"Let us reason amongst the brethren"

[ldmitruk]

I do not make up stuff what I've said is about stars going out producing water is true and we have water in outerspace.Where did them comets come from? The stars that were shut off by God when the former world perished and the stars were turned back on in day 4 of the creation of this world like I said stars going out would produce water.H2O and the heavens would be flooded with water like is described in 2nd Peter 3:5-7 with the heavens and earth flooded with water later in Genesis 1 God divides these waters which is why there is water in outerspace way more than what is on the earth,but also on the earth and science detects this flood too ealy in the history of the earth before the continents rose up.Scientists think comets brought the water to the earth and then the continents rose up which we see in Genesis 1:8-10 where God says "let the dry land appear" Sciwnce says comets brought this water, I say when God shut off the stars the water was produced to flood the universe and earth with water.I am using the bible and science to reach a credible scientific biblical hypothesis.

If enough water was produced to flood the universe where did it all go? If you have a hypothesis what's test for the creation of enough water to fill the universe from stars turning off? I also call bullshit on credible scientific biblical hypothesis, at best it's an oxymoron.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

It is in outerspace there is enough water in the universe for this to happen it is frozen though.Comets are huge chunks of ice.Stars can produce water.You are looking at it from a different perspective,don't do that.It is not necessary we have a biblical explanation.I cannot change your mind though but look at the evidence.Perhaps you need to understand how much water is in outerspace.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

As I've explained elsewhere, the above passage refers to the pre-flood and post-flood "worlds":

a) the flat Earth belief, which held that the pre-flood Earth was surrounded ("standing out of the water and in the water") and then flooded ("Whereby the world that then was being overflowed with water perished");

b) the post-flood Earth will not be flooded again but will be destroyed by fire, "But the heavens and Earth which are now by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgement and perdition of ungodly men."

That is the meaning of the passage you massacre and misrepresent - and yet you say it's wrong to add or take away anything from God's word...

There is no "frozen" in the passage - the heavens were not "flooded" - God did not "cause the stars to go out" - and any scientific evidence of "water in outer-space frozen" has absolutely nothing to do with or is evidence/proof for the bible.

You're adding all of this into the bible and its meaning - in clear contradiction to what you said about doing this being "wrong".

The bible does not teach the earth is flat.

The bible's description of the Earth and heavens is quite clearly based on a geocentric, flat-Earth model:

Even if I ignored the biblical passages that you interpret to say the earth is flat which really means east,north,west,south but even if I ignore them passages I can know the earth is round by what Jesus teaches when he reveals that in one passage he comes and it is night time and yet in the nect he comes and it is day time.It will be both day time and night time for the world when Jesus comes.So the flat earth stuff is bogus.

Book/chapter/verse(s)?

You're attempting to dismiss the bible's flat-Earth based geocentricism with a "prophecy" of Jesus' "coming"?

Yes the post flood earth will be destroyed by fire and not water,this has not happened since Adam and Eve were here and so the earth and this world remain because of Noah.God kept this world going so you cannot say this world perished,it didn't,the former world did that was full of life as the fossils,etc show us.Evolutionists are looking at this evidence from a biased evolution perspective and making it fit into evolution overlooking the gap of time between the former world and this world.

I never said that "this world perished" - your misinterpreting what I've said. Perhaps wilfully so.

Scientists are basing their theories on the evidence and nothing more. You're basing your ideas on the bible and then trying to fit the scientific evidence into the bible's tale.

There is no "gap" because there's no "former world and this world". Period.

Tell me what would happen if the heavens went dark,the sun was shut off,the earth would freeze When we read Genesis 1:2 we can see darkness is on the face of the deep.We know this means the earth is frozen but also flooded.

No, you don't.

You're just making things up and inserting them into the bible's meaning.

You have not one single reputable biblical scholar to back you up on this notion of yours.

I've asked before for such and you didn't provide any.

I challenge you to provide such.

Then we read Jeremiah to understand what caused the former world to perish and why it froze - the heavens the heavens became black.

And I've shown you that the Book of Jeremiah has absolutely nothing to do with the destruction of the world - just a kingdom.

