Culture & Lifestyle

Rave

Evidence For Creation

Posted 14 months ago|117 comments|1,425 views
Just the facts!
VIDEOS
Written by
"In 1810, about one billion people lived on earth. In less than 200 years, the population hit six billion. This fits the biblical chronology perfectly as the current population started about 4,400 years ago with Noah and his family after the Flood. An evolutionary time line would require not only a nearly non-existent growth rate but also three trillion deceased humans within the last million years."
http://www.drdino.com/evidence-for-a-you...

"Here are fourteen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old..."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/400...

"Here are nearly a dozen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old..."
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/ai...

Who would have though that the "rebellion" seen in our culture, may be last hope for a voice of reason for the future generations to come. When someone doesn't just take your word for it, people get upset and take things personally... yet it is the "free thinker" that observes evidence presented with unbiased eyes. It is this very person, that has not accepted the Bible at face value... the one that was not raised in the Church... the one that has not been indoctrinated... is the very one that is discovering facts that pose the greatest threat to evolution; and the biggest confidence in Creation.

This is also the individual that simply won't accept everything verbatim from state educators and social-engineers... and would rather find out for themselves by evidence that can be found in their observable world, and not just in a textbook! With the millions that have been spent on public education... it amazes me that even proven outdated and false material, is still propagated between the covers of most textbooks. Unlike the modern "science" books... the Bible as a history stands unapologetically unchanged... whereas the history of "science" is in constant flux.

Ken Ham from Answersingenesis.org says that evidence for Creation is and will become the new reformation of the Church and Culture in the years to come... there are many scientists that believe in the young created earth. I must admit, I was not persuaded by "creation evidence" as a determining factor for my faith... it was not even the logical evidence disproving evolution... rather it was a personal encounter with the God of the Universe that changed my life. However, though the origins of life on this planet may appeal to some more than others... it still is of significant importance just on an ethical and moral level, if something is factual or false.

For a partial list of real Scientists that believe in Creation...
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/e...

I have nothing to gain or loose in this debate... as I said that my encounter with God, and His faithfulness to me by His Word the Bible, is the sole foundation for my faith. This has literally set me free to do as some... find a amicable compromise between evolution and creation; or simply follow where the facts lead. Neither will cause me to "loose" my faith, it is for me as I stated a matter of ethics and trustworthiness of the claims presented by either school of thought. Many have had their minds made-up by schooling or media long before any evidence is really questioned. It is not good by faith or indoctrination to determine and outcome, without first a personal discovery of the viable facts... quoting their "bible" or their particular author as authority.

It is for me an exiting quest for the truth that encourages me to allow my mind to expand to possibility... but the very forced education the the world accuses the Church of has been their mandate in public schools all along. While talking with students in the system I have found that their opinion, questions or discoveries matter little... only the regurgitated information within a particular field, is required to pass a course. Is this "free thinking"
...or has it just replaced one religion for another?
The A,B,C's ...Anything But Christianity.

From Yoga to Humanism... religion is replacing the facts. Evidence is all around us, and it is time we opened our "own" eyes and discovered the truth ourselves. We owe it to ourselves, verifying facts instead of doing the very thing we accuse others of...
burring our heads in the sands of pseudo-science.
UPDATE - 14 months ago
If you think that this is just about the age of the Earth, or population figures it is not... it is about who owns this world and what some people are willing to do to get rid of His children... WARNING DISTURBING VIDEO...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvAlHrKXK...

UPDATE - 14 months ago
For a clarification on the whole population growth rates and how they are worked out and factors involved see...
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html

UPDATE - 14 months ago
Do real scientists believe in Creation?
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/e...

UPDATE - 2 months ago
John Piper - "Don't waste your life"
http://dwynrhh6bluza.cloudfront.net/reso...
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
14 months ago: Ah.....But those that disbelieve will say....

Jesue drew a picture of a fish...
14 months ago: Actually, it was reported that His disciples drew a picture of a fish to identify with other "fishers of men"...

[Jesus multiplied the fish, and fed over 5000 people 2X !:]
14 months ago: Even if all the so called "scientific evidence" for young earth creationism was revealed to you as inherrently invalid, and ultimately false, don't worry.

Your faith doesn't stand or fall on such "scientific evidence".

