@gregrutz Invincible ignorance and assertions are not arguments. Dr. Hannam deals with this myth that you believe extensively in his book and also quite a bit on his website which is free. Nearly all scholars refute your claims as ignorance.
Do you even know the opinion of your own side? They talk about mass extinctions in history..and even about the world covered with ice ("global warning")and floods covering vast portions of the globe after denying this for ages...your info is obsolete.
@TruthIsLife7 Who cares what ''scholars'' claim, I am talking about Science and the facts they have discovered, like all the transitional fossils.
Yes, there were 6 major mass extinctions, and many smaller ones, the last one killed 60% of the species on the earth including the large dinosaurs >> 65 MILLION years ago. That is a fact.
MOST of the species that ever lived on the earth are extinct. [see fossil record] Oh right that does not exist.
@gregrutz Sorry, but NO, 65 million years ago isn't any more of a fact than geocentrism or steady state were. You have profound misunderstandings of science and esp. the philosophy of science. There are ~100 methods that point to a young age for life. There are at best 40 that point to an old age...and many of those 40 are completely debunked by the discovery of soft tissue in fossils. Do you know what it means to follow the weight of evidence? Which is greater, 100 or less than 40???
@TruthIsLife7 Yes, there were floods and ice ages. But we are talking about killing everything on the earth except what a 900 year old man could get on a boat and feed for a year. And not leaving a mud layer !
@TruthIsLife7 "Invincible ignorance and assertions are not arguments"
You really should take your own advice in argumentation their, because remaining utterly retarded about the fact that Pasteur's work had nothing to do with the biochemical origin of life does not constitute a valid argument.
@PhantomOfChaosSkin You consistently fail to understand how science works.Processes we see operating now are assumed to operate the same in history in general (there are a few exceptions, but not many). Without this, universal common descent has not a shred of basis in science. Neither does the Big Bang and many other things in forensic and historical science. Your delusions are only evidence for me to use in my university classes to demonstrate that atheism makes people stupid about science.
Playing the idiot circus boy that can't understand the difference between modern life reproducing and the components of pre-life catalyzing isn't very conducive to your lie of being a professor
@gregrutz It's just dumbfounding that you are not willing to question or challenge the opinions of scientists of the past or present who made a priori judgments when we KNOW that steady state and spontaneous generation were known to be true for ~2000 years until a creationist by the name of Pasteur began questioning it...and pioneered biogenesis and another Christian by the name of Lemaitre etc. Real scientists don't close their minds to new facts.Only enemies of science do that.
@TruthIsLife7 Can't explain the fossil record can you. Can't prove evolution wrong so you move the goal posts back to Abiogenesis. [it is not sontaneous generation] If I tell you they have nothing to do with each other, you will change the subject againd and tell me nothing can't come from nothing.
@gregrutz I didn't move any goal posts. That's what evolutionists have done TIME and TIME and TIME again...such as claiming that everything in the rocks was explainable by uniformitarianism a century or so ago...when creation said much would be due to catastrophism...who was right? Evolution is moving closer to creation science, not the other way around. And the flood DID leave layers all over the planet and there is a scholarly book explaining how all necessary life could be on Noah's ark.READ.
@gregrutz Asserting that the conventional wisdom of your time is right without questioning it would have killed most scientific hypotheses in history, including universal common descent. There is vast evidence for the flood. See videos 1-10 here for starters, the 1st video being by a former atheist and published and elite professor with a Ph.d. in zoology who taught evolution for years, but changed to be a creationist based on evidence.
@TruthIsLife7 What flood? A flood would have left a mud layer with all the fossils in it, that is not what we find in nature. We find distinct layers of different kinds of rock in random order. Floods do not do that. Fossils are not in random order. Trilobites are always below dinosaurs which are always below mammals. When they went looking for the most sediment in the middle of the ocean they found less due to sea floor spreading, the earth is old, really old. Where did 29.000 ft of wate go?
@gregrutz No, floods do not at all do what you think they do. Nearly everything you say is a straw man of what creation science and flood theory ACTUALLY claim, spouted off by people who don't know anything about what they're talking about..mostly due to reading deceitful atheist sites. Just one for example. Flood theory predicts that we should find an order generally (with exceptions) of
@gregrutz You don't seem to be comprehending what I have said.The layers you mention are NO PROBLEM for creation. In creation theory, we would should not find bunny fossil or human fossil in the lower layers (unless earthquakes massively displaced layers or something like that)...why? Bunnies and humans have legs and RAN from the flood waters. Once correction on the below..the marine fossils would not only be in the lower layers...but all over ocean layers and some higher due to flood.