The Gap theory was being preached in the church long before Darwin wrote his books so I am not changing the meaning and they read it and led many people to Christ with the King James version bible.

The gap theory only came about with Chalmers in the early 19th century - less than half a century before Darwin wrote his magnum opus.

This gap theory was in response to the growing realisation - prior to Darwin - that a 6000 year Earth did not make sense. It was an attempt to accommodate an "old Earth".

The claim by gap theorists that it existed since the OT is simply an attempt to deny the fact that Chalmers came up with it as a way of addressing the growing geological evidence of an old Earth.

Again, typical of you, you completely misrepresent what this passage means by taking it out of context - and then try to shoe-horn scientific evidence into your misrepresentation to back it up.

I already explained this in another topic - anyone should recognise it from the last verses, 27-31.

The whole Book of Jeremiah is a conversation between him and God about Israel's "unfaithfulness" and a warning that if Israel doesn't "return to the Lord", it will be destroyed by invaders.

Jeremiah 4 specifically refers to the destruction of Israel by invaders - it is not referring to any destruction of the world!

Jeremiah is looking back and your interpretation doesn't hold water because in a war people survive but we can see no life survived this the fruitful place became a wilderness

Yet again, you bear false witness.

“For this the earth shall mourn
And the heavens above be dark,
Because I have spoken, I have purposed,
And I will not change My mind, nor will I turn from it.”

29 At the sound of the horseman and bowman every city flees;
They go into the thickets and climb among the rocks;
Every city is forsaken,
And no man dwells in them.

30 And you, O desolate one, what will you do?
Although you dress in scarlet,
Although you decorate yourself with ornaments of gold,
Although you enlarge your eyes with paint,
In vain you make yourself beautiful.
Your lovers despise you;
They seek your life.

31 For I heard a cry as of a woman in labor,
The anguish as of one giving birth to her first child,
The [d]cry of the daughter of Zion gasping for breath,
Stretching out her hands, saying,
“Ah, woe is me, for I faint before murderers.”

The cities were abandoned before the invaders came.

As I keep telling you, this was due to a purely military campaign by invaders who destroyed the kingdom.

Absolutely nothing to do with the destruction of this or any other "world".

:!: How many times do you have to be told this before you stop bearing false witness?? :!:

It is a look back because this has not happened since Adam and Eve and isn't going to happen in the future a new heaven and new earth will be created but before this people are still alive when Jesus returns before the heavens and earth are recreated again. There is also a gap in the ages as well in biblical teaching like the age of grace that has been going on for 2000 years until Jesus returns so gaps are apart of scripture.There are time lines which show gaps of time between biblical ages.Also God tells Adam and Eve to replenish the earth and tells Noah this too,so again why would God tell Adam and Eve to replenish the earth? Because of the life that was in the former world that perished and went extinct.I have more verses that back up the Gap theory I'm just using a few right now.How about?Genesis 2:4"These are the generations of the heavens and earth when they were created,in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens."

This misinterpretation of the bible based on your complete misunderstanding of the Book of Jeremiah is simple and utter nonsense.

Now, kindly stop evading direct questions through repeating your misrepresentations of the bible and answer them.

Your gap theory states:

1) A pre-Adam "world" existed and was destroyed resulting in the death of all dinosaurs and other animal and plant life;

Yes all life in the former world perished this would include the primates too.

2) God "restored" the world and created Adam and Eve;

Yes God restored the earth that was in a damaged without form and void,flooded and frozen state in Genesis 1:2,there is no light yet but the heaven,earth,water were already there before God creates light to start the thawing process.Don't overlook "Snow ball earth" too.

3) God turned Cain into a Neanderthal, who married Awan (his human sister), and their descendants were Neanderthals who were all killed due to "the Flood";

Yes and placed a mark on Cain which we can see by looking at Neanderthal's skull and the huge brow they had,they were also barrel chested and much stronger than man.God did this because there were people who wanted to avenge Abel's life so God made Cain into a brute,man would've been fearful of Neanserthals because of how strong and how much of a brute they were even a secular scientist in my research said something very similar to this while studying Neanderthals.I don't necessarily agree that Cain's wife was human at this point,but yes Neanderthals died out in Noah's flood.Again it baffled secular scientists whythey died out and yet man lived,don't deny this.They are not considering the bible when observing Neanderthals but looking at everything from an evolution perspective which clouds their view of much of the evidence.