You can dismiss all the evidence in the world, which is not far from what you are required to do, and I expect you happily will.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
14 months ago: Is this to say you have looked at the "young earth" evidence, and entertained the possibility that it might be correct, and all the secular "old earth" evidence could be mistaken?
14 months ago: Indeed.

"Secular evidence" is an interesting term.
14 months ago: Stan,

Still waiting for a reply...
14 months ago: Sorry.
To what question?
14 months ago: Stan,

The question posed by OOTB...

"Is this to say you have looked at the "young earth" evidence, and entertained the possibility that it might be correct, and all the secular "old earth" evidence could be mistaken?"
14 months ago: My answer to that was "Indeed".
14 months ago: Stan,

If there is evidence, not theory to the contrary... belief is a no problem!
13 months ago: Stan,

You could say I am "young Earth" but "old Adam" in belief ....at leas old enough to have kids with Eve !:]
14 months ago: The guys in the attached videos have the demeanor of people selling vacuum cleaners on late night TV, and explaining how you'd be a fool to but any sort but the one they are offering.

If I believed them I would believe that scientists are the greatest fools on the planet.

My favourite part was the bit about how, if humans existed half a million years ago, there would be 2.45 x 10990 people on the planet by now. Yet, if you use the science in the Bible, it clearly demonstrates that there would be only 6.5 billion people on the planet now, just as we see in real life. And they present all this with straight faces.

Lets not even mention the agricultural and industrial revolutions and the population explosion they brought about.

However, could these maths geniuses tell us how many dodos, dinosaurs, tigers and rabbits there are in the world today, based on the bible?

The point is, if they present such ignorant nonsense as a "killer" point that reveals actual scientists as fools, the conviction of these gentlemen is not a good recomendation for anything.
14 months ago: Stan,

I chose the particular vids because I have been at the particular museum in Glenrose Tx and agree they are quite tacky... it just shows that information doesn't have to come from National Geographic to be valid... did you check out the links? IF the info is valid it shouldn't matter if it comes from a puppet... like some Presidents... right?
14 months ago: Yes, I did check out the links, thanks, Truthbrary.

Right you are.

Good fruit can come from even from a tacky tree. ;)
14 months ago: Or maybe we can help you with operating your calculator?
14 months ago: Correction 2.45*10990 is probably supposed to be 2.45x(10^990)
14 months ago: Ok, while I'm answering questions, will a Biblical mathematician step up to the plate here?

How many dodos, dinosaurs, tigers and rabbits there are in the world today, based on the Bible?

Any takers?
14 months ago: Stan, you said...

"However, could these maths geniuses tell us how many dodos, dinosaurs, tigers and rabbits there are in the world today, based on the bible?"

If the question is "How Did Noah Fit All the Animals on the Ark?" see...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...
14 months ago: No, that's not the question.

The maths men worked out the number of people in the world of today based on the Bible.

Who can do the same for dodos, dinosaurs, tigers and rabbits using the same method?
14 months ago: OK, I getcha...

Knowing what we do about how many animals like the buffalo (bison) were almost made extinct and some were... it is hard to extrapolate those figures even remotely... but given historical records, and the average family growth rate, it is easier to do so with the population of mankind...
14 months ago: What they did was take the current population and divide it with the average population growth rate and it ends up giving us a period of aprox 4500 years... putting us at the time of Noah... then they did the same without a worldwide flood scenario and instead millions of years, multiplied by the same growth rate and you have too many to count!
14 months ago: How did animals get from the Ark to isolated places, such as Australia?
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/ai...
14 months ago: This is my favorite... it alludes most, they just got off the best ship ever made by their own hands... following generations probably made ships and carted animals with them for food, farming, pets and so on... like Columbus!
13 months ago: Really, to think that Columbus was the first to sail across the ocean, don't think so.
14 months ago: For really great info on the overall flood... ark and so on...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...

...be happy to find more answers after your perusal of those links...
14 months ago: Here is a site that answers all the details for population growth....
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html

13 months ago: "It is obvious that when all the facts of the Genesis account of the flood are examined that there is no reason to doubt that the ark could easily have carried its intended cargo. The Biblical account is not a revision of a Babylonian myth. All the scientific evidence shows that the ark could easily have contained all of the animals that were used to repopulate the earth after the flood."
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/was-n...
14 months ago: John Heffner explains his biblical math here http://www.kolbecenter.org/index.php/fea...

