Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Biblical record ( I wasn't there at the beginning of time, so I can't provide an eyewitness report) makes NO assertions about the age of the geosphere - the ball of dirt and water we now sit on. So neither will I. Yeah it does, "On the first day..." blah blah blah, then Adam and Eve, then about  gazilions " Joesephs begat Josepeh juniors", and when they all died.  Do a little CSI: Miami and you get the earth being just under 10,000 years. It don't take rubber gloves and an ultraviolet flashlight to figure that somewhere in that mix then, someone boned their sister. (aah, digression.. One step further from topic, one more toward chaos.. My work here is done.)

the non CSI version:


http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm

Biblical Age of Earth

by  David V. Bassett, M.S.

Beginning with the archeological landmark event of the fall of Jerusalem (which has now been corrected to 588 B.C., instead of 586-587 B.C.) and counting backwards the prophesied number of years between this event and the division of Solomon's kingdom (390 yrs. + 40 yrs., according to Ezekiel 4:4-7), brings us to 1018 B.C.

From the end of Solomon's 40-year reign to the start of the Temple in the 4th year of his reign takes us back another 37 years to 1055 B.C.

From the start of Solomon's Temple "in the 480th year" (1 Kings 6:1) back to the Exodus from Egypt (hence 479 years previous) brings us to near 1534 B.C.

From the Exodus out of Egypt to Abraham's entering Canaan from Haran was exactly 430 years to the day (Gen 12:10/ Exodus 12:40/ Gal 3:17), thus around 1964 B.C.

Since Abraham entered Canaan at age 75 (Gen 12:4), he was born approximately 2039 B.C.

From Abraham's birth to Noah's grandson (Shem's son), Arpachshad's birth, 2 years after the Flood started, was 290 years (Gen 11:11-26), this places the onset of the Flood at around 2331 B.C. [definitely 4,300-4,400 years ago].

The genealogy of  Genesis 5:3-32 [This is all the begats]  precludes any gaps due to its tight chronological structure and gives us 1,656 years between Creation and the Flood, thus bringing Creation Week back to near 3987 B.C. or approximately 4000 B.C.

Therefore, the biblical age of the Earth (using Scripture itself as a guide) is 6,000 years !! Mankind did not evolve 4 million years ago on an Earth which is 4.5 billion years old in a universe which was "big-banged" into existence 18-20 billion years in the distant past. Jesus Christ, the Creator Incarnate, said He made mankind male and female in the beginning (Mark 10:6), and that when the heavens and the earth were commanded into being (Gen 1:1), they "stood up together" (Isa 48:13) not billions of years apart !!

Quoted: I've yet to hear a decent explanation for the evolution of bats.

My question is "How does evolution explain the obvious artistic talent some possess?"

"Survival of the fittest" really does NOT explain how people possess such OBVIOUS talent for painting, or playing the piano, etc etc given that painting has only existed as an art form for less than 5,000 years and the piano for less than 500.

But I don't really want to get into a full blown discussion on the nuances of evolution, and want to focus more on the Greenville, SC school board ruling.

Quoted: I don't believe in gravity. It is only a theory. All things are held in place by invisible fairies sent by Flying Spaghetti Monster.

gravity is just the entire universe doubling in size every second. when you jump, you dont fall down, the ground just grows(along with yourself) to catch up with you!

Quoted: Quoted: The Biblical record ( I wasn't there at the beginning of time, so I can't provide an eyewitness report) makes NO assertions about the age of the geosphere - the ball of dirt and water we now sit on. So neither will I. Yeah it does, "On the first day..." blah blah blah, then Adam and Eve, then about  gazilions " Joesephs begat Josepeh juniors", and when they all died.  Do a little CSI: Miami and you get the earth being just under 10,000 years.

The first day OF WHAT? You need a reference point.

If you combine II Peter 3:5 and Genesis 1:2, you get the idea the geosphere may have existed long before the first day of creation. In other words, the raw material God used to create could have existed LONG before Day 1 of creation.

I'm not building a case here, I'm just saying my reading of Scripture does NOT give me a certainty all the raw materials of creation are less than 100,000 years old.

So I'm not gonna be dogmatic on the subject. I wasn't there. Dating methods use assumptions and extrapolation, which may be wrong. And I don't beelive its a critical issue anyway.

