<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Pacific Faith  

fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

June 11 2012 at 12:33 PM
No score for this post
wilz 

fossils of turtles ,spiders, frogs, horse shoe crabs, butterflies, sharks, dragonflies, palms, trees, grapes, fish, sting rays, grapes , figs(fruit), and so many other plants and animals that are found show signs of no change to todays living animals and plants ! this creatures have not shown signs of evolution even after thousands of thousands of years ! All this fossils are exactly the same to our modern day creatures and have not evolved even the slightest bit, they are still the same. .

Your humble cockroach for instance and house fly are living fossils ! there ancestors have been found fossilized and yet no signs of evolution are visible.

fossils are evidence that a worldwide flood did occur. To make a fossil the following are needed.

1)hard bodies (bones, trees, shells)
2) water (lots of it)
3 fast, deep coverage.
4)No air (so the buried animals cannot rot !)

A world wide flood would obviously meet all this requirements. The sediments dispersed in the water would rapidly cover the dead animals very deep. This fast ,deep coverage would eliminate the air next to the animals. Because theres no air, the animal cannot rot. The water would cause mineral exchange to occur thus the animal would fossilize.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
patient teacher

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 12 2012, 12:43 PM 

Some things changed a lot over time, some things changed a little over time, and some things (like cockroaches) hardly changed over time.

It all depended if the populations of those species could survive in their environment. If there were problems, the fittest individuals of the population survived, passing on their traits thru their genes. Those individuals who could not survive, died early, passed on few or no genes, and their traits slowly disappeared in the population.

There are all kinds of intermediate stage fossils in the fossil record. Or did you expect that stone fossils will change before our very eyes? happy.gif

Bodies washing into lakes and seas over many many millions of years can easily make up the fossil record we see today. There is no need for a flood. Besides (a convenient fact that you seem to overlook), how could a flood occur all at once that created metres of fossils in the fossil record, and how, oddly, did this flood seem to kill the simplest (the oldest ones at the bottom of a fossil profile) organisms first, the dinosaurs in the middle, and more advanced creatures up at the top? Hmmmm. Maybe the fossil date data is right after all.

You obviously never learnt much about biology enough to decide whether it's true or its not. Go get a biology book and become educated first, then you can come back here and discuss with some valid points.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 13 2012, 10:08 AM 

Evolutionists write biology books. Fixed.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
YU YET

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 13 2012, 10:10 PM 

And lawyers make laws while judges make judgements. FIXED.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
><{{*->

Law

No score for this post
June 14 2012, 1:08 PM 

YU YET,

I think YU got that wrong!

Politicians (and priests) make the laws, lawyers (and priests) interpret them, an judges adjudicate on them!

fish-law

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 13 2012, 5:42 PM 

"There are all kinds of intermediate stage fossils in the fossil record."

This is a misleading statement. The intermediate creatures supposedly linking man to amoebas are all missing. The whole chain is missing. What creature preceded the horse? What creature came before whales? Did you know that biologists actually believe that chicken evolved from dinosaurs and whales returned to the sea from cows etc. They call that science? I call them fairy tales for grown ups.

Because if there are all kinds of intermediate stage fossils in the fossil record, surely we would
see a cowhale fossil somewhere. But none has been found so far. Hence, the statement is misleading.

What you see in museums and textbooks are drawings of imagined creatures crafted by hired artists.
They are just make believe nonsense.

Evolution is a dying religion. Did you know why the search for aliens by NASA is getting so frantic? It's because they want to find some new theory because evolution just doesn't add up anymore in the fossil record. They want aliens to come to their rescue, but that wont happen in a long time.