Using Heffners technique exactly as he described it:

100 years after creation there were 12 people.
200 years after creation there were 19 people.
300 years after creation there were 31 people.
500 years after creation there were 77 people.

In 1500 BC there were 756 people. (Ok, that's off by about 30 to 50 million people or so.)

In 1 AD there were 690,000 people. (In real life there were about 300 million people, so Heff's only off by about a factor of 500.)

In 1700 AD there were 1.6 billion people. (In real life there were about 640 million people.)

In 1800 AD there were 2.5 billion people. (In real life there were about 1 billion people.)

In 1900 AD there were 4 billion people. (In real life there were about 1.6 billion people.)

In 2008 AD there are about 6.5 million people . (Hey, the calculator man is spot on here! Go figure!!!)

600 years from now there will be 100 billion people living on the planet, by Heff's maths.

However, if Mr Heffner was wrong, and there were in fact, 100,000 people (which is a little closer to the truth than Heff's 756 people) alive in 1500 BC, then there would be actually be 823 Billion people on the planet today.

As a matter of fact, Mr Heffner's population figures are approximately correct only in the year 2008 and in the imaginary Biblical year of creation, when there were allegedly 8 people.

Mr Heffners maths are off by billions of people, and factors of thousands, for all the intermediate periods.

The sneaky fellow made up his maths to fit 8 people at creation and 6.5 billion now. The "Heffner theory" is useless for any time in the past or future.

Value of Mr Heffner's figures: Worthless.

Fact that it is being used to give credence to "Creation": embarrasing.

Chance of these facts being admitted: up to you.
14 months ago: Stan,

NOT only do you need someone to help you with your calculator... "average growth rate" has to do with the multiplication of people less any possible diseases, wars and such...

I don't know where you got all your bogus info from the link you provided.... the genealogical lines provided in the Bible only are used for bloodlines and inheritance, even with Adam and Eve it makes ref to "other" children. Simple math if you take population now, divide by 2.5 or so... you come up with so many years... If you did the same for 500,000 years it doesn't work! One would have to have almost a non-existent growth rate... I need to go to work... I'll be back!
Content Removed by Truthbrary
Content Removed by Stan Five
14 months ago: Think about this, Truthbrary.

You are saying that 8 people, in the space of 10 years will have 76,000 offspring. It's not possible. Can you find 8 people who were alive in the year 2001 who have 76,000 children, grandchildren, and great children since then? How would that work out?

You are not following Heffner's maths. He's wrong, too, however, but I am carrying out his maths exactly as he did and you aren't.

I'm not trying to fool you.

The growth he is talking about involves multiplying the population by 1.00456 per year, not 2.5. Check it out.

To find the population in any year, the formula he has used is Population=(years since creation^1.00456)*8

Heffner's explanations are ignorant and misguided, yet he thinks his calculator shows up the legitimate scientists as fools. He'll keep on thinking that no doubt.

Heffner ridiculing the foolish, arrogant, math-challenged, secular scientists, as he does is the very definition of irony.

Heffner's theory is nonsense and worthless. So why are people putting it forward as something meaningful, when they don't know what it means? Are they just taking his pronouncements at face value without using their own critical faculties? Do they think it's a good surrogate for science because there are numbers in it?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
14 months ago: I odn't see where a simple formula could be used to get even close to an accurate number. Saying the world started out with 8 people after the flood. There would be a lag of at least (bare minimum) 13 years before their offspring reached reprductive age. Then another 13 year gap before the third generation kicked into to production mode. Then you have to factor in major pandemics like the bubonic plague, which killed off 1/3 of the earth's known population, and natural disasters which hampered the rearing of offspring to maturity. And also you would have to know the cycles of prosperity, where families had not 2.5 children, but more along the lnes of 12-15 children. To assume that everything averaged out over a long enough time span is still an assumption.