The Bible has enuf areas of CERTAIN teaching, that I'm not gonna squeeze out things that aren't necessarily there.

Quoted: And the non-religious critical review of Intelligent Design can ONLY be a good thing, right?

Actually, you'll see my RELIGIOUS review of ID theory above, and how I said it overreaches.

As a Christian, I am NOT afraid to have ALL my views tested.

Quoted:

You can tell, just by looking at ....uhh, it, the FSM does NOT evidence intelligent design.

Quoted: Quoted: I've yet to hear a decent explanation for the evolution of bats. My question is "How does evolution explain the obvious artistic talent some possess?" "Survival of the fittest" really does NOT explain how people possess such OBVIOUS talent for painting, or playing the piano, etc etc given that painting has only existed as an art form for less than 5,000 years and the piano for less than 500. But I don't really want to get into a full blown discussion on the nuances of evolution, and want to focus more on the Greenville, SC school board ruling.

G'man. As politely as I can, you don't seem to understand the mechanics of evolution at all.

Piano players and artists are NOT an evolved distinct species of man.

Quoted: Quoted: www.venganza.org/images/wallpapers/FSM3d.gif You can tell, just by looking at ....uhh, it, the FSM does NOT evidence intelligent design.

You will forever dwell in Olive Garden.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: www.venganza.org/images/wallpapers/FSM3d.gif You can tell, just by looking at ....uhh, it, the FSM does NOT evidence intelligent design. You will forever dwell in Olive Garden.

Severe punishment indeed, based on most times Ive been there. A sort of spaghetti hell.

Quoted: G'man. As politely as I can, you don't seem to understand the mechanics of evolution at all. Piano players and artists are NOT an evolved distinct species of man.

Evolution is responsible for MORE than just development of individual species.

its claimed to develop things like long monkey tails, suited to swinging from trees, as a survival mechanism.

Am I wrong thus far?

Quoted: Quoted: G'man. As politely as I can, you don't seem to understand the mechanics of evolution at all. Piano players and artists are NOT an evolved distinct species of man. Evolution is responsible for MORE than just development of individual species. its claimed to develop things like long monkey tails, suited to swinging from trees, as a survival mechanism. Am I wrong thus far?

Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution.

They believe the "environment" conditions improvements in species which then become the most prevalent due to their superior adaptability, thus replaces other less successful species. They believe if the world flooded evolution would "adapt" life forms to develop gills and survive.

And while environment DOES influence the survivability of a species it does NOT dictate new species.

Evolution is NOTHING MORE than successful mutations. Mutations constantly happen in nature. The successfulness of mutations is random. The fittests do NOT always survive. A radically advanced mutation of a species could appear and get struck by lightning.

It is the most SUCCESSFUL species that survive. Generally these are the most adapatable.

If a species with a new trait is successful, then the likelihood of that trait being passed on is higher.

That is evolution.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: G'man. As politely as I can, you don't seem to understand the mechanics of evolution at all. Piano players and artists are NOT an evolved distinct species of man. Evolution is responsible for MORE than just development of individual species. its claimed to develop things like long monkey tails, suited to swinging from trees, as a survival mechanism. Am I wrong thus far? Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution. They believe the "environment" conditions improvements in species which then become the most prevalent due to their superior adaptability, thus replaces other less successful species. They believe if the world flooded evolution would "adapt" life forms to develop gills and survive. And while environment DOES influence the survivability of a species it does NOT dictate new species. Evolution is NOTHING MORE than successful mutations. Mutations constantly happen in nature. The successfulness of mutations is random. The fittests do NOT always survive. A radically advanced mutation of a species could appear and get struck by lightning. It is the most SUCCESSFUL species that survive. Generally these are the most adapatable. If a species with a new trait is successful, then the likelihood of that trait being passed on is higher. That is evolution.

why do you bother, SA?

Idiocy.  Nothing but idiocy.

Quoted: Quoted: I don't believe in gravity. It is only a theory. All things are held in place by invisible fairies sent by Flying Spaghetti Monster. The fairies are not invisible.  I can see them! Dinosaurs never existed.  All the fossils that clearly show evolutionary changes are clearly hoaxes.