@TruthIsLife7 '' RAN from the flood waters'' LOL And the dinosaurs ran half way up the hill and forgot why they were running. So silly.
Have you ever seen what was living in the Cambiran Period? Only strange marine creatures. The dinosaurs lived in three different time periods with different dinosaurs in each period. You people need to look at the fossil record so you don't look so stupid.
@gregrutz Do you not know about gravity? Heavy objects don't move very well up steep inclines...try getting an elephant to the top of Everest for example. They would have drowned LONG before that. Thus we wouldn't expect to find the dinosaurs at the top. I know quite a bit about the Cambrian&have quotes from many evolutionists,such as Dr. Gould of Harvard,agreeing that it doesn't match evolution predictions.It actually is one of the BEST confirmations of creation in the fossils.
@TruthIsLife7 Scientists don't find more mammals on the tops of mountains. Dinosaurs lived on the plains like cows, ever been to Nebraska. IT IS FLAT DUMMY> STOP MAKING UP SHIT.
@gregrutz You need to read much more. You just are not comprehending. I didn't claim that dinos or mammals should be found on the tops of mountains. But, youtube comments are way too limited to explain things in detail. This video deals with the Cambrian Fossils in detail and in the notes, I wrote a simple summary of what creation predicts and several links to scientists who explain it in more detail. The detectingdesign one has studies on the Coconino.
Um, I have quotes from geologists in the 1800s...saying explicitly what you call wrong. You are changing the goal posts yet again. I know very well what uniformitarianism is and what they claimed and how modern evolutionists are trying to rewrite history to cover up yet ANOTHER failed prediction.
Do you really think there is only ONE canyon in the world? There are quite a number of large canyons in many places. Just google it or check wikipedia.
@gregrutz Invincible ignorance and assertions are not arguments. Dr. Hannam deals with this myth that you believe extensively in his book and also quite a bit on his website which is free. Nearly all scholars refute your claims as ignorance.
Do you even know the opinion of your own side? They talk about mass extinctions in history..and even about the world covered with ice ("global warning")and floods covering vast portions of the globe after denying this for ages...your info is obsolete.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Who cares what ''scholars'' claim, I am talking about Science and the facts they have discovered, like all the transitional fossils.
Yes, there were 6 major mass extinctions, and many smaller ones, the last one killed 60% of the species on the earth including the large dinosaurs >> 65 MILLION years ago. That is a fact.
MOST of the species that ever lived on the earth are extinct. [see fossil record] Oh right that does not exist.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz Sorry, but NO, 65 million years ago isn't any more of a fact than geocentrism or steady state were. You have profound misunderstandings of science and esp. the philosophy of science. There are ~100 methods that point to a young age for life. There are at best 40 that point to an old age...and many of those 40 are completely debunked by the discovery of soft tissue in fossils. Do you know what it means to follow the weight of evidence? Which is greater, 100 or less than 40???
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Yes, there were floods and ice ages. But we are talking about killing everything on the earth except what a 900 year old man could get on a boat and feed for a year. And not leaving a mud layer !
gregrutz 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 "Invincible ignorance and assertions are not arguments"
You really should take your own advice in argumentation their, because remaining utterly retarded about the fact that Pasteur's work had nothing to do with the biochemical origin of life does not constitute a valid argument.
So tell me what part of;
Pasteur's work only involved modern life
do you fail to understand?
PhantomOfChaosSkin 3 months ago
@PhantomOfChaosSkin You consistently fail to understand how science works.Processes we see operating now are assumed to operate the same in history in general (there are a few exceptions, but not many). Without this, universal common descent has not a shred of basis in science. Neither does the Big Bang and many other things in forensic and historical science. Your delusions are only evidence for me to use in my university classes to demonstrate that atheism makes people stupid about science.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TruthIsLife7 You dodged my question, again.
What part of;
Pasteur's work only involved modern life
do you fail to understand?
