In the superimposed geological layers we notice that as green algae became terrestrial that different plants begin to evolve. We see the chemical signatures and even cooler, we see the basal forms diverging as morphology showcases speciation.
Were gymnosperms, angiosperms or spore bearing plants show up first in superimposed layers?
- Thread starter Skovand1075
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
We do, and since plants were the first forms of (non-sentient) "life" on earth, what went with them in the soil in which they grew, were living as well. Bacteria and other microscopic organisms were not mentioned by God to a scientifically illiterate people. God explained creation on a simple "needs to know" basis. It has taken man thousands of years to get this far in his scientific knowledge and now he thinks he knows everything.....I think God laughs at them.
"Evolving" is an interesting word in science....it has come to mean something other than what God intended it to mean...."adaptation" (often called micro-evolution) is programmed into all living things...even humans. But adaptation is not evolution as science teaches it....adaptation can be seen within all species....but it never leads to a completely different "kind" of creature....just different varieties of the same creature. Even closely related creatures who can interbreed like lions and tigers have sterile offspring. Horses and donkeys produce mules, but mules too are sterile. Genetics has impenetrable roadblocks....that cannot be crossed....science wants to ignore those impediments to push their godless agenda. Guess who is behind that?
Evolution on a large scale is assumed to have taken place over millions of years, but there is not a single "common ancestor" who has ever been proven to exist.....assumed to have existed, yes...proven, not ever.
Actually a large portion of people who accept evolution are Christians. In America 1/3rd of evolution accepting scientists are Christians.
Dropship
Well-Known Member
Yes, in fact I'm a minor scientist myself, I got College of Preceptors exam passes in General Science and Advanced Science in 1963 and went on to work in physics labs.
Biology never appealed to me (too stomach-churning) and neither did chemistry (too smelly) so I plumped for physics to become a 'shatterer of worlds'..:)
Naturally the Bible intrigues me because it's full of a 'Superscience' that we know nothing about, notably Jesus's 37 miracles in which he seemed able to manipulate and bend this dream we call 'reality' to his own will.
I don't know where Dawkins got this wrong notion from-
I think he got it from the fact that the overwhelming majority of people who believe things like young earth creationism, old earth creationism, intelligent design and flat earth are predominantly Christians and Muslims. Even though the majority of Christians accept evolution and science in general, the majority of those people who don’t are Christians.
Dropship
Well-Known Member
Incidentally we could speculate that these Bible verses from Job chapters 40 and 41 refer to a stegosaurus, specifically the one about the 'rows of shields' on its back
“Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
Its tail sways like a cedar;
Who can penetrate its double coat of armor
Who dares open the doors of its mouth,
ringed about with fearsome teeth?
Its back has rows of shields
tightly sealed together;
When it rises up, the mighty are terrified;
they retreat before its thrashing.."
“Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
Its tail sways like a cedar;
Who can penetrate its double coat of armor
Who dares open the doors of its mouth,
ringed about with fearsome teeth?
Its back has rows of shields
tightly sealed together;
When it rises up, the mighty are terrified;
they retreat before its thrashing.."
The book of Job is considered fiction by the bulk of scholarship.
Also, I prefer to stay on the subject of geology and evolutionary botany. We can make another thread about dinosaurs, dragons and unicorns and discuss job there though.
Also, I prefer to stay on the subject of geology and evolutionary botany. We can make another thread about dinosaurs, dragons and unicorns and discuss job there though.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
I guess it depends on how “Christian” one is when the temptation is to divorce the Creator from his own productions....to fail to see him in his own works, and to assign his genius to blind chance.
In my own search for the truth, I subscribed to evolution in my younger years...but the more I studied, the more I saw God’s creative genius and the more I saw suggestions substituted for facts. The literature is full of “might have’s” and “could have’s” and “this leads us to believe “ statements. You will miss these things if you get blinded by the “science” (fiction).
The temptation also is to run with the majority view and assume that their suggestions are actual scientific facts. Science cannot even tell us what “life” is, or where it comes from. They do know one thing for sure from their own experience however.....that “all life springs from pre-existing life”. Christians know that all life came from an eternal Creator who really doesn’t care about what mere humans think.
Have you seen any “common ancestors” ever identified and seen in the fossil record? Once you know what you are reading, it becomes clear that it’s all based on unprovable “beliefs”, just like a religion.
It operates on the principle that “if a little is good, a lot must be better”.....micro-evolution itself then evolves into macro-evolution....all by the power of suggestion and some very misleading graphics.
Do you see the way Dawkins and others use derision and ridicule to sell their “beliefs”? That is after all, the only thing they have when it comes to evolutionary science...the theoretical kind of science....it has little to do with true and provable science, and I can see why the majority view is so powerful...even in religion. No one wants to look like a fool to their peers. Even so called Christians will jump ship to save face in that environment. It is full of egos, as the likes of Dawkins and Coyne clearly demonstrate.
The earth itself proves the YEC’s to be in error, assuming that the “days” of creation were literally 24 hour periods, but there are so many species revealed in the fossil record to have been long extinct when mankind arrived on the scene. Imagine sharing a place with monstrous creatures that could step on us like we were insects under their feet....? These were long gone by the time of our creation. Whatever purpose they served, it was done before we came along.
The Bible says that the great sea creatures and land animals were created before us......we were last. If the “days” were eras of great length then that explains a lot. God is a Creator, not a magician. He is not constrained by time and we can see from the Genesis account that he planned his activity in increments and allotted specific things to be accomplished in each creative “day”. His expressions of satisfaction speak volumes about his success at the close of each creative period.
The Bible does not argue with true science, just as it doesn’t argue with true religion...it only argues with the fakes.