CLEARLY satan put the bones there to fuck with your head!!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: G'man. As politely as I can, you don't seem to understand the mechanics of evolution at all. Piano players and artists are NOT an evolved distinct species of man. Evolution is responsible for MORE than just development of individual species. its claimed to develop things like long monkey tails, suited to swinging from trees, as a survival mechanism. Am I wrong thus far? Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution.  Not quite. They believe the "environment" conditions improvements in species which then become the most prevalent due to their superior adaptability, thus replaces other less successful species. They believe if the world flooded evolution would "adapt" life forms to develop gills and survive. Success is not directly linked to adaptability.  There are a lot of interactions between the species and environment that affect success.  Too much adaptability might be detrimental. And while environment DOES influence the survivability of a species it does NOT dictate new species. In the long term, it might. Evolution is NOTHING MORE than successful mutations. Mutations constantly happen in nature. The successfulness of mutations is random. The fittests do NOT always survive. A radically advanced mutation of a species could appear and get struck by lightning. Evolution is a lot more than successful mutation.  Mutations are not random but are influenced by environmental and genetic factors. It is the most SUCCESSFUL species that survive. Generally these are the most adapatable. Again, it is not directly linked to adaptability. If a species with a new trait is successful, then the likelihood of that trait being passed on is higher. Now that is the other part of evolution.  New phenotypes don't have to arise through mutation.  They can arise through blending of genetic material. That is evolution.

Quoted: why do you bother, SA?

Because...

1. He asked.

2. If I asked a Biblical question I didn't have a decent understanding of he'd tell me.

Guys like G'man and OP have always taken the time to answer or explain issues of religion that I didn't have a strong understanding of. We don't agree on many things related to issues like evolution vs. creationism, but we always take the time to explain why we believe what we do.

Quoted: Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution.  Not quite.

I said "most" not "all."

Everyone of your other points are simply arugmentative as well.

I was basically offering a general overview to correct some basic misassumptions.

Quoted: Quoted: why do you bother, SA? Because... 1. He asked. 2. If I asked a Biblical question I didn't have a decent understanding of he'd tell me. Guys like G'man and OP have always taken the time to answer or explain issues of religion that I didn't have a strong understanding of. We don't agree on many things related to issues like evolution vs. creationism, but we always take the time to explain why we believe what we do.

I appreciate the effort.

I'm "noodling"  thru what you said.


ETA : Did no one catch the FSM reference?  

So if the flood occurred as postulated


From Abraham's birth to Noah's grandson (Shem's son), Arpachshad's birth, 2 years after the Flood started, was 290 years (Gen 11:11-26), this places the onset of the Flood at around 2331 B.C. [definitely 4,300-4,400 years ago].

 How do you account for civilizations not destroyed at that time (Say Egypt and China among others)  or did Noahs family somehow go into a baby boom of epic proporations and get re settled in the place of the flooded peoples and why is there no mention of how they got there in the histories of those civilizations??

Quoted: Quoted: why do you bother, SA? Because... 1. He asked. 2. If I asked a Biblical question I didn't have a decent understanding of he'd tell me. Guys like G'man and OP have always taken the time to answer or explain issues of religion that I didn't have a strong understanding of. We don't agree on many things related to issues like evolution vs. creationism, but we always take the time to explain why we believe what we do.

Yes, but he's not ignorant of the things you posted....he's seen it a million times....he just thinks its bunk i.e. bogus scientists advanced by those with an agenda.

(correct me if I'm wrong G'man)

Quoted: Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution. They believe the "environment" conditions improvements in species which then become the most prevalent due to their superior adaptability, thus replaces other less successful species. They believe if the world flooded evolution would "adapt" life forms to develop gills and survive. And while environment DOES influence the survivability of a species it does NOT dictate new species. Evolution is NOTHING MORE than successful mutations. Mutations constantly happen in nature. The successfulness of mutations is random. The fittests do NOT always survive. A radically advanced mutation of a species could appear and get struck by lightning. It is the most SUCCESSFUL species that survive. Generally these are the most adapatable. If a species with a new trait is successful, then the likelihood of that trait being passed on is higher. That is evolution.

concerning the two parts in red....

They seem to somewhat contradict each other.

It doesn't seem logical that the successfulness can both be random AND be the driver in what mutations survive.

If the successful mutations are teh one that survive, then survivability is what "selects" the mutations to be available for reproduction, and that is no longer a random process.

Which brings me back to my question "What evolutionary mechanism produced artistic ability?"