 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
><{{*->

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 14 2012, 1:14 PM 

EN MAU,
maybe you may also agree that the dinosaurs and the "six day creation" story is not another fairy tale for grown ups?

just checking.

fishy-tales

ps: i admire (grudgingly..hehe..) yor opinions/arguemnt tho!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 14 2012, 4:18 PM 

Could be right if anything, anything ever happened at all, like matter just appearing across the universe at once from nowhere. And billions of years may not be required - and nothing could ever rise out of dirt in a trillion years. But it happened one day. One day could be millions of years ago, or just under 10,000 years ago. It had to come to reality at one point in time and we could be more closer to our day of origin than evolutionits want us to believe. And here we are. Perfectly created, never evolved. Life itself is a miracle. How come the universe reached perfect equilibrium and coordinated motions to sustain human existence? It could have been a dead universe without life and energy, or a constant flux of chaos and disorder or a wonderfully fixed environment with the perfect mix of oxygen to sustain human life. By accident, over millions of years...that's where fairy tales take off...

Let there be ...and there was. It wouldn't require billions of years when even time had to be created. If such a source of immense creative power exists, it would take a week if He so desired. I have no problem with that. Life is a miracle. If we think about it...seriously! That matter even came into being at one point in time, but organised into orderly systems of galaxies, stars and planets. There is a great mind behind it all, or nothing orderly and organised as the human brain would have emerged from nothing.

The God of the Bible is not one retard who made man through horrific mistakes, putting man through survival of the fittest curve over billions of years of blood, gore and death. No

And God saw that man and the environment was good, perfect as he desired.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Fantastic!!!!!

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 15 2012, 2:16 PM 

AMMMMAAAAZING that you're smarter than thousands of scientists that have devoted their lives to investigating these things.

Simply amazing! Have you ever thought of applying for the Nobel prize?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Noble peace prize

No score for this post
June 16 2012, 5:56 PM 

Nobel peace prize? Like how the commies awarded their first black president for his 'visions' of peace and Al Gore for the second great scam (man made global warming) known to man. Obama can't do a thing about Libya, Egypt and now Syria. Its all mauswara as they say in PNG.

Those who swallow evolution will fall for Gore's lies and scam. You know, the sea level rising, ice is melting and drowning coastal regions crap? And it is this dodgy 'science' which they believe and award their climate gurus the Nobel prize. O the gullibles! Remember how Copenhagen collapsed after Gore took the prize. We've had straight severe winters in both the northern and southern hemispheres over the last few years against the warmists' threat that the earth was warming up.

Australians believed the doomsday warmist prophets who predicted it would never rain and that all its rivers would be dry due to global warming. (Google: Tim Flannery Climate Predictions) Instead of building dams to store water, they spent billions constructing desalination plants, now sitting idle in the rain and rusting off. Australians have seen record rains with sever floods, destruction and deaths, with no dam to store water. And the cold winters continue with no sign of the predicted warming. Scientists. Hmmmmmmmmmm.

No thanks, Fantastic!!!!!. As they say to the 'One' in the US. Keep you Nobel prize the change as well. Its all suspect, dodgy and totally unreliable as evolution, so is the global warming scam.

Why don't people ever, ever get off their backsides and investigate the evidence for themselves than relying on 'thousands' of scientists who feed them trash in text books, books and magazines?


A question for you. Is man still evolving?


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Der Wolfe Wer Fressen Katzen

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 16 2012, 7:22 PM 

Several years ago, I heard about human footprints being found alongside dinosaur tracks in a Cretaceous limestone in the vicinity of Glen Rose, Texas. There were newspaper accounts in both the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (June 17, 1982) and The Dallas Morning News. Also, Dallas area television stations Channel 5 and Channel 8 reported on the finds. I did not think much about this at the time but later, because of my extensive reading on the subject of evolution, I was reminded of it. In January, 1995, I made a trip to Glen Rose specifically to visit the Creation Evidences Museum and find out all I could about these footprints.

Several highly-qualified scientists had witnessed and testified to the genuineness of the discoveries. Media from around the country publicised at least some of them.

Evolutionists, however, rejected the human footprints as Indian carvings, tracks of a sick dolphin, a case of misidentification, or an outright fraud. One gentleman was so threatened by the discoveries that he actually took a hammer, went to the river, and broke up some of the footprints to make them useless for study.