I do believe that there was a beginning point in man's existence. Like Truthbrary, I believe it was a lot more recent than what is commonly accepted as fact. But I don't believe a simple formula, that doesn't account for vast variations in repopulation can be used as a template.
14 months ago: Stan,

You are right on the part of my math being wrong... I was trying to work backwards and it is not the logical way of extrapolating population, however this site takes one through the gory details of population growth and exponential increase...
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html

I guess we both need a new calculator... or someone to help us use it!
14 months ago: Yeah Box,

My math was c--p! I was trying to use the figures provided and wasn't calculating all the factors needed. I found a site that does the job... I guess, as I implied to Stan, I should go back and get some upgrading! Here is the page...
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html

14 months ago: OK, so here's a teachable moment: rely on Truth-brary to tell you the facts, or rely on the scientists who spent their entire lives and many generations of lives learning and handing down learning about extremely complex things that take extreme rigor, what with MIT, CalTech, the rest of the ivies and liberal art schools, the massive schools throughout Europe, Russia and now China -- you guys may have your opinion about truth, but many people much smarter than us have worked very hard, and they have children too, you know, and they have come up with many agreed upon ideas that are not derived from literature, rather, they are derived from painstaking work and deafening critique between each other as the competition for getting the correct answer is intense, thanks to the market place folks right of center/ conservatives bow to.

Why is it the marketplace can bring us capitalism, which is greed made into law, while we spit on the marketplace that brings us scientific explanations of how to live on this planet without killing ourselves?
14 months ago: Pluto,

We can rely on each other to be voices of reason, and challenge the status quo... "scientists" brought us everything from Agent Orange, Aspartame, Chlorine and Fluoride... not to mention vaccinations abortions and mind-control. I may not have all the facts, and am willing to admit I am wrong... but I am a true skeptic, willing to challenge political movements that would have us all "animals" and shipped off to market. I am not spitting on anything... the "market" you are referring to has made entire nations SLAVES for our gain. It is politically incorrect to own a slave in North America, but it is OK that we purchase off countries who force (by poverty) their own people to work for $1 or less per day! You too will be a little skeptical when our money is worthless and you are the slave...

If you missed it... my math on the whole population thing (in the comment section) was faulty, so here is the link for the details behind the figures presented in my post:
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html
14 months ago: Stan I think you have a point, I follow what you are saying. They are starting with an end result and working backward... on a graph that would NOT be on a curve. There must be consideration for a slower start, and then exponentially increase from there. The following link that I posted all over this article seems to work it out properly...
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html

14 months ago: I admire your openness to my point there, Truthbrary.

(You know if y'all on RantRave denied there was anything wrong with Mr Heffner's theory, I was probably going to start trying to work out why Mr Heffner is a terrible racist whose terrible theories caused the genocide and slavery, just like Charles Darwin before him. ;) Just kidding. )
14 months ago: OK Stan,

You score one for Heff... but what did you think about Morris?
http://ldolphin.org/morris.html
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
14 months ago: That's more like what I was talking about. Even playing the game by their rules, he gets a workable answer. That doesn't look good for the 200,000 year old human claims.
2 months ago: How would that whole Time / Space theory work if they lived a thousand years?
2 months ago: I wonder how that whole Global Warming scam by Plutomisters educated elite peers is working out for him right about now.
Content Removed by Truthbrary
14 months ago: I shouldn't be too harsh on John Heffner. He is no better or worse than any other self-styled "scientist"

1. who starts with the conclusion that "My reading of the Bible is the reality of the world" and works backward from there.

2. whose conclusion cannot be challenged by any disconfirmation of any or all theories that he relies on to "prove" his faith.

3. who invents "scientific arguments" to "prove" his faith, when he doesn't actually have an interest in science as a method of discovery, or respect for scientific conclusions that conflict with his foregone "Biblical" conclusions.

If John Heffner had the courage to say "I don't care what Science or Reason demonstrate. Science and Reason are fallible and wrong when they conflict with the Bible. Science is only valid when it agrees with the Bible. If it disagrees with my book it's wrong. Scientists who say otherwise are fools.", I could respect his honesty a little more.

14 months ago: This is a general statement - not specifically directed to anyone here.

The age of the earth, or this universe for that matter, has nothing to do with whether it was created or not.

Fact is, the overwhelming evidence points to s specific time of creation.

Whether that was 10 thousand years, tens of thousand of years or longer is irrelevant in the larger scheme of things.

There is no such thing as spontaneous generation of anything.

Faith in abiogeneis or faith in biopoesis is just as much a religion as anything else. It is not science at all. It is grasping at straws mostly due to refusal to consider alternatives. Fact is, without billions of years the "theory" of evolution comes crashing down harder than Humpty Dumpty.