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: why do you bother, SA? Because... 1. He asked. 2. If I asked a Biblical question I didn't have a decent understanding of he'd tell me. Guys like G'man and OP have always taken the time to answer or explain issues of religion that I didn't have a strong understanding of. We don't agree on many things related to issues like evolution vs. creationism, but we always take the time to explain why we believe what we do. Yes, but he's not ignorant of the things you posted....he's seen it a million times....he just thinks its bunk i.e. bogus scientists advanced by those with an agenda. (correct me if I'm wrong G'man)

I do NOT beleive scientists gather in a room and conspire.

But what Steyr Aug said about the mechnisms of evolution doesn't seem logically compatible to me. Sounds like he's saying the selection process of evolution is both random AND the determinant as to what mutations survive.



.

Quoted: Quoted: Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution. They believe the "environment" conditions improvements in species which then become the most prevalent due to their superior adaptability, thus replaces other less successful species. They believe if the world flooded evolution would "adapt" life forms to develop gills and survive. And while environment DOES influence the survivability of a species it does NOT dictate new species. Evolution is NOTHING MORE than successful mutations. Mutations constantly happen in nature. The successfulness of mutations is random. The fittests do NOT always survive. A radically advanced mutation of a species could appear and get struck by lightning. It is the most SUCCESSFUL species that survive. Generally these are the most adapatable. If a species with a new trait is successful, then the likelihood of that trait being passed on is higher. That is evolution. concerning the two parts in red.... They seem to somewhat contradict each other. It doesn't seem logical that the successfulness can both be random AND be the driver in what mutations survive. If the successful mutations are teh one that survive, then survivability is what "selects" the mutations to be available for reproduction, and that is no longer a random process. Which brings me back to my question "What evolutionary mechanism produced artistic ability?"

simple answer -  there are heritable traits that don't necessarily enhance survivability but get passed along nonetheless.

Quoted: Quoted: why do you bother, SA? Because... 1. He asked. 2. If I asked a Biblical question I didn't have a decent understanding of he'd tell me. Guys like G'man and OP have always taken the time to answer or explain issues of religion that I didn't have a strong understanding of. We don't agree on many things related to issues like evolution vs. creationism, but we always take the time to explain why we believe what we do.

+1

Hooray for learning and the free exchange of ideas. We will never get anywhere if we just write people off. Making people defensive can only perpetuate the divide instead of changing minds.

Quoted:  How do you account for civilizations not destroyed at that time (Say Egypt and China among others)  or did Noahs family somehow go into a baby boom of epic proporations and get re settled in the place of the flooded peoples and why is there no mention of how they got there in the histories of those civilizations??

There3's about four questions in there.

Per the Biblical record, all humanity was destroyed in the flood, save the eight on the ark. From my reading of Scripture, the Noahic flood was MUCH ealier that the existence of Egyptian society

Noah's procreative habits are nowhere, to my knowledge recorded, so all I could give is specualtion.

Since all humanity was destroyed, the civilizations didn;t exist to record how Noah, et al settled in their communities.

Quoted: simple answer -  there are heritable traits that don't necessarily enhance survivability but get passed along nonetheless.

THAT to me is true randomness. Just chance happennings.

But from what I can observe, order never spontaneously generates out of chaos.

That's teh leap of faith I'm not willing to take. I don't  anywhere observe order coming out of chaos without sentient assistance, which it is my understanding that is EXACTLY what evolution requires - the spontaneous generation of order out of chaos

I'm trying to understand, I am. It just doesn't pass my smell test.

.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution. They believe the "environment" conditions improvements in species which then become the most prevalent due to their superior adaptability, thus replaces other less successful species. They believe if the world flooded evolution would "adapt" life forms to develop gills and survive. And while environment DOES influence the survivability of a species it does NOT dictate new species. Evolution is NOTHING MORE than successful mutations. Mutations constantly happen in nature. The successfulness of mutations is random. The fittests do NOT always survive. A radically advanced mutation of a species could appear and get struck by lightning. It is the most SUCCESSFUL species that survive. Generally these are the most adapatable. If a species with a new trait is successful, then the likelihood of that trait being passed on is higher. That is evolution. concerning the two parts in red.... They seem to somewhat contradict each other. It doesn't seem logical that the successfulness can both be random AND be the driver in what mutations survive. If the successful mutations are teh one that survive, then survivability is what "selects" the mutations to be available for reproduction, and that is no longer a random process. Which brings me back to my question "What evolutionary mechanism produced artistic ability?" simple answer -  there are heritable traits that don't necessarily enhance survivability but get passed along nonetheless.

