Creationism: Right or Wrong?

[b said:
Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Sep. 08 2004,9:17)]What is to stop someone from postulating that God set the big bang in motion as well as set forth the guidelines for Darwinian evolution?  Can't the creationist always fall back and say that it is God's will that set the big bang in motion, or anything that anyone else comes up with?
Yeah I've thought about that too.

As for the "golden mean," are you refering to the number phi? I think it equals 1.618 or something. But yeah, I would say that that is highly relevant in this discussion. You see the proportion everywhere..it's amazing.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I agree, without doubt that people and animals can adapt to their enviroment, if they have the genetic ability to do so.  But at a cost, that is a loss of genetic information that is not required.  Unless there is an addition back into the genetic information, that loss is permanent.  For example, my Keeshond has been bread to have long hair to survive in the cold northern climate.  My dog and all her offspring will always have long hair, regardless of where she or they live because the genetic coding for short hair has been bread out.  If the climate of where they live all of a sudden becomes 90'f on average, that breed will die out without intervention.  Thus, this gives no rise to any new species.  And I also define species as a biological, taxonomic group whose members can interbreed.

Not too sure about this. Where did you get the information about this?

BTW Pi is an infinite number, usually rounded to 3.14.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jim @ Sep. 08 2004,11:38)]BTW Pi is an infinite number, usually rounded to 3.14.
Pi and Phi are two different numbers. I'm fuzzy on the details, but basically Phi, also known as the "sacred proportion" and apparently the "golden mean," is a ratio that's seen all throughout the world. In the sizes of body parts, like the length of the legs over the arms, in architecture, in famous paintings, in mozart's symphonies, everywhere. This is perhaps evidence for a common creator..though I would not jump to conclusions and eliminate all other possibilities.
 
Like in Leonardo de Vinci's Vitruvian man.

Phi is defined as the proportion that results when a line is divided into two unequal parts, such that the ratio between the whole and the larger part is equal to the ratio between the larger and the smaller part. If we call the whole phi, and the part 1, then it follows that phi/1=1/(phi-1), 1/phi = 0.61803..., and the smaller part will be 1/(phi)^2=0.38196....

I don't understand why God would hide his presence in "golden means" when he could have stenciled MADE BY GOD on everyone's butts. Why this need to hide?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I don't understand why God would hide his presence in "golden means" when he could have stenciled MADE BY GOD on everyone's butts. Why this need to hide?

Wouldn't that remove the free will of an individual?

Cory
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Sep. 08 2004,1:32)]Like in Leonardo de Vinci's Vitruvian man.

Phi is defined as the proportion that results when a line is divided into two unequal parts, such that the ratio between the whole and the larger part is equal to the ratio between the larger and the smaller part. If we call the whole phi, and the part 1, then it follows that phi/1=1/(phi-1), 1/phi = 0.61803..., and the smaller part will be 1/(phi)^2=0.38196....

I don't understand why God would hide his presence in "golden means" when he could have stenciled MADE BY GOD on everyone's butts.  Why this need to hide?
I dunno DV.  Assuming that there is a creator, I'd say that phi is fairly obvious evidence of that.  Hardly hiding, methinks.

What language would he use? There's only one that everyone understands, and that's math.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Thaddius @ Sep. 08 2004,5:01)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I don't understand why God would hide his presence in "golden means" when he could have stenciled MADE BY GOD on everyone's butts.  Why this need to hide?

Wouldn't that remove the free will of an individual?

Cory
Not at all.

God made his presence known to the Israelites, He was literally in their faces. Did that ruin their Free Will?  Nope, they STILL rejected Him.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Sep. 08 2004,5:23)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Sep. 08 2004,1:32)]Like in Leonardo de Vinci's Vitruvian man.

Phi is defined as the proportion that results when a line is divided into two unequal parts, such that the ratio between the whole and the larger part is equal to the ratio between the larger and the smaller part. If we call the whole phi, and the part 1, then it follows that phi/1=1/(phi-1), 1/phi = 0.61803..., and the smaller part will be 1/(phi)^2=0.38196....