As I've already pointed out to you, you're making stuff up and inserting it into the bible - something which you've said is "wrong" for anyone to do!

4) Noah, his wife, their three sons and their wives - eight humans - were the only survivors of the Flood;

Yes and populated the earth into the 7 billion humans we have on this earth today.Evolutionists on the other hand previously thought and taught that man evolved about 1 million years ago but the new sciene that came out moved man to a much more recent beginning.They were ignoring reproduction for 1 million years and having to cram only 7 billion humans into 1 million years but the new science came out and changed everything.Creationists were still closer than evolutionists werefor man having a much more recent beginning.So science can mean well and be wrong and so can Christian with the young earth stuff.We all can be wrong therefore it is wiser to trust God over man.

Again, your nonsense figures.

Noah's flood only happened a few thousand years ago - how could we start with 8 humans and end up with 7 billion in that time?

Do the calculations and show how you get from 8 to 7 billion in a few thousand years!

We'll ignore - for the time being - the insurmountable fact that 8 blood-related humans are insufficient as a gene pool for our species. A scientific fact which you can only surmount through "divine intervention" - despite no evidence for a divinity.

The questions I've already asked are:

1) If death only came into being due to Adam's "original sin" - how could the pre-Adamite world's life-forms all die out? This contradicts the traditional interpretation of the bible.

Science explains this - your gap theory can't: Science 1, Gap Theory 0.

What happened in the former world had no bearing on this world.God wiped the slate clean and started again.

Which shows that "God" is neither omniscient or omnibenevolent.

Death did not come until they sinned in this world.The Gsp theory in noway effects salvation of this world by Jesus,God spared this world and kept it going in noah's flood which produced the 7 billion humans today.It was evolutionists that ignored reproduction for amost 1 million years having to cram only 7 billion humans into 1 million years much like young earthers do cramming everything into Noah's flood.They were still more right than evolutionists were until the new science came out that placed man to a much more recent beginning.But it shows both sides can be wrong.

You can't get from 8 individuals to 7 billion since the alleged "Flood".

Prove it.

2) If the Neanderthals all died out due to "the Flood", how do modern humans have Neanderthal DNA in our genome?

Science explains this - your gap theory can't: Science 2, Gap Theory 0.

Because Neanderthal were humans but God reprogrammed the DNA to produce Neanderthal instead.Some human DNA would remain.

False - because you're now contradicting what you said earlier.

You said that "God" turned Cain into a Neanderthal and that his and Awan's descendants were Neanderthals.

You said that the descendants of Cain - Neanderthals - perished in the Noachian Flood.

That means there were no Neanderthals after the Flood - since only Noah, his wife, their three sons and their wives - ALL HUMANS, since they were not descendants of Cain (since all of those died in the flood) - survived.

Therefore, no humans today should have Neanderthal DNA in our genome.

Science explains this - your gap theory doesn't. In fact, it renders this impossible.

3) If only eight - that's 8 - humans survived "the Flood", how do you get your population of 7 billion in time since Noah's Ark?

Science can explain today's population - your gap theory can't: Science 3, Gap Theory 0.

The new science thast came out placed man to a much muh more recent past than evolutionists believed for years and taught as truth,we no longer have to ignore reproduction for 1 million years.

This is a nonsensical statement.

I hope that you will have explained this "8 individuals to 7 billion" conundrum in your next reply by now.

4) Where do Denisovans fit in with your gap theory? How do humans have Denisovan DNA in our genome?

Science can explain this - your gap theory can't: Science 4, Gap Theory 0.

Don't know yet and I don't make up stuff.

You've been "making up stuff" throughout!

5) What about Homo Floresiensis? How did they come about?