+1 That’s true. Plus with humans the issues are far more complex. Because we can so effectively communicate, nurture, as well as nature, plays a large role in outcomes. People with the raw materials, for great art, rarely are born into a situation where those skills can flourish. It’s what makes great art so amazing; it is the product of a zillion variables coming together in just the right place and time.

Quoted: Quoted: simple answer -  there are heritable traits that don't necessarily enhance survivability but get passed along nonetheless. THAT to me is true randomness. Just chance happennings. But from what I can observe, order never spontaneously generates out of chaos. That's teh leap of faith I'm not willing to take. I don't  anywhere observe coming out of chaos without sentient assistance, which it is my understanding that is EXACTLY what evolution requires. - the spontaneous bgeneration of order out of chaos I'm trying to understand, I am. It just doesn't pass my smell test. .

sounds weird I know, but it does just that. But you need is a huge amount of time. 4.5 billion years seems to work.

Plus there are some rules. science it trying to nail down just what exactly they are.

Quoted: Quoted: But from what I can observe, order never spontaneously generates out of chaos. sounds weird I know, but it does just that. But you need is a huge amount of time. 4.5 billion years seems to work. Plus there are some rules. science it trying to nail down just what exactly they are.

Hopefully this won't come across wrong, but I have three problems with that concept - (1) it doesn't logically make sense to me, (2)  nowhere do I observe that process happenning in the tangible world, and (3) the whole concept is unScriptural, so I just have a  hard time accepting it.

I do appreciate your patience with me in explaining it tho.

Quoted: For those of you that don't believe in evolution, what do you think happened to the dinosaurs?THey died. Pretty simple   How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years old?Do you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.

Well, I don't care about the BS theory of evolution. THere is no proof that we came from monkeys, or apes.
Hell, the best we have is the fact that whales have bone structures that resemble feet. And when was the last time you saw a whale on land walking around?

Quoted: Quoted: For those of you that don't believe in evolution, what do you think happened to the dinosaurs?THey died. Pretty simple   How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years old?Do you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.   Well, I don't care about the BS theory of evolution. THere is no proof that we came from monkeys, or apes. Hell, the best we have is the fact that whales have bone structures that resemble feet. And when was the last time you saw a whale on land walking around?

Dude, check this out. www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/ They play it on discovery from time to time. You can also rent it.

The bones don't lie.

Quoted: How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years oldDo you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.

For the record, the Bible says "a day is as a thousand years." But it also says "a thousand years is as a day."  Same passage.

Said passage is NOT a proof text that a day  = a thousand years.

It is a proof text that time is Irrelevant to God, who is timeless.

I have a real opinion on the matter, but this is a serious topic and GD is so thoroughly plagued by retards that I won't waste my time.

Instead, I'll just up my post count.
I've earned by wading through the stupidity.

Quoted: I have a real opinion on the matter, but this is a serious topic and GD is so thoroughly plagued by retards that I won't waste my time. Instead, I'll just up my post count. I've earned by wading through the stupidity.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: But from what I can observe, order never spontaneously generates out of chaos. sounds weird I know, but it does just that. But you need is a huge amount of time. 4.5 billion years seems to work. Plus there are some rules. science it trying to nail down just what exactly they are. Hopefully this won't come across wrong, but I have three problems with that concept - (1) it doesn't logically make sense to me, (2)  nowhere do I observe that process happenning in the tangible world, and (3) the whole concept is unScriptural, so I just have a  hard time accepting it. I do appreciate your patience with me in explaining it tho.

1. That’s just because you don't have the right information. Sound logic is a very important tool, but can't help you if the data is not complete.

2. That’s the trouble with anwsers about the past. The time frame is so unimaginable huge, that the changes are imperceptible in real-time. We only live 50-100 years at most, and we are talking about things occurring over hundreds of millions of years, sometimes billions. It’s really hard to get your head around. I find what helps is to think in terms of scale and videos help with this immensely.

3. I certainly understand this; we are all subject to this. Like everything in our lives, especially those we were introduced to as children; language, customs, religions, etc. it is very hard not to see the world through those prisms. That’s why I love the new series of videos on these subjects. They do such a good job of describing the big picture issues in visual terms we can all understand. They are visual eloquent in ways reading can never be.

