114d
2 edits
@pettytalk saidThe 13.8 billion years is of course relative to our perception and measurement of time from our place on earth.
The Big Bang theory posits that approximately 13.8 billion years ago, the universe burst forth from a singularity, a point of infinite density and temperature. This explosion of energy and matter laid the foundation for everything we see today.
According to general relatively time is a “relative” concept. Time appears to pass faster for an observer observing a fast moving object. For example leaving the earth at almost light speed for six months and retuning for six months the traveller would experience one year, but on earth many years will have passed. The traveller will have, for all intents and purposes, travelled forward in time.
This phenomenon also occurs when the traveller is further away from a a massive object than the observer standing on it. It has been proven using a pair of atomic clocks that travelling high and fast in the earth’s atmosphere slows down time for the clock on the plane by a miniscule amount compared to the one on the earth’s surface.
So as the universe expands at increasing speeds and massive objects such as galaxies move further apart, the relative passage of time becomes quite different depending on speed and proximity. It may be that what we observe as being billions of years could in fact not be correct.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4148
@kellyjay saidKellyJay said to Ghost: "It is quite lacking when you look at it instead of like sheep accept it as a fact and move on without question."
Creation doesn't need safeguarding, especially from evolution, evolution has huge holes in it while trying to explain life from a single lifeform to the variety we see today. You cannot explain how the process started, you cannot go into details on the creative features you claim natural selection supposedly has, which is the point in modifying life's forms and features, yo ...[text shortened]... lacking when you look at it instead of like sheep accept it as a fact and move on without question.
You do realize that the use of the term 'sheep' was often used by Jesus as a simile for his flock? Ghost may have studied to be a sheep, but, through evolution he came out as another kind of animal, a scientific goat. He's no potato head.
114d
@pettytalk saidYour increasing inclination toward Petty (talk) insults doesn’t help you.
Ghost may have studied to be a sheep, but, through evolution he came out as another kind of animal, a scientific goat.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4148
114d
"Time, then, and the heaven came into being at the same instant in order that, having been created together, if ever there was to be a dissolution of them, they might be dissolved together. It was framed after the pattern of the eternal nature, that it might resemble this as far as was possible; for the pattern exists from eternity, and the created heaven has been, and is, and will be, in all time."
"Such was the mind and thought of God in the creation of time."
According to the Big Bang theory, time itself began with the Big Bang. The theory suggests that the universe expanded from a very high-energy state, and as it expanded, time began to elapse. This means that time and the universe were created simultaneously at the moment of the Big Bang.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4148
114d
Evolution is a matter of science and scientists. There must be something spiritual about it, given that this thread was created in this spiritual forum. Is it a joke? I plagiarized a couple, just in case.
Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything!
Why don't Bible believers trust atoms? Because they're always trying to find the missing chapter in the book of Genesis!
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI believe random mutations occur there is no debate about them occurring, also accept modifications in forms and features, but only in established forms and features, something must be there to be selected.
You often make this incongruous affirmation, that you somehow agree with evolution while simultaneously denying all the key facets of evolution. So let's be clear, you do not accept evolution in any meaningful sense and have never really understood it. Instead you respond with the same defensive and poorly informed arguments that make conversation with you on this topic a complete waste of time.
There is no creative power in natural selection, it is a filter that takes out life that cannot handle its environment leaving behind the life that can, or if there is a reduction of resources like food the stronger and faster will get them, that too is a truism no debate there either. Life will dominate the environment it is better suited for that too is a truism, white rabbits will do better in snowy areas than dark ones.
Your so-called theory runs afoul when it comes to the genetic coding in life, and until you acknowledge that you can run around acting like you have it all figured out, but it is only in the code that forms and features are established because these are informational properties that you have no clue how to talk about, you are better off running away claiming victory.