Science can explain this - your gap theory can't: Science 5, Gap Theory 0.

Primates were in the former world and perished therefore they could not have evolved into man.

And as I keep explaining to you, Man is a primate - that is the scientific classification for us.

There'll be more for you to answer later.

It is like casting pearls before swine with you.

The responses you give are not pearls - nor am I a pig.

You add words to the bible that are neither present nor implied - despite stating that doing so is "wrong".

You bear false witness through your continued misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the bible.

Your mind is closed in that - despite being corrected multiple times on your misinterpretation/misrepresentation of the bible - you have not stopped bearing false witness.

Anyone reading this topic can clearly see what you're doing and will not be fooled by your attempts at repeating your falsehoods.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[abelcainsbrother]

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

 

[Mugnuts]

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

I don't think you seem to be understanding anything much about the burden of proof.

If you are going to prove to us the bible is right about your interpretation of the evidence, then you are going to have to account for something called "common descent".

Think very carefully about how you phrase your next post. There really is only two options for this.
1. Citations. We would like to read anything (as you posted before about having evidence and sources) that can back this up. NOT SCRIPTURE! Now would be the time to play those cards.
2. "I do not know how to back that up." If you answer this way, at least we can discern some honesty.
3. Repeat yourself again and again with the same inane asserting mindless drivel with nothing to back up a single point.

Like I said there is only two options (either 1 or 2) for the next post but I added #3 as my prediction to what you most likely do anyway.

 

[australopithecus]

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

Flies aren't a species, they're an order; Diptera.
Bacteria is a domain.
Frogs aren't a species, they're also an order; Anura.
Finches are a family of birds, and Salamander is another order; Caudata.

It seems your definition of "kind" is useless. Perhaps you'd like to streamline your "definition" before continuing.

If you're insisting a kind is an order, then you'd have no problem with speciation within the Primate order, say S. tchadensis to H. sapiens sapiens. They're the same "kind".

If you're insisting a kind is a family, then you'd have no problem with speciation within the Great Apes, because they're the same "kind".

If you're insisting a kind is a domain, then you'd have no problem with speciation between literally any animal, plant or fungus, because they're the same "kind".

So, which is it?

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

How does switching back to attacking evolution answer the points I made in my last post?

It doesn't.

@ Australopithecus, "kinds" are whatever a creationist needs it to be to make humans special, so that evolution doesn't apply - that's why it chops and changes depending on the circumstances.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[abelcainsbrother]

No matter how you twist it you cannot deny the evidence scientists put forth as evidence for evolution only proves "kinds produce after their kinds". I am not lying look at the evidence Fruit flies produce fruit flies,Bacteria produces bacteria,Viruses produce viruses,frogs produce frogs,salamanders produce salaanders,etc. Nobody denies this,it is observable life can adapt to survive hostile evironments but it never evolves.

You cannot teach single-celled organisms evolved to become all other life,or dinosaurs evolved into birds,etc unless you assume and this is what you are having to do in your acceptance of evolution.

But let me help you see the bible revealed to Christians in the church long before Darwin wrote his books that the bible reveals to us a former world existed on this earth full of life as the fossils,coal and oil and age of the earth prove.You no longer have to assume life evolves and reject the God of the bible anymore.I'm sorry the truth can hurt but for 150 years evolution has blinded you to the truth revealed to us in God's word.J Vernon McGee one of the greatest bible teachers taught and believed the Gap fact.Young earth creationists overlooked it and chose to defend a young earth and evolution has kicked their butts scientifically eventhough not one scientist can or has demonstrated macro evolution. The Gap fact is still just as truthful today as before Darwin.Open your eyes and see the truth. The fossils have nothing to do with evolution,they prove the bible true about a former world existing on this earth that perished.they testify to it. Jesus said "If the people do not praise me the rocks will cry out" They do.

 

[australopithecus]

My favourite part was where you continued to use the same ignorant and fallacious "argument" after I kindly pointed out your error.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

My favourite part was where you continued to use the same ignorant and fallacious "argument" after I kindly pointed out your error.