If you get some time, the PBS nova: origins and BBCs “walking with” series, are hugely interesting, entertaining, and just the tip of the iceberg.  Programs like these really make a netflix account and DVD player a relatively cheap and powerful learning tool. A warning though, once you start watching you won’t be able to get enough.

Quoted: Quoted:  How do you account for civilizations not destroyed at that time (Say Egypt and China among others)  or did Noahs family somehow go into a baby boom of epic proporations and get re settled in the place of the flooded peoples and why is there no mention of how they got there in the histories of those civilizations?? There3's about four questions in there. Per the Biblical record, all humanity was destroyed in the flood, save the eight on the ark. From my reading of Scripture, the Noahic flood was MUCH ealier that the existence of Egyptian society Noah's procreative habits are nowhere, to my knowledge recorded, so all I could give is specualtion. Since all humanity was destroyed, the civilizations didn;t exist to record how Noah, et al settled in their communities.

So Noah and Sons didn't record??  too busy procreating? those civilizations pre-date the alledged flood, you need to read something other than Scriptures.  They are an incomplete history of the semitic peoples, unfortunately there are historical records of other peoples not included in the Bible.

Quoted: 1. That’s just because you don't have the right information. Sound logic is a very important tool, but can't help you if the data is not complete.

IMO its a little presumtuous for you to make that assertion, as you don't have the right information about the level of study I've done on the subject.

But then maybe I don't have the right information about the amount of information you have as to how much I;ve studied the subject.

Oy.....

Quoted:

So Noah and Sons didn't record??  too busy procreating? those civilizations pre-date the alledged flood, you need to read something other than Scriptures.  They are an incomplete history of the semitic peoples, unfortunately there are historical records of other peoples not included in the Bible.

I'd have to go back and re-count the geneologies, but off the top of my head, the Flood occurred before Egyptian and Chinese civilizations developed.

I won't be dogmatic about that, cuz I haven't recently studied it, but that is my recollection.

What the....



DID IT JUST LET ME EDIT PADANBY's post???

Dude, I am sorry man, I'm not sure what's going on.

Quoted: Quoted: 1. That’s just because you don't have the right information. Sound logic is a very important tool, but can't help you if the data is not complete. IMO its a little presumtuous for you to make that assertion, as you don't have the right information about the level of study I've done on the subject. But then maybe I don't have the right information about the amount of information you have as to how much I;ve studied the subject. Oy.....

I'm not saying I have all the answers, just saying logic alone, critical as it is, can't help anyone if the facts are off.

Quoted: Quoted: simple answer -  there are heritable traits that don't necessarily enhance survivability but get passed along nonetheless. THAT to me is true randomness. Just chance happennings. But from what I can observe, order never spontaneously generates out of chaos. That's teh leap of faith I'm not willing to take. I don't  anywhere observe order coming out of chaos without sentient assistance, which it is my understanding that is EXACTLY what evolution requires - the spontaneous generation of order out of chaos I'm trying to understand, I am. It just doesn't pass my smell test. .

You're right.  That is an incompletely understood point in evolutionary theory.  I'll also say that it doesn't seem impossible at the moment even if no one understands how it works.  Self-organization is a major area of focus at the moment, but in general people don't have a clue.  There is a reason why evolution is the dominant theory at the moment though, and I'll get to that in my next post.

Quoted: Quoted: Ok here is the view MOST have of Evolution.  Not quite. I said "most" not "all." Everyone of your other points are simply arugmentative as well. I was basically offering a general overview to correct some basic misassumptions.

I'm not intending to be argumentative.  I'm correcting misconceptions in your summary of evolutionary theory.  I believe you when you say that is the view of "most"; this debate, in general, is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.  Neither side, congressman, pastor, or teacher understands either side of the argument, even if it is the side they are arguing.  However, your summary, even if believed by most, is not a correct summary of evolution.  Look at the new data geneticists are coming up with and actually read Darwin's original work.

I'll also go ahead and give the ID people some ammunition.  No one understands how evolution works in something as complex as life.  People realize that life is adaptive, that this adaptation is a complex set of interactions between environment and genetic information, and that evolutionary theory most likely does play some role in it.  People know evolution works very well in very simple, sometimes artificial, cases.  But can you say evolution is correct and ID is wrong?  No!  Likewise, you cannot say ID is correct and evolution is wrong.  You can't even say that they are mutually exclusive.