Sure, keep looking and studying, but refusal to consider alternatives and shooting down others who do is arrogant as well as myopic.

The statistical likelihood of this universe and we ourselves of being an accident, or of all the complexity and mathematical harmony we see from the cosmos to the atom as being coincidental, or the information required for biological organisms as coming from a non-intelligent source, is about as impossible as you can get.

The Blind Watchmaker mechanism is a child of metaphysical naturalism, not of science. Again, it is philosophy and religion.

Consider all. Test all. Hold on to the good.

That being said, folks have a right to believe whatever they want.
14 months ago: So, you're not sore that John Heffner's theory is just nonsense, then? Cos, we can believe whatever we like?
14 months ago: I've never heard of John Heffner or studied any of his theories.

As to addressing nonsense - if someone wants to believe they are evolved slime mold or that life on this planet is the result of a single cell organism run amok, that's up to them. It's their life. Personally I find that to be low level living.

It's my belief that we are created for greatness and we are not here by accident. But, to each his own. That's what I'm saying.
14 months ago: This is the kind of topic that does not have import: think what you want, reality will happen. Same with climate change. Same with over population and the same with the collapse of the empire. Who cares what anybody thinks about the issue of how old the earth is, reality is gonna happen. I will certainly conduct myself to minimize the impacts inasmuch as I can that create or worsen the oncoming problems/ issues, and will prepare for the realities ahead. Those who do what they please otherwise may, since we still live in a free country, where "you can have it your way."

In the mean time let's talk about stuff that really matters and has meaningful impact on our lives today and that of our children: Box and I could dig a ditch in the earth together regardless of how old we both think that soil is.

14 months ago: Plutonomister,

Don't you think that it goes to credibility or the lack of it in the education system? They have taught the Earth is billions of years old yet more evidence is for only thousands of years... it not only discredits their "science" ...but it also discredits their view of races and the view of the future. IF we are of one common ancestor, then we are all of one race as the evidence supports. I get that we must be responsible for our planet, but we also must be responsible to our Creator.

IF we care don't less who's earth we are on...
...we won't care less what is going to happen according to His word...
...this is just negligent. If you found out that one day you were really a squatter on someones property, would you not seek terms of tenancy? Or would you just wait until you were evicted? The signs are all around us about why we are here, and where we are going when we are done... neglect is not an educated option.
14 months ago: ...sorry a little licsdexic... should read...

"IF we don't care less who's earth we are on..."

14 months ago: What amazes me is that perfectly normal people think the world is only 6,000 years old despite the facts of astronomy, archeology, and geology. But, I know perfectly normal people who create the most fantastic art pieces and others who tell the most fictional of stories too -- great dramatic works -- and they are normal as the next person: "ya want fries with that?" "Yes, please."

I'm an atheist, artist, environmentalist, farmer and father -- go ask all the masses who know more about Ronald McDonald than Jesus, and ask them how old the world is, and they'll say they believe in god, while littering their burger trash.

You don't have to believe in Jesus as the son of a god, or think the world is 6,000 years old to steward the earth, you just need decent parents who care about your future. Most people are short sighted and self interested, watch tv and lack proper education and eat poorly: ask them their opinion and hang your hat on it!
14 months ago: Pluto,

There are no "scientists" that agree on the age of the Earth. Even if the age changes from 1 to 2 million years.... do you realize how hokey that sounds? A million years is a very long time... but they jump from 1 million to 5 then 500 million... and you think that is normal?? The only verifiable record is our recorded history... to think that man waited millions of years to start communicating is bizarre to say the least....

I know you think that all this is not worth your time... but if you get the chance I would encourage you to find out for yourself, and lean less on your State paid religion (theories). I can understand if you would rather not, you might end up being one of those "perfectly normal people" that believe the evidence.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
14 months ago: Sorry if I'm mis-understanding or being a bit sensitive, but am I reading you correctly Mr. Pluto? Are you implying that the "normal" folk who believe in creationism are mostly the sort you might find working or eating at the counter at a fast food joint? I know you wouldn't be so obvious as to insinuate the need for elevated mental capacity in order to make the leap from God to logic. Or would you?