Are you ignoring what the evidence for evolution reveals to us? Kinds produce kinds,this is what the bible teaches,I know it might seem like finger nails being scratched on a chalk board to you but I'm focused on the evidence used as evidence for evolution and only kinds producing kinds is what we see.


Flies aren't a species, they're an order; Diptera.
Bacteria is a domain.
Frogs aren't a species, they're also an order; Anura.
Finches are a family of birds, and Salamander is another order; Caudata.

It seems your definition of "kind" is useless. Perhaps you'd like to streamline your "definition" before continuing.

If you're insisting a kind is an order, then you'd have no problem with speciation within the Primate order, say S. tchadensis to H. sapiens sapiens. They're the same "kind".

If you're insisting a kind is a family, then you'd have no problem with speciation within the Great Apes, because they're the same "kind".

If you're insisting a kind is a domain, then you'd have no problem with speciation between literally any animal, plant or fungus, because they're the same "kind".

So, which is it?

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

Flies aren't a species, they're an order; Diptera.
Bacteria is a domain.
Frogs aren't a species, they're also an order; Anura.
Finches are a family of birds, and Salamander is another order; Caudata.

It seems your definition of "kind" is useless. Perhaps you'd like to streamline your "definition" before continuing.

If you're insisting a kind is an order, then you'd have no problem with speciation within the Primate order, say S. tchadensis to H. sapiens sapiens. They're the same "kind".

If you're insisting a kind is a family, then you'd have no problem with speciation within the Great Apes, because they're the same "kind".

If you're insisting a kind is a domain, then you'd have no problem with speciation between literally any animal, plant or fungus, because they're the same "kind".

So, which is it?

I did not ignore this but being very knowledgeable about evolution does not let you off the hook,realize everything is looked at from an evolution perspective and so you are just looking at it from an evolution perspective. But in order to say life evolves you must be able to demonstrate that it truly does and the evidence does not demonstrate it or confirm it. Look at the root of the problem instead of glossing over it and continuing to look at everything from an evolution perspective. Also about the primates there are morphological differences between the primates,Neanderthal and man that get skimmed over by scientists.But yet they found away around it but had to go back before Neanderthal and man while overlooking the morphological differences of Neanderthal and man.I noticed this and can see a gap between the primates and man but because scientists don't consider the bible they look at it from a different perspective. Neanderthal is more like the primates than man are too,man is strange compared.Also you have two different views the out of africa and multi-regional evolutionists so nothing is truly settled yet.It seems the out of Africa camp have the more solid evidence and would be biblical but tthere is still debating going on.It shocked scientists how different genetically Neanderthals are to man also.

http://www.livescience.com/42933-humans-carry-20-percent-neanderthal-genes.html

And http://www.livescience.com/7153-scientist-humans-strange-neanderthals-normal.html

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Greetings,

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

How does switching back to attacking evolution answer the points I made in my last post?

It doesn't.

@ Australopithecus, "kinds" are whatever a creationist needs it to be to make humans special, so that evolution doesn't apply - that's why it chops and changes depending on the circumstances.

Kindest regards,

James

I'm not really ignoring you just been busy and have not had time to address your last post but still I am making a point that without evidence that life evolves the Gap fact makes the most sense even if you don't fully understand the Gap fact right now.I've explained it from a biblical point of view and evolutionists cannot just attack it and win without evidence for evolution the truth will shine through.Evolutionists think attacking the bible instead of evidence that life evolves wins but it will not work against the Gap fact once it is explained.I don't have to really go into detail about it either but I try to,I could just put forth the theory of a former world that existed on this earth and use the fossils as evidence to back it up and point out no evidence for macroevolution and it would be just as believable as evolution is unless they are not intellectually honest,Nobody can make somebody change their mind but evidence will out shine everytime and we have evidence of a former world that existed on this earth that went extinct and perished evolutionists have just made it fit into evolution.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

Greetings,

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

How does switching back to attacking evolution answer the points I made in my last post?

It doesn't.

@ Australopithecus, "kinds" are whatever a creationist needs it to be to make humans special, so that evolution doesn't apply - that's why it chops and changes depending on the circumstances.