You accept a blind process that goes against all odds and has nothing driving things into more specified specialized functional complexity
114d
@pettytalk saidThe truth about all things matters to everyone, no one has an exclusive right to it. At the heart of science's foundation you find brilliant men of God who believed that there were laws in nature we could study because they believed in a lawgiver who set up the universe. Remove that, you have a universe that has no explanation, which now begs the question why trust your brain to understand anything, since your brain has now become the end product of chaos and chance, it rose via an unguided, uncaring, blind indifferent process that has no reasoning in it at all, mindless.
Evolution is a matter of science and scientists. There must be something spiritual about it, given that this thread was created in this spiritual forum. Is it a joke? I plagiarized a couple, just in case.
Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything!
Why don't Bible believers trust atoms? Because they're always trying to find the missing chapter in the book of Genesis!
114d
1 edit
@pettytalk saidYes, because of that I used it. It's okay to be a sheep following the Good Shepherd, but to follow something blind, and indifferent, if the blind lead the blind, they both fall into the pit.
KellyJay said to Ghost: "It is quite lacking when you look at it instead of like sheep accept it as a fact and move on without question."
You do realize that the use of the term 'sheep' was often used by Jesus as a simile for his flock? Ghost may have studied to be a sheep, but, through evolution he came out as another kind of animal, a scientific goat. He's no potato head.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4148
114d
@kellyjay saidIf you only had true faith the size of a mustard seed, you could tell a mountain to move, and it would move. And if any evolutionist was watching you move that mountain, you would stop evolution in its tracks, and they would help you move the mountain back. With that kind of demonstration, you would make believers out of all of them, except for Dive.
The truth about all things matters to everyone, no one has an exclusive right to it. At the heart of science's foundation you find brilliant men of God who believed that there were laws in nature we could study because they believed in a lawgiver who set up the universe. Remove that, you have a universe that has no explanation, which now begs the question why trust your br ...[text shortened]... e via an unguided, uncaring, blind indifferent process that has no reasoning in it at all, mindless.
"Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."
Did you say you have experienced the Holy Spirit within you?
@kellyjay saidI'm talking about as far what evolution is, not whether you believe it or not.
Except you are preaching to the choir, if you are going to be wrong about anything more than likely those that share the same view as you will also be making the same mistake. Like minds think alike, and I'm asking you to look a little deeper at the details that are not broad-sweeping generalities, but how they would have to look if true, and how they would not look if not true.
You said in another post something about us evolving from potatoes, elephants, etc. That's not how common decent works. If you understand what evolution is you wouldn't have made such a comment.
All I want from this is for you to stop attacking evolution based on your ignorance of it, and stop repeating falsehoods about what evolution is and isn't.
In short: feel free to disagree with evolution all you want; just do so from a factual standpoint. Like your claim that evolution can't happen because mutations "destroy" life or whatever the hell you claim.
114d
@pettytalk saidFaith does not alter reality which is the topic, can random chance and necessity produce through natural selection life, answer is no one has a clue how that could have happened they just on blind faith believe it did.
If you only had true faith the size of a mustard seed, you could tell a mountain to move, and it would move. And if any evolutionist was watching you move that mountain, you would stop evolution in its tracks, and they would help you move the mountain back. With that kind of demonstration, you would make believers out of all of them, except for Dive.
"Truly I tell you, i ...[text shortened]... Nothing will be impossible for you."
Did you say you have experienced the Holy Spirit within you?
Granting for the sake of argument established life, can random chance and necessity alter existing genetic code without any forethought, plan, purpose, knowledge of pass or failures, knowledge of what a pass or failure is, I submit no, clearly not.
Within the genetic code, we find a few things random chance does not produce, randomness would only produce jibberish, unintelligible placement, while what we see in life's genetic code is much more sophisticated, we find the placement within the code both syntactic and semantic information that instructs the biology to perform a task in a regulated manner that has level checking and stop-starts.
Some see that as nothing but applying what is going on in human characteristics and making more of it than we should, but what is going on is simply phenomenologically seeing what is there in terms that are understandable due we do in our coding experiences. A series of commands that checks levels in our digital world has the same necessities in biology, along with start-stop mechanisms, our digital world directs actions and stops them and so does biology. Biology is comprehensible due to our comprehension of life, including our digital experiences.