I don't understand why God would hide his presence in "golden means" when he could have stenciled MADE BY GOD on everyone's butts.  Why this need to hide?
I dunno DV.  Assuming that there is a creator, I'd say that phi is fairly obvious evidence of that.  Hardly hiding, methinks.

What language would he use?  There's only one that everyone understands, and that's math.
I'm not sold on the Golden Mean supporting either side.

One could just as easily argue that nature seeks order and harmony in all things, even at the basest levels.
 
I think God speaks Hebrew. WHY? It is a perfect language, it is both numerical and phonetic. You cant blaspheme God in this language. It is a very rich language as well. Thats just the things I can think of off the top of my head. Getting back the "creation" side of things, I found an interesting article talking about dinosaurs and ill paste a snippet here.
=========================================================================================================
Palaeontologists discovered a basin-like nest, preserved in red-grey mudstone in Liaoning province, in which an adult Psittacosaurus sp - a "parrot-lizard" named after its strong beak - is surrounded by 34 babies at the moment they faced a mortal threat.

The sight of a parent with young huddled at its feet provides "strong evidence" that even dinosaur youngsters may have enjoyed some motherly love, the scientists report in the journal Nature.

Dr David Varricchio, of Montana State University, and his colleagues in China found no isolated bones or partial skeletons at the site and speculate that the nest could have been enveloped in a Pompeii-like cloud of suffocating gas and dust from a volcanic eruption, been trapped in an underground burrow that collapsed or been hit by sudden, dramatic flooding.

The baby dinosaurs all showed a consistent pattern of preservation in an upright pose, like the adult - implying that they could have been buried alive before having had a chance to react and escape.

The proximity of the adult and baby skeletons is consistent with parental care after the young had hatched, the experts believe. The babies are well developed and much bigger than hatchlings, suggesting that the adult had already put in some quality parenting time with its young.

http://www.rense.com/general57/part.htm heres the link to the article

========================================================================================================
This was an article describing the mothering behavior of dinosaurs. It is also VERY interesting to not that he belives they were buried in a SUDDEN DRAMATIC FLOODING. He also states a volcanic burial, but there would have to be a volcano around for it to bury the dinosaurs. Another excuse is an underground nest that collapsed, but the nest would have to be underground for it to collapse, which there is not evidence for. I do not know the background of this palentologist, but he is giving validity (at least on some level) to the flood of Noah. Perhaps something that hasnt been explained very well is the way the flood happened. It was not just a bunch of rain and a slow creeping flood. It was as if you put an egg in a microwave. It was a violent eruption with the earth splitting open and geysers of water spewing out rock and steaming hot water up into the atmosphere. Certainly not something you would want to be around for. The scars of this flood can be seen today. Look at a topographic map of the world including the ocean floors. You will see giant scars running the length of the oceans. One goes thru the middle atlantic others go thru pacific. This is but a quick explantation of the event, if you would like I can get more detailed info on it.

In Christ,
Gabriel
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I think God speaks Hebrew.

Wouldn't an omniscient God understand ALL languages?  Or are you asserting that Hebrew is the native language of God and that is what He speaks while relaxing in Heaven?  Geez, and you accuse nontheists of limiting God!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]WHY? It is a perfect language, it is both numerical and phonetic.

Please explain to me what you mean by "perfect language".  What makes this language "perfect", moreso than any other?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]You cant blaspheme God in this language. It is a very rich language as well.

Again, what do you mean by this.  How can you not blaspheme God in Hebrew?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Getting back the "creation" side of things, I found an interesting article talking about dinosaurs  and ill paste a snippet here.
http://www.rense.com/general57/part.htm       heres the link to the article

LOL.  Ok, hang on.  Most people here get outraged when I link to so called "athiest" sites because they automatically assume that it's bias.  Which, incidentally, is an uneducated response since infidels.org carries quite a few theistic writings.  Anywho, if we follow that logic, how much credit do you expect me to put into this article that is hosted on a website that also includes articles on George Bush's bisexuality, UFO sightings, 9/11 "codes" and numerous world conspiracies?

