Tweet
I do not care. I really do not.
Our salvation is not based on how God created the dirt or water. Our salvation is based on our Love and Faith in God, and the forgiveness Jesus gave to us.
I believe my God can do anything, I mean anything. I do not care if he used evolution over billions of years, or took 6 earth days. God is not restricted by our concept of time, we know from the Theory of Relativity that time is not a constant. Heck, I even think it is possible that God evolved the physical human body (like Pokemon
), then when it was where God wanted it He created the Soul in His image (then split the Soul in two creating Adam and Eve, which is why sex is sacred because it is the two spirits melding into one; forming the image of God). This is also the last time I mention God here, none of my issues with evolution involve Him.
Evolution is interesting, I have some problems though. For instance, scientist having one toe bone and reconstructing a full sized 'missing link', most of the time the bones are proven to be from a "modern" man (withing the last few thousand years). Also, who else looks at these bones? I really want to know the methodology for reconstructing an entire body out of a single toe or tooth. I could understand figuring out major details like a toe bone showing they walked upright, or a tooth showing herbivore/carnivore/omnivore. But I can not understand getting major details like shape of hands or height from ONE bone. I also find it interesting that several times marine life, that went "extinct" millions of years ago, are still being discovered by fishermen with really long fishing lines (Coelacanth). This is called Lazarus taxon
Another problem I have is with Radiocarbon Dating (carbon dating for short). Wiki does a good job of this. To sum up my issue is that it assumes a constant (or near constant) amount of cosmic rays to interact with nitrogen to produce the C14. My main problem is the assumption, we know that the Sun goes through cycles of "active" and "inactive" periods. What if some of the Ice Ages, were the result of lower solar activity? (we know of a minor ice age in the middle ages) Carbon dating to maybe 6-10 thousand years, maybe because we can compare known plant specimens (rings from trees that are old). I have also seen carbon dating be abused as a "magic bullet" science. The Shroud of Turin is an example, multiple samples taken, multiple results given. I do not know (or care) if the Shroud is real, my point is that carbon dating can be thrown off by many, many things (in the Shrouds case, it was a fire in the 15-16th centuries).
In conclusion, I have more points of debate, but I think I went on for long enough. I got to save some tasty debate for later. yummy. So side notes.
On a more humorous side note, I saw an Atheist scholar blast an Internet commented for posting that the compiled writings of Josephus were not real because "carbon dating said so". The scholar blasted the commenter because we do not have any original copies to test (almost 2000 years ago, was when Josephus wrote). Most paper does not survive a few hundred years (then only under the most Ideal of conditions). Declaration of Independence is almost gone too, is that going to be a myth of history? (remember an Atheist said that
) I wish I could remember where I read that.
Anther side note, many scientist in the early 20th century were skeptical of the "Big Bang Theory". Many leading researchers, such as the eminent Cambridge astronomer Arthur Eddington, were also suspicious of the Big Bang idea, because it suggested a mystical moment of creation (source). That is right, until the mid-20th century Big Bang was "Creation Science Crazy Talk(tm)" which was first proposed by a Vatican scientist. I am not saying all Creation Science is right (that is another Really long post, please save that discussion for the next thread I will do later on that subject. I have a few issues with them too.).
(PS: I plan on being back on tomorrow, but I do not know for certain. It is based on time restraints. I guess that is relative.)
Our salvation is not based on how God created the dirt or water. Our salvation is based on our Love and Faith in God, and the forgiveness Jesus gave to us.I believe my God can do anything, I mean anything. I do not care if he used evolution over billions of years, or took 6 earth days. God is not restricted by our concept of time, we know from the Theory of Relativity that time is not a constant. Heck, I even think it is possible that God evolved the physical human body (like Pokemon
), then when it was where God wanted it He created the Soul in His image (then split the Soul in two creating Adam and Eve, which is why sex is sacred because it is the two spirits melding into one; forming the image of God). This is also the last time I mention God here, none of my issues with evolution involve Him.Evolution is interesting, I have some problems though. For instance, scientist having one toe bone and reconstructing a full sized 'missing link', most of the time the bones are proven to be from a "modern" man (withing the last few thousand years). Also, who else looks at these bones? I really want to know the methodology for reconstructing an entire body out of a single toe or tooth. I could understand figuring out major details like a toe bone showing they walked upright, or a tooth showing herbivore/carnivore/omnivore. But I can not understand getting major details like shape of hands or height from ONE bone. I also find it interesting that several times marine life, that went "extinct" millions of years ago, are still being discovered by fishermen with really long fishing lines (Coelacanth). This is called Lazarus taxon
Another problem I have is with Radiocarbon Dating (carbon dating for short). Wiki does a good job of this. To sum up my issue is that it assumes a constant (or near constant) amount of cosmic rays to interact with nitrogen to produce the C14. My main problem is the assumption, we know that the Sun goes through cycles of "active" and "inactive" periods. What if some of the Ice Ages, were the result of lower solar activity? (we know of a minor ice age in the middle ages) Carbon dating to maybe 6-10 thousand years, maybe because we can compare known plant specimens (rings from trees that are old). I have also seen carbon dating be abused as a "magic bullet" science. The Shroud of Turin is an example, multiple samples taken, multiple results given. I do not know (or care) if the Shroud is real, my point is that carbon dating can be thrown off by many, many things (in the Shrouds case, it was a fire in the 15-16th centuries).
In conclusion, I have more points of debate, but I think I went on for long enough. I got to save some tasty debate for later. yummy. So side notes.
On a more humorous side note, I saw an Atheist scholar blast an Internet commented for posting that the compiled writings of Josephus were not real because "carbon dating said so". The scholar blasted the commenter because we do not have any original copies to test (almost 2000 years ago, was when Josephus wrote). Most paper does not survive a few hundred years (then only under the most Ideal of conditions). Declaration of Independence is almost gone too, is that going to be a myth of history? (remember an Atheist said that
) I wish I could remember where I read that.Anther side note, many scientist in the early 20th century were skeptical of the "Big Bang Theory". Many leading researchers, such as the eminent Cambridge astronomer Arthur Eddington, were also suspicious of the Big Bang idea, because it suggested a mystical moment of creation (source). That is right, until the mid-20th century Big Bang was "Creation Science Crazy Talk(tm)" which was first proposed by a Vatican scientist.
I am not saying all Creation Science is right (that is another Really long post, please save that discussion for the next thread I will do later on that subject. I have a few issues with them too.).(PS: I plan on being back on tomorrow, but I do not know for certain. It is based on time restraints. I guess that is relative.
)
). Along with a few other disparaging remarks that were not related to the content of the exhibits (like implying it is wrong to call them a museum). But, I am hoping that is an isolated incident, I am still wiki surfing so time will tell. So of their issues could also be still be found in many non-creationist museums (like the feathers being missing, or the 'classical' view of the Tyrannosaurus Rex {dragging the tail would have broken its back}, ect), because the new discoveries with the feathers is rather recent. But I am still reading and it is still interesting.
Comment