Kindest regards,

James

I'm not really ignoring you just been busy and have not had time to address your last post but still I am making a point that without evidence that life evolves the Gap fact makes the most sense even if you don't fully understand the Gap fact right now.I've explained it from a biblical point of view and evolutionists cannot just attack it and win without evidence for evolution the truth will shine through.Evolutionists think attacking the bible instead of evidence that life evolves wins but it will not work against the Gap fact once it is explained.I don't have to really go into detail about it either but I try to,I could just put forth the theory of a former world that existed on this earth and use the fossils as evidence to back it up and point out no evidence for macroevolution and it would be just as believable as evolution is unless they are not intellectually honest,Nobody can make somebody change their mind but evidence will out shine everytime and we have evidence of a former world that existed on this earth that went extinct and perished evolutionists have just made it fit into evolution.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

I don't think you seem to be understanding anything much about the burden of proof.

If you are going to prove to us the bible is right about your interpretation of the evidence, then you are going to have to account for something called "common descent".

Think very carefully about how you phrase your next post. There really is only two options for this.
1. Citations. We would like to read anything (as you posted before about having evidence and sources) that can back this up. NOT SCRIPTURE! Now would be the time to play those cards.
2. "I do not know how to back that up." If you answer this way, at least we can discern some honesty.
3. Repeat yourself again and again with the same inane asserting mindless drivel with nothing to back up a single point.

Like I said there is only two options (either 1 or 2) for the next post but I added #3 as my prediction to what you most likely do anyway.

The only thing secular scientists have demonstrated in the lab is micro-evolution which is "kinds producing after their kind" like the bible says but no example or demonstration of macroevolution like I've said Flies will always be flies,bacteria will always be bacteria,viruses will always be viruses,frogs will always be frogs,finches will always be finches,salamanders will always be salamanders.This is what the evidence used as evidence for evolution proves and demonstrates to us.And yet you doubt the bible and the Gap fact?Even when the fossils back it up.It is a fact a former world existed on this earth like the bible reveals to us and the fossils prove and they did perish and go extinct just like the bible teaches and they have nothing to do with evolution.

"common descent".

Think very carefully about how you phrase your next post. There really is only two options for this.
1. Citations. We would like to read anything (as you posted before about having evidence and sources) that can back this up. NOT SCRIPTURE! Now would be the time to play those cards.
2. "I do not know how to back that up." If you answer this way, at least we can discern some honesty.
3. Repeat yourself again and again with the same inane asserting mindless drivel with nothing to back up a single point.

Like I said there is only two options (either 1 or 2) for the next post but I added #3 as my prediction to what you most likely do anyway.

1.I have already explained the Gap theory from a biblical point of view,you may doubt the bible so just think of a former world existing on this earth that went extinct and what kind of evidence we would expect if this were the case.
2.My evidence is peer reviewed scientific evidence that proves the earth is old also the fossils,coal and oil that was produced when the former world went extinct and perished.
3.Now you give scientific peer reviewed evidence to demonstrate macro-evolution.If you can't admit it and accept the Gap fact and stop doubting the bible like you do.

 

[Mugnuts]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I thought it was getting old, but it's still funny.


Since you love the sabre cats, please use the Gap theory to explain this. Since you have no 'evolution' perspective, please explain in your words to the best of your capability to describe what this evidence represents. You can ignore the connecting lines but focus on the different shades indicate time periods as to where each was dated to.

Edit: submitted before seeing response but it still fits.

BTW #3 it is :lol: :lol: Called it

 

[abelcainsbrother]

I thought it was getting old, but it's still funny.


Since you love the sabre cats, please use the Gap theory to explain this. Since you have no 'evolution' perspective, please explain in your words to the best of your capability to describe what this evidence represents. You can ignore the connecting lines but focus on the different shades indicate time periods as to where each was dated to.

Zoom in (real dimensions: 800 x 661)Image

Edit: submitted before seeing response but it still fits.

BTW #3 it is :lol: :lol: Called it
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I thought it was getting old, but it's still funny.