Playing the idiot circus boy that can't understand the difference between modern life reproducing and the components of pre-life catalyzing isn't very conducive to your lie of being a professor
PhantomOfChaosSkin 3 months ago
Did Christianity oppose and hinder science? YES YES YES
SEE BELOW
Some christian is trying to tell me there was a world wide flood when it was discovered 200 years ago that there never was one.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz It's just dumbfounding that you are not willing to question or challenge the opinions of scientists of the past or present who made a priori judgments when we KNOW that steady state and spontaneous generation were known to be true for ~2000 years until a creationist by the name of Pasteur began questioning it...and pioneered biogenesis and another Christian by the name of Lemaitre etc. Real scientists don't close their minds to new facts.Only enemies of science do that.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Can't explain the fossil record can you. Can't prove evolution wrong so you move the goal posts back to Abiogenesis. [it is not sontaneous generation] If I tell you they have nothing to do with each other, you will change the subject againd and tell me nothing can't come from nothing.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz I didn't move any goal posts. That's what evolutionists have done TIME and TIME and TIME again...such as claiming that everything in the rocks was explainable by uniformitarianism a century or so ago...when creation said much would be due to catastrophism...who was right? Evolution is moving closer to creation science, not the other way around. And the flood DID leave layers all over the planet and there is a scholarly book explaining how all necessary life could be on Noah's ark.READ.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
No, the bible hinders science. People still believe in the flood story due to religious lies.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz Asserting that the conventional wisdom of your time is right without questioning it would have killed most scientific hypotheses in history, including universal common descent. There is vast evidence for the flood. See videos 1-10 here for starters, the 1st video being by a former atheist and published and elite professor with a Ph.d. in zoology who taught evolution for years, but changed to be a creationist based on evidence.
/user/TruthIsLife7#g/c/14FDE276E5C97E24
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 What flood? A flood would have left a mud layer with all the fossils in it, that is not what we find in nature. We find distinct layers of different kinds of rock in random order. Floods do not do that. Fossils are not in random order. Trilobites are always below dinosaurs which are always below mammals. When they went looking for the most sediment in the middle of the ocean they found less due to sea floor spreading, the earth is old, really old. Where did 29.000 ft of wate go?
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz No, floods do not at all do what you think they do. Nearly everything you say is a straw man of what creation science and flood theory ACTUALLY claim, spouted off by people who don't know anything about what they're talking about..mostly due to reading deceitful atheist sites. Just one for example. Flood theory predicts that we should find an order generally (with exceptions) of
marine sessile (lower layers)
free swimming (mid) and
land dwelling (higher)
This is what we find.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 WRONG ! Here is the evidence, the facts, go look.
The fossils are layered like this:
In the bottom layer of rock are shell fossils,
above that is a layer with shells and fish fossils,
above that is a layer with shells, fish and amphibians fossils,
above that is a layer with shells, fish, amphibian and reptile fossils,
above that is a layer with shells, fish, amphibian, reptile fossils
and dinosaur fossils.
No human or bunny fossils are found in any of these layers.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz You don't seem to be comprehending what I have said.The layers you mention are NO PROBLEM for creation. In creation theory, we would should not find bunny fossil or human fossil in the lower layers (unless earthquakes massively displaced layers or something like that)...why? Bunnies and humans have legs and RAN from the flood waters. Once correction on the below..the marine fossils would not only be in the lower layers...but all over ocean layers and some higher due to flood.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 '' RAN from the flood waters'' LOL And the dinosaurs ran half way up the hill and forgot why they were running. So silly.
Have you ever seen what was living in the Cambiran Period? Only strange marine creatures. The dinosaurs lived in three different time periods with different dinosaurs in each period. You people need to look at the fossil record so you don't look so stupid.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz Do you not know about gravity? Heavy objects don't move very well up steep inclines...try getting an elephant to the top of Everest for example. They would have drowned LONG before that. Thus we wouldn't expect to find the dinosaurs at the top. I know quite a bit about the Cambrian&have quotes from many evolutionists,such as Dr. Gould of Harvard,agreeing that it doesn't match evolution predictions.It actually is one of the BEST confirmations of creation in the fossils.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Scientists don't find more mammals on the tops of mountains. Dinosaurs lived on the plains like cows, ever been to Nebraska. IT IS FLAT DUMMY> STOP MAKING UP SHIT.
gregrutz 7 months ago
@gregrutz You need to read much more. You just are not comprehending. I didn't claim that dinos or mammals should be found on the tops of mountains. But, youtube comments are way too limited to explain things in detail. This video deals with the Cambrian Fossils in detail and in the notes, I wrote a simple summary of what creation predicts and several links to scientists who explain it in more detail. The detectingdesign one has studies on the Coconino.
watch?v=eZJxbBQKvBA
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago
Um, I have quotes from geologists in the 1800s...saying explicitly what you call wrong. You are changing the goal posts yet again. I know very well what uniformitarianism is and what they claimed and how modern evolutionists are trying to rewrite history to cover up yet ANOTHER failed prediction.
Do you really think there is only ONE canyon in the world? There are quite a number of large canyons in many places. Just google it or check wikipedia.
TruthIsLife7 7 months ago