Evolutionary creationist are not separating El from creation. We are saying genesis is not a scientifically or historically based book. It’s a myth. It’s mythology. It’s ancient Jewish mythology. So in the same way you say days are not literal it’s metaphorical or symbolism for eras, we simply say it’s all metaphorical and symbolic and it’s purpose was to define theological relationships and not human origins or eras.
plus even following eras it’s not true. Angiosperms came after gymnosperms. Birds came after land animals. Butterflies and moths came after angiosperms. So eras do not work out scientifically or historically either. Not the one in genesis 1 or the different account with a different story and different order of events in genesis 2
No one is accepting evolution, definitely not the majority, in order to not look foolish to their peers. The overwhelming majority of scientists, again over 99.99% of the 8,000,000 scientists accept it because it’s by far the best theory out there. YEC , OEC and ID are not even theories. There zero supporting facts for it. Zero. Not a single fact exists supporting them. They only are believed by those that accept pseudoscience. Any gaps in knowledge in the theory of evolution is a pinhole compared to the mile wide ones in the pseudoscientific views.
Those views exist solely because of others not understanding how science all fits together. That’s why those beliefs are dying. It’s why in another hundred years those beliefs won’t even exist. Christianity will still be here. Just not the version some of y’all cling to.
Those views exist solely because of others not understanding how science all fits together. That’s why those beliefs are dying. It’s why in another hundred years those beliefs won’t even exist. Christianity will still be here. Just not the version some of y’all cling to.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
If you wish to believe that....it’s up to you. But God’s word is his word.....to remove the Creator from being the source of all living things is degrading him and making creation itself it’s own creator.
Where did you get the idea that the winged creatures came after the land animals? Both created on separate days, which we know were not 24 hour periods since the word “day” in Hebrew can mean an unspecified period of time. Our beliefs must be Bible based and speaking about Jewish myths is insulting to the Creator IMV.
God says that he “created” all living things.....he gave the order, the “kinds” he brought into existence, and the timeframe of the progression, and you think he didn’t mean what he said. Like I said, Genesis is a general outline of the creative process, so just because we have no scientific explanations, doesn’t mean that the process was not as God stated. Do you know how he created? Would you understand even if he gave you the details?
We will all find out one day soon it seems...or don’t you believe that either?
I read a few sentences.
How do I know birds evolved after terrestrial tetrapods? Cause I graduated middle school.
again, I’m not reject god or the Bible. I’m simply and only rejecting your interpretation of the Bible.
let’s try this. Can you tell me the process of how Yahweh created fruit trees?
Dropship
Well-Known Member
A fool with a diploma is still just a fool..:)
As for geology and evolutionary botany, what's there to discuss exactly?
Dropship
Well-Known Member
On the other hand there are some scientists who like to think outside the box instead of running with the herd..:)-
SCIENTIST QUOTES
"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."- Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): The Universe: Past and Present Reflections. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics: 20:16.
"There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all...It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming"- Paul Davies (British astrophysicist), The Cosmic Blueprint: New Discoveries in Nature's Creative Ability To Order the Universe. New York: Simon and Schuster, p.203.
"As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?"- George Greenstein (astronomer),1988. The Symbiotic Universe. New York: William Morrow, p.27.
"When confronted with the order and beauty of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it."- Tony Rothman (physicist),Paradigms Lost. New York, Avon Books, p.482-483.
"When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics."- Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics), 1994 The Physics of Immortality. New York, Doubleday, preface.
"We know that nature is described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created it."- Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician),Gannes, S. October 13, 1986. Fortune. p. 57
"Here is the cosmological proof of the existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one"- Ed Harrison (cosmologist),Harrison, E. 1985. Masks of the Universe. New York, Collier Books, Macmillan, pp. 252, 263.
"Who created these laws? There is no question but that a God will always be needed"- Barry Parker (cosmologist),Heeren, F. 1995. Show Me God. Wheeling, IL, Searchlight Publications, p. 223.
And to his credit even Dawkins said-
Dropship
Well-Known Member
That's easy, God wrote the Creation / Evolution programme then hit 'Enter' to start it, and BOOM, that was the Big Bang..:)
Regarding fruit trees, they're interesting enough but some other of his divine creations like this one are far more interesting..;)
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
No, because I am not God, and he didn’t tell us how he did it. It simply says in Genesis that God planted a bunch of fruit trees in the garden for the humans to feast on. They were apparently vegetarians to begin with, as the account says....
Genesis 1:29-31...
“Then God said: “Here I have given to you every seed-bearing plant that is on the entire earth and every tree with seed-bearing fruit. Let them serve as food for you. 30 And to every wild animal of the earth and to every flying creature of the heavens and to everything moving on the earth in which there is life, I have given all green vegetation for food.” And it was so.
31 After that God saw everything he had made, and look! it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.”
So all living, sentient animals were originally vegetarians. There were no carnivores.
Dropship
Well-Known Member
I placed this grass seed on a piece of damp tissue and within a few days it'd sprouted, and notice how its put out thin roots to soak up the moisture bless its little heart.
Scientists can analyse it, scan it, probe it, dissect it, list all its molecular components and write books about it but they can't actually MAKE one, let alone even begin to guess how it 'evolved'..:)
Scientists can analyse it, scan it, probe it, dissect it, list all its molecular components and write books about it but they can't actually MAKE one, let alone even begin to guess how it 'evolved'..:)
And a fool without a diploma who thinks they know better than thousands of experts is arrogant.
As For what’s to discuss. My question…..
You think scientist don’t know how seeds evolved?
https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03249.x
Have you considered looking up a evolutionary botanist online at a college and emailing them?