You might also want to keep in mind that the author of the article, John Highfield also wrote, "The science of Harry Potter: how magic really works." (Science journalist Roger Highfield illustrates how magic and science are intertwined in the Harry Potter books. He delves into the archaeology of witchcraft, speculates on the connection between hallucinogens and flying broomsticks, and shows how potions and charms are grounded in the science of ethnobotany.)  

You're not wowing me with credibility here.

I'm not exactly sure how you culled the existence of a global Flood out of that article either.  The article was written to show that dinosaurs exhibited "motherly love" for their infants, as you said, not to exhibit evidence for Noah and the Flood.

In the future, you may want to check your sources a bit more thoroughly.

The article says, "that the nest could have been enveloped in a Pompeii-like cloud of suffocating gas and dust from a volcanic eruption, been trapped in an underground burrow that collapsed or been hit by sudden, dramatic flooding."  That means the nest COULD have been suspect to these three things, AS WELL AS OTHERS.  How you are pulling this into corroborating the flood in Genesis is far beyond my comprehension, so an explanation would be appreciated.  A sudden, dramatic flooding happens all the time, watch the news.  The author didn't say that this was a part of a GLOBAL FLOOD.  That is a HUGE chasm your logic is jumping, it just doesn't make sense.

Oh, and your definition of the flood in Genesis, "It was a violent eruption with the earth splitting open and geysers of water spewing out rock and steaming hot water up into the atmosphere.", well I don't seem to remember this description in the Bible. Or is this just an assumption on your part? And yes, I would love to see a detailed description of how you corroborate this into the Bible.

Keep one thing in mind when you discuss the ocean floor in relation to the flood. This comes from Dave Matsen, "A second problem involves the thickness of sedimentary rock on the ocean floor as well as missing flood layers. Let us start with Dr. Hovind's assumption that the earth was relatively flat during the flood and that the excess water was drawn off into deepening ocean basins, even as the continental regions rose up. Former ocean areas and former land areas would have received approximately the same amount of sediment during a worldwide flood which reworked the earth's original outer crust to a great depth. After all, the low hills and flat lands of Dr. Hovind's antediluvian world are not going to provide more than a fraction of the sediment generated. Thus, even if that sediment were not transported to nearby ocean areas, an extremely unlikely possibility given the assumed violence of the flood, the sediments would still be distributed about equally over former ocean and land areas. Right?

Such would be the condition after the sediment first settled out. The excess water, now rushing off the rising continental areas, would wash vast amounts of sediment into the new ocean basins. Thus, today's ocean basins should have a much thicker layer of sedimentary rock than the continental areas. In addition, the first flood strata laid down on the new ocean floors should match the first flood strata laid down on today's continental areas, especially in areas adjoining the border between the two zones.

Why are the sedimentary rocks generally thinner on the ocean floor than in continental regions? Why are the sedimentary rocks of the Pacific and Atlantic sea floors no older than the late Jurassic? What happened to the Cambrian, the Ordovician, the Silurian, the Devonian, the Carboniferous, and the Permian strata? Funny, that Noah's flood should deposit all those strata in many, many places while systematically missing vast areas that were to become today's ocean floors!"
 
The voice of God (whether by direct vocal intervention or by indirect vibrational disruption) at microwave energy level penetrated the great water reservoir beneath the earth's granite crust. With microwave's unique effect on water, this agitated medium rapidly disrupted the planet's subterranean structure which housed the designed nuclear reactors and internal foundations.

The violent heated waters ruptured the granite crust and sent hot jets of steam upward through the thin firmament suspended above the earth. This action opened channel windows in the crystalline canopy and caused its collapse. The mass fell as liquid rain in the temperate zones and dropped as ice at the poles. Subsequent expulsion of water and chemical elements from earth's disrupted interior saturated the surface floods and trapped living organisms as fossils in sedimentary deposits.

