-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Darwinists teach the abrupt appearance of humans on earth
- Thread starter 7djengo7
- Start date
Genesis appeared “abruptly” a short time ago. It was debunked around the same time Christians stoped setting people on fire fir challenging YEC.
Right Divider
Body part
More silly Caino opinions based on nothing.
Scientists cant even figure out how dust evolved, let alone massive planets...
| “The origin of dust in galaxies is still a mystery.” “(I)t is unclear how and where dust grains condense and grow, and how they avoid destruction in the harsh environments of star-forming galaxies.” “The large amounts of dust detected in sub-millimeter galaxies and quasars at high redshift pose a challenge to galaxy formation models and theories of cosmic dust formation.” “This increase in the dust content of massive galaxies at high redshift is difficult to explain using standard dust evolution models and requires a rapid gas consumption time-scale together with either a more top-heavy initial mass function (IMF), efficient mantle growth, less dust destruction or combinations of all three.” Gall, C. and 8 others, Rapid formation of large dust grains in the luminous supernova 2010jl, Nature 511:326–329, 2014. Gall, C. and 2 others Production of dust by massive stars at high redshift, Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 19:43, 2011. Dunne, L. and 39 others, Herschel-ATLAS: rapid evolution of dust in galaxies over the last 5 billion years, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 417:1510–1533, 2011. |
See more origin problems at https://rsr.org/atheism#no-secular-origins-theory-even-exists
Last edited:
Bad students of science have adopted bad speculations about the age of life forms on earth which are neither scientific nor accurate. Devotees to bad science promote the debunked narrative, for example, that dinosaurs mysteriously died off 65 million years ago. Modern scientific evidence show dinosaur remains are no older than mammoth remains.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Like I said, Darwin cheerleaders make that claim:
Which is an astoundingly ridiculous thing to claim, since, were it true that the human population on earth was never less than about 10,000, then at no time would the human population have ever been 0. (You know, because 0 < about 10,000, right?) But the human population on earth was, at one time*, 0, and therefore, this "scientific" consensus** that the human population on earth was never less than about 10,000, is false.
* for a five-day period, and less than about 10,000 years ago
** Bear in mind that, by "scientific consensus," all Darwin cheerleaders mean is consensus amongst Darwin cheerleaders—which is worth nothing to rationally-thinking people.
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
expos4ever
Well-known member
Please answer the question. Who, specifically, made such a claim?
The biologist user Alate_one. She said it because that is the consensus.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
For an answer to this question, please actually read the post of mine to which you are reacting, here.
Oh, yeah, I guess he could have just read the post...
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
It's interesting that he seems hostile and resistant to believing that Darwinists claim what I said they claim, as though he's not on board with them in that claim, yet does not want to think of himself as being at odds with them.
Last edited:
Mary Contrary 999
Active member
What is a good response to the claim that 90%+ species are extinct means no designer or a poor designer?
Right Divider
Body part
First, ask them to scientifically document that number. i.e., making vague and unverifiable claims is meaningless.
Mary Contrary 999
Active member
Okay. I can attack the percentage as being pulled out of thin air but they point to fossils and list many, many forms. Maybe the fossils are degraded versions of existing kinds?
Right Divider
Body part
Fossils are the direct result of God's judgment on the world via the flood.
Mary Contrary 999
Active member
They claim the bone structure is unique and not represented in living species. Is that just biased interpretation?
Right Divider
Body part
Many living things died in the flood. Therefore, there could be plenty of them that went extinct during that event (or series of events).
Last edited:
Darwinists believe that before there were white humans on earth there were not fully human blacks in Africa, the supposed birthplace of modern humans.
Mary Contrary 999
Active member
Yes, thanks. I used this with great effect.