And yes, I could dig a ditch right alongside anyone. I might even talk about how old the dirt is while we dig. I really don't know for certain. God hasn't revealed that to me...yet.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
14 months ago: This does sort of remind me of some conversations I had with my grandmother while she was still alive. We wold talk politics for hours, and I loved it when the conversation ended with her arguing me down using the same logic I started out with. Circular reasoning has a completely different meaning for me.

But when the topic turned to religious beliefs, she would shut me down cold. "Son," she would say, steel glinting in her eyes, "that don't amount to a hill of beans for me. I know Jesus is my Saviour, and I'm going to be with him when I'm called. To me, that's all that matters, and I don't want to argue about it."
14 months ago: OO7,

I don't know how old the dirt is either... I just like checking out the evidence to see if we can get close. It is like all the conspiracy stuff that ends up not being "conspiracy" ...it is like a treasure hunt, that is why so many are interested in anthropology, archeology and ufology... but we'll get into that one a bit later...
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
14 months ago: Very true. If the old fox wasn't so crafty and elusive, what would be the fun in chasing him? Might as well call off the dogs and pee on fire, rather than have the fox delivered up, already made into a nice set of earmuffs.
14 months ago: Like I said, you can believe what you want, it's a free country -- go find a website that proves the wold is 6,000 years old, I'm sticking with the tens of millions of scientists who agree on the facts after having competed amongst each other to get it right for generations, and they're still going at it and won't stop until they drop: you are done already with your literature findings: great, now go dig a ditch and make something of yourself.

Or dig a grave instead and put your body there and then just wait to die, since this earth is not what you were made for -- come on let's take things literally here, like you do the entire metaphorical bible...talking snake, blow the horn to knock down walls, cast a spell-miracle, come guys let's throw a party and cast some spells ourselves, or is that only for the son of god? Wait, the Jews say you have it all wrong, the son of god hasn't come yet...wait, but my book of literature says ol' Jim and Huck...oops, wrong book...Dang...
14 months ago: Pluto,

Coming from a life of hard work, I know a bit about digging... I defer to others who have "brains in their head" and I don't mind making mistakes or failing, yet I appreciate the facts, ones that don't change, like history, written, substantiated, verified and preserved... the Bible. Others on the other had prefer "science" that is forever changing and illusive in the fact department. As I said there are smarter people than me, like my kids, but I will give you a list of those who made research and education their lives, without digging ditches...

"Before trying to claim all scientists believe (operative word) in evolution consider this list first. Once you have all of them in your corner, then you can sweep all you want."
http://www.examiner.com/christian-worldv...

"Many scientists, including many of the most famous of scientists, are advocates of Creation over Evolution."
http://www.cpals.net/forums/index.php?/t...

14 months ago: Pluto,

I don't have any problem with miracles, I see one every day when I look in the mirror. I see how the God of the Universe changed me from being a psycho into someone with compassion. Many other miracles too... I have also seen evil, spiritual and human... the proof for God's Word the Bible is all around us. As to the walls at Jericho... check out the archeology on that one!
14 months ago: As my site name (Truthbrary) connotates, even though I have my opinions, I want to source good material for those who are interested in a Biblical perspective.

"Does Archaeology Support the Bible?"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...
14 months ago: Pluto,

I do like the amount of "scientists" you can muster "tens of millions of scientists" sounds like the population of Canada!
14 months ago: Uh Pluto?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/ho...

One of Albert Einstein's greatest insights was realizing that time is relative. It speeds up or slows down depending on how fast one thing is moving relative to something else.

Is that second hand on your watch speeding up or slowing down?
14 months ago: Re http://ldolphin.org/morris.html

"How could it be that the planet only now is experiencing a population crisis--why not several hundred thousand years ago, soon after man first appeared on earth?" says Mr Morris.

I can answer that for Mr Morris.

Social, agricultural and industrial developments and revolutions came along without you noticing. Get a graph of historic world population before you go any further, Mr Morris. There is an unprecedented population spike from a period of relative stability since the 1800s.

Mr Morris, do you think God gave Adam and Eve the diesel tractor, bulk phosphate and nitrogen? Noah certainly didn't take these things on the Ark, did he? Even the ancient Egytians didn't have these. You know how people lived in prehistoric and ancient times, right? You know how many people an acre of desert or meadow could support, throughout history? You know how a city of ten million feeds itself without sewerage, motor vehicles, electricity and intensive agriculture?

