. You want to have the Ark be seaworthy in the worst storm ever by several orders of magnitude. When your excuses for just the failures of the Ark all amount to "magic" is it an wonder that no one takes it seriously.Nope..doesn’t fit.
Those ratios of the Ark would only be useless evidence, if other non-powered, barge-like ships from the same era utilized those ratios.
Yet, in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the vessel described, was almost a cube! Another myth from the same era described the boat as circular! These do not work...the Ark in Genesis, does.
Lol!It's important to understand that @Hockeycowboy believes the world's scientific community is, and has been, under the influence of Satan (apparently in order to turn all of us away from Jehovah).
But don't worry....eventually he'll leave this discussion, wait a few days to a week, and later turn up in another thread making all the exact same arguments.
It's important to understand that @Hockeycowboy believes the world's scientific community is, and has been, under the influence of Satan (apparently in order to turn all of us away from Jehovah).
I tend to doubt it, given what's at stake.Thoroughly debunk them, and I’ll adjust my understanding.
Nope, never said anything like that at all.Heck, you can’t even admit that there are some people, even on these forums, who experience genuine paranormal experiences. You need to call these events ‘mental delusions’ or ‘aberrations’, to maintain your worldview.
So it's just those associated with creationism who are "searching for honest answers", whereas the scientists who aren't associated with creationism are under the influence of Satan.No, not all of it...many are searching for honest answers, like Drs. Behe, Meyer, Axe, Minnich, etc.
Well, you'll forgive me if I don't put much stock in a Jehovah's Witness' take on the scientific community.(I surmise that there are many, many others who aren’t committed to the mainstream views...but they need to keep their jobs. When they retire, they’ll sign the Dissent....maybe.)
I'm aware of what you believe.Jehovah knows what’s in people’s hearts.
But Revelation 12:9, 1 John 5:19, and 2 Corinthians 4:4 — even Jesus himself, @ John 12:31 — reveal who is behind this crazy, mixed-up world.
People may believe that they have experienced "genuine paranormal experiences" , but they lack reliable evidence for those claims.Lol!
Thoroughly debunk them, and I’ll adjust my understanding.
My goal is to gain an accurate understanding of all history.
It seems you’re happy with assumptions and suppositions.
Heck, you can’t even admit that there are some people, even on these forums, who experience genuine paranormal experiences. You need to call these events ‘mental delusions’ or ‘aberrations’, to maintain your worldview.
The various forms of life (at least two each) the ark would have had to save on board plus all the food necessary to feed it for 364 days:Nope..doesn’t fit.
Those ratios of the Ark would only be useless evidence, if other non-powered, barge-like ships from the same era utilized those ratios.
Yet, in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the vessel described, was almost a cube! Another myth from the same era described the boat as circular! These do not work...the Ark in Genesis, does.
What mechanisms do you have a problem with? Your appeal to magic makes me suspect that your distrust of science is underlain by a lack of familiarity with the disciplines involved and their relevant findings.Exactly!
But you stated in post 139, that “familiar, everyday mechanisms are sufficient”.
Apparently not.
Quite a remarkable conspiracy. Usually just two people have a hard time keeping a secret, but millions of unrelated scientists?It's important to understand that @Hockeycowboy believes the world's scientific community is, and has been, under the influence of Satan (apparently in order to turn all of us away from Jehovah).
But don't worry....eventually he'll leave this discussion, wait a few days to a week, and later turn up in another thread making all the exact same arguments.
Why this obsession with the ark? It's a minor detail in a major myth. The whole story is fabulous.Nope..doesn’t fit.
Those ratios of the Ark would only be useless evidence, if other non-powered, barge-like ships from the same era utilized those ratios.
Yet, in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the vessel described, was almost a cube! Another myth from the same era described the boat as circular! These do not work...the Ark in Genesis, does.
And you want us to believe the ark held them all*.
Then use reliable sources, preferably testable and corroborated. If you begin with a presumed, unevidenced plan and magical master of ceremonies you're going to see apophenic connections everywhere.Lol!
Thoroughly debunk them, and I’ll adjust my understanding.
My goal is to gain an accurate understanding of all history.
My assumptions and suppositions are better evidenced than your deus ex machina. Moreover, science isn't happy with assumptions, either, that's why it tests them as part of its investigative process.It seems you’re happy with assumptions and suppositions.
When did I ever dismiss paranormal experiences? I've had paranormal experiences myself, but I'd be suspicious of anyone who accepted my stories without additional evidence.Heck, you can’t even admit that there are some people, even on these forums, who experience genuine paranormal experiences. You need to call these events ‘mental delusions’ or ‘aberrations’, to maintain your worldview.
Why do you think that, when all the evidence, and all the experts in the field think otherwise?Nope, I do not.
I agree w/ certain evolutionary changes within many genera and up to some Family taxa. But all organisms stay within their Family groups.
I assume your saying that back in Noah's day there were far, far, far fewer species, perhaps what, a few thousand?---think the ark could hold two of each few thousand plus their provisions?---And obviously far, far fewer genera, perhaps only a few hundred. And that in the last two thousand years BC there was an incredible evolutionary explosion of species after the ark dumped its cargo, which gave us the approximately 8 million species we have today? All without leaving a single trace of such an evolutionary event? Hardly.Nope, I do not.
I agree w/ certain evolutionary changes within many genera and up to some Family taxa. But all organisms stay within their Family groups.
Your major premise needs to be verified before you can proceed with your argument
Wasn't Einstein's theory of relativity initiated by a dream?
It doesn't matter where the inspiration comes from. What matters is the process used to follow up on it, the scientific method.
Again, no.I assume your saying that back in Noah's day there were far, far, far fewer species, perhaps what, a few thousand?---think the ark could hold two of each few thousand plus their provisions?---And obviously far, far fewer genera, perhaps only a few hundred. And that in the last two thousand years BC there was an incredible evolutionary explosion of species after the ark dumped its cargo, which gave us the approximately 8 million species we have today? All without leaving a single trace of such an evolutionary event? Hardly.
This is as absurd as the flood itself.
It does?
That’s not what you said here:
How did you come up with that bizarre interpretation?Valjean said: ↑
Wasn't Einstein's theory of relativity initiated by a dream?
It doesn't matter where the inspiration comes from. What matters is the process used to follow up on it, the scientific method.