There is a very, very important reason why we teach evolution and use it as the dominant theory right now.  That's because it is testable.  ID is not currently testable.  If you accept an untestable scientific theory, you revert to mysticism.  God's will.  Who can find out the reason behind God's will?  How do you even try?  We might as well chant "Insha Allah" and start wiping our butts with our bare hands in that case.  It may very well be the case that ID is correct and evolution doesn't explain everything.  But we will never, never know if we just accept ID and refuse to study evolution.  If that is the case that ID is correct, it will be studying evolution that will lead us to that conclusion.

I have no problem with questioning evolution...in about a hundred years.  Right now is premature.  Evolution works for researchers, it keeps things moving forward, and if it doesn't work out, that will become apparent to everyone in time.  But only because evolution has been studied and inconsistancies have been found.  Not because someone feels that it just can't be that way.  Religion or lack thereof has nothing to do with this. We are all men, we are limited in what we can observe and experiment with, and God's will is far beyond those limitations.  Evolution is not, but might imply some of the same answers.  Someday far, far into the future.

Quoted: Quoted: I've yet to hear a decent explanation for the evolution of bats. My question is "How does evolution explain the obvious artistic talent some possess?" "Survival of the fittest" really does NOT explain how people possess such OBVIOUS talent for painting, or playing the piano, etc etc given that painting has only existed as an art form for less than 5,000 years and the piano for less than 500. But I don't really want to get into a full blown discussion on the nuances of evolution, and want to focus more on the Greenville, SC school board ruling.

I'll jump in here since this conversation is going so well.  I don't consider myself an expert in evo theory, but I do some reading here and there.

If there are traits that we can call artisti ability, they may be attributable to sexual selection.  Sexual selection  involves inviduals from the same sex competing against one another  (rutting deer for example) or when members of one sex choose from the opposite sex.  

Females in most species are choosier in their mates for the obvious reason that they invest more in their offspring than their male counterparts.  

When choosing females may use indicators of genetic fitness.  Its possible that artist ability is a trait selected by females.  

An (imperfect) analogy would be the peacocks tail.  As you know the peacocks tails are long flambyant things.  They get in the way, in fact, of surviving. Apparently tigers in India are known to capture peacocks by first grabbing their tails before killing them.  They would seem to be a problem for the males.  But surviving is not as important as passing on your genes (althought survining generally allows individuals more opportunities to reproduce in the long run).  

So why do peacocks have the long tails?  Cause the peahens go wild for them.  Peahens prefer the bigger more symmetrical tails with more "eyes".  And as it turns out, tail size, symmetry, and number of "eyes" is correlated with male sickness and early death.

All of this may sound like a nice story, but how does one go about testing this idea?  Well, they take the peacocks who get the most peahen and then cut off some of their eyes.  When you deplete the eyes and make the tail more asymmetrical, the peahens aren't so eager anymore.

So, possibly, artist talents exist in humans because the chicks did art.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For those of you that don't believe in evolution, what do you think happened to the dinosaurs?THey died. Pretty simple   How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years old?Do you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.   Well, I don't care about the BS theory of evolution. THere is no proof that we came from monkeys, or apes. Hell, the best we have is the fact that whales have bone structures that resemble feet. And when was the last time you saw a whale on land walking around? Dude, check this out. www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/ They play it on discovery from time to time. You can also rent it. The bones don't lie.

If the bones don't lie, why are there still apes? If one evolved, wouldn't the rest? After you can only evolve upwards, not regress.

And the fact that there are monkeys and apes still running around kinda disproves the fact that we evolved from them.

None of the biblical explanation makes sense at any level.  At least if you take it literally.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For those of you that don't believe in evolution, what do you think happened to the dinosaurs?THey died. Pretty simple   How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years old?Do you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.   Well, I don't care about the BS theory of evolution. THere is no proof that we came from monkeys, or apes. Hell, the best we have is the fact that whales have bone structures that resemble feet. And when was the last time you saw a whale on land walking around? Dude, check this out. www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/ They play it on discovery from time to time. You can also rent it. The bones don't lie. If the bones don't lie, why are there still apes? If one evolved, wouldn't the rest? After you can only evolve upwards, not regress. And the fact that there are monkeys and apes still running around kinda disproves the fact that we evolved from them.

