Here's some easy money

**KrisMunro** · 02-04-2011, 03:22 AM

Originally Posted by Writ-with-Hand

LOL.

If I recall correctly, they went into some town and found wives. Where these people came from is not clear though.

At least not to me. I'm sure some theologians and biblical theologians have an answer for it.

I've got an answer for it.. but most Christians would throw stones at me for saying it

My mum once said that the bible is the biggest story on extraterrestrials ever made. So I was raised believing that humans were created, but not strictly by 'god'. When the bible explains that Adam and Eve are the first humans, I was taught that they were the first humans to taste the forbidden fruit (sex - which is carnal knowledge, and it explains many of the punishments Man received for the act, such as a painful childbirth). There were many other people on Earth at the time.

And thus humans that tasted the sacred fruit were cast out of Eden to survive on their own.

I'm hoping to clarify that the above is just a sample of how I've been taught to interpret the bible.. and it is in no way related to what I actually believe. In much the same way as me saying it now doesn't make you believe it. It's just what I've been told by someone.

**caelum** · 02-04-2011, 04:21 AM

My uncle is a paramedic as well, Ditch, and he's told me about the stress. Definitely one of those necessary, unsung jobs.

Anyone care to have a go at my whales that were dogs, or the light from stars being millions of years old? I don't see how you can rationalize the whales away from supporting evolution. The fossils follow a chronological transformation too, as in the dog fossil is dated oldest, hippo next, and so on. I take no stance on a creator guiding this evolution, merely on it happening.

**KrisMunro** · 02-04-2011, 05:02 AM

Caelum, there is always the chance that the creator planted the evidence for evolution. And you could argue that the universe existed long before Earth (the world) was made. Thus how long it takes light to travel here is not really relevant to Earth being or not being here for longer than 6,000 years. So, sure there is proof of substance existing for many billions of years, but this doesn't disqualify the Earth from being created only 6,000 years ago. My point is that 'light traveling across the cosmos' isn't truly an argument against Creation.

Some theories exist for Earth being one stage of creation, and that life exists (and has existed for a long time) outside of Earth. If you accept that there is life after death, then you can like extrapolate this concept to beings existing in various forms in a huge variety of conditions that predate Earth. Prior to being 'humans', we as energy-beings may have existed in a different form on different planets/dimensions/ or anything else your imagination could conjure up.

At the end of the day, anyone could pose arguments for or against any number of possible 'solutions' to the problem of disproving Creation as well as Evolution. It's really comes down to what we choose to believe, as opposed to what's really true (which we are unable to gauge at the moment).

**caelum** · 02-04-2011, 05:30 AM

Originally Posted by KrisMunro

Caelum, there is always the chance that the creator planted the evidence for evolution.

This rationalization creates so many problems, namely why the creator would lie to the people doctoring up the evidence.

Originally Posted by KrisMunro

My point is that 'light traveling across the cosmos' isn't truly an argument against Creation.

I don't know how aware you are of Young Earth Creationism, but they do in fact claim the universe is as old as the Earth. Visit the site Ditch linked. There's even a section—I'm noticing now—on light from the distant universe and how it's not actually that old. One of the rationalizations goes, the universe was made in place, as in the light was made already moving.

**guy_faukes** · 02-04-2011, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by Ditch

What a load of crap. If this fortunate monster might through many generations develop the ability to hold it's breath it still won't grow lungs ever. Go back and read what you just wrote. where did the gills come in and just how did they grow into lungs? If through a mutation this did happen, what did it breed with and how can anyone say that these traits would be passed down? You talk about blind faith? I have never seen someone stick to an unprovable set of beliefs more than evolutionists. You stick speculations in my face and say that I am wrong? The wing itself is a miracle of design, hollow bones, interlocking spines of each branch of wing tissue that makes it light enough yet strong enough to sustain flight? And you say that Christians make a leap of faith?

Ahh Ditch. You're a good man. If I were dying in your ambulance, I would find solace in the presence of a kind soul during my final moments.