I knew that the human footprints, found side by side with dinosaur tracks, if genuine, destroyed the theory of evolution all by themselves. Still, I wanted to see for myself. See agoracosmopolitan.com


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Der Wolfe Wer Fressen Katzen

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 16 2012, 7:55 PM 

Woooooooofffffff!

" Science supports the Bible. That's just how it is. On the other hand, there's the theory of Evolution which is not science. What sustains it? FAITH !Science as Religion. One has to believe that all matter is self created, that this matter in turn created intelligence and; in spite of the fact that it has never been seen, that this inorganic self-creating matter then created life in opposition to observed science. All of this in violation of the 1st and 2nd law of Physics, probability theory, biogenesis and common sense.

This belief system necessitates extraordinary explanatory contortions, strange suppositions and sleight of hand. For example, since catastrophic events in our history would lend too much credence to the truth of the Flood of Noah event, those theories are avoided. It is thought and promoted that man has evolved both physically and technologically from the primitive to the modern on a uniform basis.

Given that presupposition, what do you do as a scientist when you encounter ancient artifacts produced by antique high technology?

As a scientist, you�d better be careful what you say or risk ridicule and professional suicide. As a result one can wind up convincing oneself, other scientific disciplines and the public that these things can be explained by elbow grease or some other arcane theory which is best not examined too closely.(That's how items like true optical lenses get described as "worship artifacts"--because everyone knows the ancients didn't have optical lenses). See True Suppressions


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

46 percent believe in Creation

No score for this post
June 15 2012, 3:37 PM 


A recent (June 1, 2012) Gallup Poll in the US has suggested that 46 percent of Americans have a creationist view of human origins, that God created man less than 10,000 years ago.

That is a massive loss given all those billions spent in text books, public school indoctrination and TV programs to convert people into believing in evolution.

About 32 percent believe God guided the evolutionary process, that when Genesis says God made man in his own image, he really doesn't mean that. (The fence sitters, too cowardly to chose one or the other, who either embrace or drop the Genesis record depending on room temperature and company because those atheists and evolutionists are so mean, rude and intimidating. They are the weak ones, indoctrinated to some degree but want to reserve some space for God, to plead some innocence over their unbelief.) For such God has a warning in Revelation. You will either be hot or cold, don't get lukewarm or I'll spit you out. You're either for God or against Him.

Revelation 3:15&16. I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

Only 15 percent believe in pure Darwinian evolution. That is truly sad. Someone should be sacked for doing a poor job. It's time to get a new theory. ET? Please phone Earth. This is Houston calling. There is a problem!

7 percent don't really know what's going on.

www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
mama

Re: 46 percent believe in Creation

No score for this post
June 16 2012, 6:39 PM 

scientists only "assume" and draw possibilities when it comes to dating fossils . So i really dont see why people totally believe that the earth is million upon millions of years old. After they die to right ? there only human whom make mistakes...have you people who are suporting them thought about this ???

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Der Wolfe Wer Fressen Katzen

Re: 46 percent believe in Creation

No score for this post
June 16 2012, 7:25 PM 

An article from Strand magazine (December,1895) reprinted in "Traces of the Elder Faiths of Ireland" by W.G. Wood-Martin mentions this fossilized giant discovered during mining operations in County Antrim, Ireland: "Pre-eminent among the most extraordinary articles ever held by a railway company is the fossilized Irish giant, which is at this moment lying at the London and North-Western Railway Company's Broad street goods depot, and a photograph of which is reproduced here. . . This monstrous figure is reputed to have been dug up by a Mr. Dyer whilst prospecting for iron ore in County Antrim. The principal measurements are: entire length, 12ft. 2in.; girth of chest, 6ft. 6in.; and length of arms, 4ft. 6in. There are six toes on the right foot. The gross weight is 2 tons 15cwt.; so that it took half a dozen men and a powerful crane to place this article of lost property in position for the Strand magazine artist. Dyer, after showing the giant in Dublin, came to England with his queer find and exhibited it in Liverpool and Manchester at sixpence, sixpence a head, attracting scientific men as well as gaping sightseers".