14 months ago: Mr Morris has the same problems as Mr Heffner.

"Thus, the average family must have had 2.5 children in order to bring the population to its present magnitude in 100 generations." says Morris, exactly the same as Heffner. It's part of a whole train of misguided sleight of hand.

The biggest problem is that both Heffner and Morris are flatly wrong for all the known history of the world. They both disingenously carry on as if the only valid historical population data points come from Adam and Eve, the Flood, and the present day.

Full marks to Morris and Heffner for at least not ignoring the present day population while ignoring the rest of relevant "secular" knowledge.

What problems of Heffner does Morris solve? Looks like none.

Has Mr Morris actually got an example of an evil, foolish, lab-coated, Darwinist, scientist puffing on his pipe saying "There are far too many people in the world for there to have been comparatively few 8,000 - 10,000 years ago. Prove me wrong and creation is real."? I suspect he is tilting ineptly at a straw man of his own making.

If Mr Morris carries his work to its logical conclusion, he can tell us the current populations of all the clean and unclean animals taken on the Ark, and their numbers at any time in history. It will be fine to dismiss with a wave of the hand any relevant factors that would influence their populations, just as he does for people.

Science is hard, isn't it Mr Morris? Stick to the Bible and what you know.
14 months ago: Stan,

I think that your quick perusal of the figures on this site have you generalizing and dodging... there is a lot of meat for you to be tossing out... eat up... the article covers extensively in detail those concerns... however, has the evolutionist presented anything but vague illogical theories for a million-year span for man's existence....NOT TO MENTION... where did the FIRST man get his wife... or was it the FIRST wife waiting for another ape to finally man-up??? Seriously.

We have a verifiable historical document in our hands... you less than a theory. If our math at any time is wrong, we still have archeological proof of civilizations, areas and evidence of climate; what you have is an guess without your own historical document, you still need to borrow our Book to help validate your digs.
14 months ago: If you are going to rely on Science to prove God and the Bible, you are making a rod for your own back.

Scientists are not likely to say things like "Look, Christians, I don't respect the Bible, but I am going to rely on the words of the Bible to prove my chemistry theory, and the Bible proves my theory, therefore I am right, even if science proves me wrong."

But there are Christians who go around saying "Look, I don't have a lot of time for silly secular scientists, and silly secular science is not a good reason to believe in anything, and silly secular scientists believe nonsense for no reason, despite the Bible being the only authoritative decider of any matter.. . . . but I've made some Science to demonstrate the Bible is TRUE about Adam and Eve and the Flood!" Ho hum.

Scientists can read any old books they like, including the Bible. In fact scientists are likely to read a lot of old books and find a mixture of facts and errors made through lack of knowledge. The Bible is not of any particular use in validating ancient, prehistoric biology, one way or the other.

In asking about the "first man" and "first woman" according to science, you seem to be misunderstanding what evolution would imply. I would refer you to the history of every single species alive on the planet today.

Consider the horse for example. There were no horses 50 million years ago, but there were horse ancestors. There were ancestors of the horse that you wouldn't recognize as a horse. There were no zebras but there were ancestors of zebras. When did the first boy zebra marry the first female zebra you might ask?

You might equally ask

"When did the first African man appear, and how long did he have to wait for an African African woman?"

"When did the first Caucasian man appear and how long did he have to wait for the first Caucasian woman?"

"When did the first australian Aboriginie man appear and how long did he have to wait for an australian Aborigine woman?"
14 months ago: Stan, the reason that I said my math was crap was because I failed to account for a few important details like generations, wars and exponential increase. You on the other hand see "2.5" and fail to see the step by step factors that make that part of the equation the most obviously stable. I must admit this algebraic formula has my head spinning... but it doesn't seem you are even looking at it.

SO here is what we are going to do... you pick a random amount of people that just appear in a million year past, and tell us all why we have the population we do today... BUT make sure to show your work!!!
14 months ago: Stan, you said..

"Consider the horse for example. There were no horses 50 million years ago, but there were horse ancestors. There were ancestors of the horse that you wouldn't recognize as a horse. There were no zebras but there were ancestors of zebras. When did the first boy zebra marry the first female zebra you might ask?"