I hope you don't see my posts as being challenges to your faith, but I do hope I can help reconcile your beliefs with evolution since it doesn't need to be just one or the other.
The world, in all its complexity, is a beautiful thing to unravel and behold. A neat puzzle from the one up above.

So, you mentioned mousetraps? Since Baron asked everyone to keep on topic with the Homosexuality thread, post here.

Ditch - funny thing you should mention a mousetrap because it's an excellent analogy. It seems that without all its components coming together in a specific fashion, it will not work. But let’s take a step back.

Take a very basic mouse trap.
It’s basically a bendy wire, twisted so that it’s under tension, and the ends arranged so that if the mouse pokes its head through it, it will clamp around the mouse.
Chances are it’s not going to work too well. Most escape, most walk around it, but the odd one gets caught. So unless you have stupid mice and a LOT of these traps lying around one walks into it, you're not going to catch too many.

So you start adding onto it.
You add bait to attract the little vermin.
Then you add a spring to add more force.
But you don’t want it lying around on the concrete waiting to go off so you attach the trap to a backing to make it portable.
Instead of clumsily trying to prop the ends together, you turn one end into a trigger, then the other in the hammer.
Then you develop the hammer further to increase the kill ratio.
With each step, the mousetrap becomes more and more effective. More mice are caught with fewer traps, until voila, you have one that looks like the ones used today.

This is probably how the most complex biological systems on Earth develop.
The development of eye, for instance, started as something very simple. It was a patch of photo-receptive skin that can only detect the presence or absence of light in single celled organism.
Genetic mutations occur. The offspring of those basic organisms become more complex. That patch recedes to form a concavity. Now the descendants have directionality of where that light is.
More genetic mutations occur. The concavity has receded further and the light enters through a pin hole. Now these organisms can make out basic shapes, blurred though.
More genetic mutations occur. That pin hole now has a droplet of liquid secreted on it. The images are sharper, less distorted, but still “blobby”.
More genetic mutations occur. That droplet starts to form into a solid lens that can sharpen the image. The image loses blurriness and can become somewhat more discernible.

And so on and so on.Tiny steps towards a goal of continued existence (or pest removal, either way).

**Dudester** · 02-04-2011, 05:58 AM

The big thing about the evolution theory debate is that it is, in many ways, identical to the global warming debate. Here you have two religious groups-one of which worships an invisible, yet very present God, and on the other side, those who worship some guy in a lab coat holding a beaker over a bunsen burner. You can't convince either group to cave because you can't convince either group that they're wrong. This is why I believe in interventionist theory.

The creationistys say, "Wait a second, God picked up some dust, breathed on it, and poof, man appeared." The evolutionists say, "Man was first a small dinosaur, then he evolved into a small mammal, became a dog, then an ape...(and I'm trying not to laugh here, but it's really hard).

Anyway, who is not to say that the invisible, yet very present God, didn't give some guidance and help to a brilliant anthropogist, and helped him travel a number of light years to come to Earth and do what he did best ?

Man suddenly appeared, he didn't evolve from something. That he evolved from something is specualtion, at best. The fossil record is mixed and scientists aren't as brilliant as they think. Consider-the theory of evolution came about when the procedure for a gunshot was amputation, there were no antibiotics, and transfusion was a theory. Today's scientists are paid by groups expecting a certain outcome. Do not find the outcome and the grant money dries up, can't drive the jaguar, have to give up the McMansion, and wife has to not spend her days on QVC.

So, Bob's your Uncle. The needed outcome-have scientists who don't regard their field of study as their religion. Have them be independent thinkers once again and we can all go back to having a better life.

**KrisMunro** · 02-04-2011, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by caelum

This rationalization creates so many problems, namely why the creator would lie to the people doctoring up the evidence.

*ahem* "It's not a lie, it's a test of faith"

**guy_faukes** · 02-04-2011, 07:40 AM