Are you joking?  Why are there domesticated dogs AND wolves at the same time?

There are still apes because not all members of a species evolve at the same time.  Different environments allow for different traits to prosper.  

There is overwhelming evidence supporting evolution.  There is NO evidence supporting Creation.  There is only faith.  If someone wants to have faith, that is their right. I can understand if people are unwilling to seek out this evidence, but please don't claim it's not there.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For those of you that don't believe in evolution, what do you think happened to the dinosaurs?THey died. Pretty simple   How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years old?Do you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.   Well, I don't care about the BS theory of evolution. THere is no proof that we came from monkeys, or apes. Hell, the best we have is the fact that whales have bone structures that resemble feet. And when was the last time you saw a whale on land walking around? Dude, check this out. www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/ They play it on discovery from time to time. You can also rent it. The bones don't lie. If the bones don't lie, why are there still apes? If one evolved, wouldn't the rest? After you can only evolve upwards, not regress. And the fact that there are monkeys and apes still running around kinda disproves the fact that we evolved from them.

you're not disproving evolution, you're only exhibiting your lack of familiarity with its fundamentals.

Quoted: If the bones don't lie, why are there still apes? If one evolved, wouldn't the rest? After you can only evolve upwards, not regress. And the fact that there are monkeys and apes still running around kinda disproves the fact that we evolved from them.

We did not evolve from contemporary apes.   Both contemporary apes and humans had mutual ancestors (one that probably looked more apelike than human  going by the bones) way back in time.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For those of you that don't believe in evolution, what do you think happened to the dinosaurs?THey died. Pretty simple   How do you explain that the earth is 4.6 Billion years old?Do you think that everyone who believes in God thinks it is just a week old? Got some news for you, the Bible explains all of this crap. See, God created all the animals of the earth BEFORE He created man. And the Bible states that a day unto God is LIKE A THOUSAND UNTO MAN. Which infers that a day to God is vast compared to our limited experience. You have to actuall READ THE WHOLE BIBLE, not cherry pick passages to understand how it all works. And No, I'm not a huge Bible thumper .I don't go to church or pray, but I have actuall read most of the Bible, and used to keep the passages on hand for these kinds of discussions. But suffice it to say, if yo usit down and READ the Bible, you can see how it was all laid out. I'm guessing you just don't care.   Well, I don't care about the BS theory of evolution. THere is no proof that we came from monkeys, or apes. Hell, the best we have is the fact that whales have bone structures that resemble feet. And when was the last time you saw a whale on land walking around? Dude, check this out. www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/ They play it on discovery from time to time. You can also rent it. The bones don't lie. If the bones don't lie, why are there still apes? If one evolved, wouldn't the rest? After you can only evolve upwards, not regress. And the fact that there are monkeys and apes still running around kinda disproves the fact that we evolved from them.

You’re thinking to linearly. Think about it more like a family tree.

Monkeys and Gorillas are part of the larger group which we also fall into, primates. Monkeys don't evolve into gorillas and then gorillas into humans, and then disappear because evolution does not work like that. Remember we are talking about millions of years and all sorts of factors. As DNA mutates randomly, a change will occur, a monkey for example will have a slightly larger brain. If that change causes the monkey to reproduce more effectively then the trait will be passed on. But just as likely a flood could come along a wipe the mutated monkey out even if the mutation would have helped him otherwise. You see there are a ton of variables that decide if the mutations get passed on. Some times it’s practical, like the monkey having a bigger brain and thus being better at getting food. Sometimes it's random like the flood.

But back to your question of why monkeys are still around. Populations get separated all the time and evolve in different ways. Just like humans. “Asians” have distinct, similar features because that’s what happened to work in their geography. Black Africans and White Europeans are other examples of specific adaptation. We are all still human, but our populations got separated at some point and evolved in different ways to suit different environments. We all came out of Africa, but we got cut off from each other at different points. This went on for millions of years. Only when we gained the ability to travel amongst the populations, a couple thousand years ago, did we start to mix again. But racism and cultural clashes, usually prevents mixing even when the populations got close geographically, but that’s a whole other story.

Anyway, the best way to better understand these processes is to watch some of the videos I recommend previously. Nova : origins and the BBC “walking with” series is a good place to start.