Gravitational attraction of the moon brought the global body of floodwaters into resonance. Cyclical tidal action deposited organic and inorganic materials into conformable sedimentary layers. The vast majority of the "geologic column" is adequately explained by a single year of global flood activity

Early in the Flood sequence subterranean waters erupted and ruptured the great Pangean supercontinent into continental divisions, but the continental divisions were still in place adjacent to each other.

During the year of that great Flood the global floodwaters laid down sedimentary layers of rock laced with fossils. These sedimentary layers were placed directly over many of the fracture lines. The Pangean supercontinent was still in place, but was "fractured at the seams."

Approximately five hundred years after the Flood a "runaway" nuclear reaction took place in Earth's interior under the South Pacific basin. This reaction was initiated originally as a result of the disruption which caused the Flood. This "runaway" nuclear reaction took place at the time of Peleg, and during his lifetime the diameter of the earth expanded - separating the continents and thrusting great masses of land into new configurations.

The ocean floor has expanded, and earthquakes continue to release pressures from a violent internal structure below Earth's crust. Surface temperatures range in extremes, while ice buildup has extended beyond the poles. Loss of the firmamental canopy left the geomagnetic field without a charging mechanism.

The ozone canopy, which built up after the Flood, is losing its stability due to depletion of energy in the magnetic field. As we approach tribulation, the Creator will appear for an instant in the air. His radiant energy will increase the strength of the magnetic field.

As tribulation progresses extreme earthquakes and violent eruptions will reshape the planetary surface and emit an overcast of dust particles in the upper atmosphere. Radiation judgments will further increase the strength of the magnetic field. Buildup of massive hailstones on a global scale will purify the upper atmosphere and leave water suspended in the concentrated lines of flux. The geomagnetic field will then hold sufficient strength to break measured amounts of water into oxygen and hydrogen by natural electrolysis

The return of the Creator in His glory will produce radiant physical energy, bonding the hydrogen and water suspended above the earth. This phenomenon will reintroduce the firmament, and dinosaurs will flourish again. Elimination of ultraviolet radiation and reintroduction of magenta glow will give vegetation opportunity for optimal genetic expression. The crystalline firmament will again provide physical characteristics to

receive and audibilize the harmonic radio signals from space for the musical benefit of Earth's inhabitants. This Kingdom reign will lead into the final judgment. Subsequently the new Heaven will suspend itself over the restored Earth. Symphonic righteousness will dwell in the heavens, and we will enjoy our Creator for eternity.

This is from Dr. Carl Baugh....and who is Dave Matsen?
 
Uh, you kinda skipped everything else, most notably how you got the Global Flood from that article.

Dave E. Matson is a former computer programmer who has written a few theological articles.
 
I only have so much time to post here, I do what I can when I can. Ill answer you questions.


BTW... you want me to take a computer programers word on geology? Come now, Im not that stupid
tounge.gif
 
That's not as funny as wanting me to accept that article posted on a website with ufo's and conspiracy theories.
rock.gif


Touche' mon frer!
 
Now that is a MUCH more believeable site!

But, alas, the article is totally different. Nowhere does it talk about how the fossils came to be, no flood indicator at all. The article is about providing "the most compelling evidence to date that dinosaurs raised their young after hatching."
 
Honestly im not sure why the articles differ, perhaps someone added or took away from the other. At any rate I cant find it anywhere else.
 
NO, they do differ, they have basically the same content. Actually they are kinda like different species of the same KIND of animal they are basically the same, but with different features! LOL If Im not mistaken all the content was taken from Nature mag or online? Probably whoever re-wrote the article just pulled what they wanted from the original source to suit there needs. Perhaps the 2 differing article are a great example of MICRO-evolution.
tounge.gif
 
Back
Top