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
><{{*->

Re: 46 percent believe in Creation

No score for this post
June 20 2012, 6:58 PM 

EM MAU,
Am also doing some amateur research (readings mostly) on evolution and Darwinism (some argue are not the same), Adam and the so-called three (or four?) races/ethnic groups, namely Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid (and now some contend, Autraloid or aborigines), and a bit of eugenics.

With the "race" thing, what happened since Adam? The feature/complexion changes/contrasts between the three (or four?) major ethnic groupings are so profound, however the genes may be more similar/identical?

Ok, so God did all that over a few thousand years,....but how ?

Maybe like some contend, some mysteries should remain mysterious....and tell the scientists to find another job...and the curious to remember that "cat"...hehe

fish-cat

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: 46 percent believe in Creation

No score for this post
July 3 2012, 3:01 PM 

"Ok, so God did all that over a few thousand years,....but how ?"

Good question. That has to be accepted by faith as written in Scripture. By the power of God's word.

But evolution says it took billions of years. Same question. BUT HOW?
That's why we say evolution is a religion. You have to believe in one or the other, creation or evolution.

The reason why we believe in Creation is because nature is in harmony with the Bible record. Fossils,
lack of evidence for past or continuing human evolution, Jesus who spoke often about God'd creation was raised from the dead (You cannot kill Truth.)

And unlike evolutionary theories, Scripture never reinvents and corrects itself, never. It is sealed and no new discovery will disprove it because it was directed and authored by the Creator who saw it all from the beginning and faithful men recorded his word. You cannot outsmart God and his word.

But how, you still ask. By the power of his (God's) word.

And God said let there be, and it all came into being. He spoke the universe into existence.
Nature cannot just appear from nowhere.

Furthermore, who holds chemicals, atoms and matter together in orderly fashion? Where does this organised cohesion come from? Mindless nature? I don't think so.

We live in a potentially explosive minefield of immense proportions if the universal order and coordination came unhinged and went chaotic.

Creation is one thing but sustaining the whole real estate across the entire universe is in itself a miracle.

It would bring utter chaos if gravity, motion and mass of heavenly bodies were uncoordinated without clockwork precision, if there were no laws set in the universe to act and counteract providing balance and order for existence of life on earth.

Scripture has that important area of universal order covered in Colossians 1:15-20.

The Supremacy of the Son of God

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.






 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Der Wolfe Wer Fressen Katzen

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 16 2012, 9:50 PM 

Dont be lazy, find the evidence and info yourselves!!!

"It's one heck of a climb to see the footprint; more than a thousand feet up a rugged mountain in the Cleveland National Forest. And James Snyder's house sits right at the bottom. "I go out of my way to make a slip trail where nobody else has been and I was actually looking for gold," said Snyder (the discoverer).

That was back in February 2002 . But instead of finding gold on Gowers Mountain, Snyder found a giant fossilized footprint, at least it looks like one, embedded in solid granite.

The footprint was found in what becomes a creek bed during the rainy season. It looks as though something big crossed the creek a long time ago leaving its footprint behind.

What made it and when? Who knows....Granite is supposed to have formed over 1 billion years ago.

No doubt scientists will try to argue that it just looks like a footprint as they do for every one of these types of anomalies. For science, if not fraud it's the only acceptable answer."

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Geologist

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 18 2012, 11:42 PM 

Yeah, there's only one small problem with this: granite NEVER has fossils because of the way that kind of stone is formed. Fossils couldn't possibly form inside a volcano!

Nice try, though.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
another possible evidence to flood.

Re: fossils are against evolution and for world wide flood.

No score for this post
June 19 2012, 1:00 PM 

its possible he could have found the prints in the volcano ! just evidence of what the great world wide flood could have done . It would have mixed everything up in bundles : sea creatures and land creatures , all in close or same proximity of each other(which alot of evidnece has been found). Sea shells have been found on Mount everest ! a thousand miles from the sea !

I belive that its possible since the flood would have collected that foot print and while in the process of drying up ,left that "fossilized " foot print in the volcano . its very very possible !

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Pacific Faith