Since you love the sabre cats, please use the Gap theory to explain this. Since you have no 'evolution' perspective, please explain in your words to the best of your capability to describe what this evidence represents. You can ignore the connecting lines but focus on the different shades indicate time periods as to where each was dated to.

Edit: submitted before seeing response but it still fits.

BTW #3 it is :lol: :lol: Called it

That is not scientific evidence to demonstrate macro-evolution yet you are presenting evidence built around a theory that has never been demonstrated.The evidence from the Gap theory perspective tells us there were cat like creatures in the former world the former world lasted millions of years and in that time certain species went extinct they never evolved they were specific different creatures that you can realize by looking at the fossils but when the former world perished all of them cat like creatures perished until God created the big cats in our world and they are different from them cat like creatures.

 

[Capn Planet]

At the risk of having this sound like a personal attack...

ACB, is English your first language? I only ask because it's getting increasingly difficult to understand what exactly it is you're yammering about. I do wish to reply, but your response is going to color how I phrase my reply.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

At the risk of having this sound like a personal attack...

ACB, is English your first language? I only ask because it's getting increasingly difficult to understand what exactly it is you're yammering about. I do wish to reply, but your response is going to color how I phrase my reply.

Yes it is.English is my first language but I am not the best typer and often hit the wrong key which causes me to misspell words.

 

[Mugnuts]

That is not scientific evidence to demonstrate macro-evolution yet you are presenting evidence built around a theory that has never been demonstrated.The evidence from the Gap theory perspective tells us there were cat like creatures in the former world the former world lasted millions of years and in that time certain species went extinct they never evolved they were specific different creatures that you can realize by looking at the fossils but when the former world perished all of them cat like creatures perished until God created the big cats in our world and they are different from them cat like creatures.

Fail. Again. You get one more try, and don't for a second think that gleaming over for half a second gives you enough to pull an answer out of your head or ass as it seems to be the case.

Do some research.

Learn what timeline each of the fossils are from.

Explain why they are not found in other time periods.

I've said it before and I cannot understand why you keep doing the same thing over and over and over. If you want us to stop laughing, then start applying some actual thought into how you can deconstruct the "evolution perspective". If what you think is actually true, then it can be evidenced without the bible.

Seriously, this has moved far past humility and laughter, and traversed into pity.

 

[Capn Planet]

Let's try an alternative tactic, since posting giant mountains of evidence isn't swaying you, ACB.

What evidence WOULD convince you that evolution happens? Be very specific. I'm willing to bet we can either provide what you request or your request will be nonsensical. Either way, this will set off this thread's denouement.

 

[abelcainsbrother]

That is not scientific evidence to demonstrate macro-evolution yet you are presenting evidence built around a theory that has never been demonstrated.The evidence from the Gap theory perspective tells us there were cat like creatures in the former world the former world lasted millions of years and in that time certain species went extinct they never evolved they were specific different creatures that you can realize by looking at the fossils but when the former world perished all of them cat like creatures perished until God created the big cats in our world and they are different from them cat like creatures.

Fail. Again. You get one more try, and don't for a second think that gleaming over for half a second gives you enough to pull an answer out of your head or ass as it seems to be the case.

Do some research.

Learn what timeline each of the fossils are from.

Explain why they are not found in other time periods.

I've said it before and I cannot understand why you keep doing the same thing over and over and over. If you want us to stop laughing, then start applying some actual thought into how you can deconstruct the "evolution perspective". If what you think is actually true, then it can be evidenced without the bible.

Seriously, this has moved far past humility and laughter, and traversed into pity.

Wow! I have not seen that particular graph you posted before but I like it.As you can see looking at it there are different time periods in it with different species being found in each time period.Also I expect you to be intellectually honest if you know about evolution,you know about much of the evidence,the only think you have to do is look at it from a Gap theory perspective instead of an evolution one.You know about the fossils,evolutionists use that as evidence all the time just look at them from a former world that perished perspective and remove evolution,don't think of them as evolving,instead think of them living at one time in the former world and dying.