Historical Creationism: Literal Genesis, Old Earth

[HitchSlap]

Do you know how psychologists are trained to score those who see Christian symbols on a Rorschach test?

Is it the same way they score delusional alt right q anon idiots, or no?

 

[Jimmy D]

There's nothing wrong with looking for scientific evidence to support Biblical monogenism, but that evidence will be interpreted differently by those committed to a materialist worldview.

Have you got any examples of this?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

What is the cult of St Charles?

There is actually a cult of "King Charles the Martyr". @Humble_Disciple probably has no idea who that is, so he just applied the name thinking it was clever.

 

[Job 33:6]

Evolutionists are masters of ad hoc explanations. When the transitional fossils weren't found to support Darwinian evolution, we were given the ad hoc explanation of punctuated equilibrium.

Stephen Jay Gould was required reading in my anthropology course, and I don't consider him a particularly gifted thinker. Gould's belief in sudden, revolutionary change in the biological world was inspired more by his belief in Marxism than by the actual evidence.

Though you were given literally lists of transitional fossils in this very thread. Here's an entire thread just for you (see link below). And Gould also acknowledged what he has referred to as an abundance of transitional fossils.

Proving that Links Exist

How can you say that transitional fossils weren't found if we have lists of them?

Alternatively, how could it be suggested that these lists of fossils don't support the theory of evolution when they all fit perfectly into a fossil succession that directly matches cladistics based phylogenies of other fields of study?

 

[AV1611VET]

People ask for transitional fossils. They are provided with lists and information and details about them.

I've seen "lists and detailed information about them."

Specifically that fossil hominid skull chart put out by that anthropology site.

If that's your idea of transitionals, then I'm Genghis Khan.

 

[HitchSlap]

I've seen "lists and detailed information about them."

Specifically that fossil hominid skull chart put out by that anthropology site.

If that's your idea of transitionals, then I'm Genghis Khan.

What's your idea of transitionals?

 

[Job 33:6]

I've seen "lists and detailed information about them."

Specifically that fossil hominid skull chart put out by that anthropology site.

If that's your idea of transitionals, then I'm Genghis Khan.

Would you like to address the details of my post?

For example, with respect to Tiktaalik, how do you think that its locality was predicted?

Proving that Links Exist

 

[AV1611VET]

What's your idea of transitionals?

That they were all real tax-pay...

LOL -- I have a feeling you know exactly what my idea is.

You're just testing me again, aren't you?

 

[AV1611VET]

For example, with respect to Tiktaalik, how do you think that its locality was predicted?

QV please:

He probably heard stories of "fishapods" from the Inuits, and went and investigated.

Finding them, he did what any modern scientist would do -- took the credit for discovering them by way of evolutionary prediction.

 

[HitchSlap]

That they were all real tax-pay...

LOL -- I have a feeling you know exactly what my idea is.

You're just testing me again, aren't you?

A great question was just brought up AV; How did Dr. Shubin find T. roseae?

 

[Job 33:6]

QV please:

Haha. What?

So you're saying that these native people in the Canadian arctic knew about these fish-tetrapod hybrid fossils, and Neil Shubin and his team somehow learned of this, and then when Shubin and his team got there, maybe there was some sort of a local guide that lead them out into the wilderness to these fossils?

And that's how Shubins team found Tiktaalik?

That's not really how he describes the prediction. Do you think Shubin and his team are lying?

 

[Job 33:6]

A great question was just brought up AV; How did Dr. Shubin find T. roseae?

I expect nothing less from AV than suggestions of grand conspiracies involving scientists around the world completely fabricating stories about the geologic record and fossils found therein haha.

I think that at the end of the day, this is all critics of evolution really can do. Just say that it's part of a conspiracy to destroy God or something like that and that all the information is purely made up

 

[Bradskii]

Science and scripture need not be in conflict. The founders of western science were Christians who believed that, because there is one unchanging God, we could study the unchanging laws of nature. There's nothing wrong with looking for scientific evidence to support Biblical monogenism, but that evidence will be interpreted differently by those committed to a materialist worldview.

I've no problem with that. But make sure you get the science right.

 

[Bradskii]

Gould's belief in sudden, revolutionary change in the biological world was inspired more by his belief in Marxism than by the actual evidence.

My gob could not be more smacked.

 

[Ophiolite]

Stephen Jay Gould was required reading in my anthropology course, and I don't consider him a particularly gifted thinker.

Admittedly I've read more of Gould than I have of you, but I'm not sure your in a position to make a sound judgement on that point. Now if you wish to assert that his magesterial Structure of Evolutionary Theory would have benefitted enormously from tight editing, I'm with you all the way.

Gould's belief in sudden, revolutionary change in the biological world was inspired more by his belief in Marxism than by the actual evidence.

And yet at least quarter of a century before Gould and Elredge published their concept of punctuated evolution the evidence was that evolution did not always proceed smoothly. For example, the department head at my alma mater posited a rate gene that controlled mutation rates, in order to account for observations. I can assure you that he was no Marxist.

 

[Bradskii]

Admittedly I've read more of Gould than I have of you, but I'm not sure your in a position to make a sound judgement on that point. Now if you wish to assert that his magesterial Structure of Evolutionary Theory would have benefitted enormously from tight editing, I'm with you all the way.

And yet at least quarter of a century before Gould and Elredge published their concept of punctuated evolution the evidence was that evolution did not always proceed smoothly. For example, the department head at my alma mater posited a rate gene that controlled mutation rates, in order to account for observations. I can assure you that he was no Marxist.

Even Darwin himself drew attention to it in the 'Origin of Species':

"...the periods during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured in years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form".

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

There was need for a small cleanup. I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that goading is in violation of CF's sitewide rules.

MOD HAT OFF ​

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I think that the proposal is that it was written in English and then translated into Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. By someone familar with Jacobean English one presumes.

A time traveller? That's it! God transported Adam back in time from Jacobean England to take notes for Genesis... and don't tell me that God couldn't do that - God can do anything.

 

[Estrid]

Even Darwin himself drew attention to it in the 'Origin of Species':

"...the periods during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured in years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form".

And so-?

 

[Bradskii]

And so-?

And so...he is describing punctuated equilibrium.

I really don't understand why those who argue against evolution keep bringing it up. It's part if the evolutionary process itself. It's like denying that UFOs exist and then arguing that their warp drives are inefficient.