...sure I am asking that, but you don't have an answer.. according to your "bible" the textbooks... all life including the Zebras came from "soup off a rock" ...and you have no way of proving it... it is a matter of FAITH... I have never claimed what we believe isn't faith... we ALL were NOT there.

All you can do is slam someone else's math-work or quote the same changing text-book, but you don't show your evidence nor your mathematical equations factoring any possible factors that may have occurred... Show us your work.

The Bible is not a "science" book I agree, otherwise it would be changing it's figures and facts all the time! If we so much as change a word you guys yell.. "telephone game" ...your faith-books change all the time and the State pays for it... that is why I call it a State religion.
14 months ago: Stan,

Here is a good link that shows why we have differing races according to the Bible...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...

If you asked those same questions of your text-books, what would they say?
If you are going to ask questions, or say someone "doesn't know what he's talking about" please do-tell what information we are missing to make logical conclusions. Otherwise you just appear to be saying blaa blaa baa baaa baaaa...
like you are accusing others of doing. Easy enough to point fingers, harder to come up with answers. Like I said before... your "scientists" have done the same as the guys you say are fudging it... your guys start at "now" and work a figure to match an historical point in time that they say existed... and that is faith.
14 months ago: Sorry Stan,

We are going to have to dock you a point for "ad hominem..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

When I gave you a point it was in ref to the lack of work shown by Heff... seemingly starting at the end and working his way to a conclusion... much like your "scientists", now Morris was a good lad and worked everything out step by detailed step...and have come up with a population growth that we see today as verified. Now if your "scientists" try and do the same... you are in hot water. By you slamming some good work based on your disdain for Christians, makes you the loser... of at least one point!
14 months ago: I don't have disdain for Christians for one thing.

If I'd done what you said, you should dock me a point.

But, I did take a good hard look at Morris' work.

Morris' calcuations are the same as Heff's - constant growth in human population since a particular date at a particular rate = today's population.

It just happens to yield vastly incorrect figures for all of history except for today.

14 months ago: This "Answers in Genesis" explanation of how the races turned up is talking about evolution, as if the Bible couldn't provide a better explanation.

So, if we take that web page as providing a factual account and we say "When did the first Caucasian couple appear?" we can see that such an event never happened, and answers in Genesis can't answer it. Nobody can. It doesn't mean that there aren't Caucasians today.

When I say that Heff and Morris don't know what they are talking about, they don't know about the actual history of the population of the world, or at least their theories ignore these facts.

14 months ago: Stan,

In the section "Colored skin" we have an answer to the "Caucasian" question is answered, and the reference to adaptation is just using our common observation and not evolution (one species to another) to explain it. As to when the "Caucasians" appeared on the scene... the Bible states it was after God divided the people at the Tower of Babel, by confusing their languages... this would in effect separate and divide portions of the gene pool that could not mix as before. This is the Bible answer for the "races" as we know them today... and not one of them had to come form an ape! See, God's Word the Bible has the answer... it just not be the one you want.


"In any group of "white" people today the ability to tan or produce brownness varies. Some just can't do it and pay the price—sunburn. Others produce Hollywood brown without too much trouble. We are even familiar with the person whose skin is just "naturally" dark. In a group of "black" people, such minor variations also exist, producing shades of blackness."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...
14 months ago: Stan,

Just in case you don't make it to the end of the article I cut and pasted it for you...

"Summary
The dispersion of people which would have followed the imposition of new languages at Babel, would have produced situations of cultural and environmental difference. These new conditions would have created a stress or pressure which would have acted on characteristics already present. With time, certain features, both physical and cultural, became associated with a particular group, and a separate race was formed. The races, in most cases, represent recombinations of pre-existent "created" genes, with minor degenerate mutation. The origin of human races does not conform to the popular concept of evolution, i.e. from simple to complex. There has been no "evolution" of genes which did not previously exist, only the recombination and degeneration of created genetic information. No race of the world today comes from a background of zero technology or of innocent, ignorance of God. All cultures which do not have a correct knowledge of God have got that way by deliberate rejection. They are not primitives in need of education and technical aid so that they can understand the Gospel, but spiritual degenerates in need of the Gospel so they can appreciate education and relevance of technology."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...
14 months ago: So, when did the first Caucasian man meet the first Caucasian woman again?
14 months ago: Stan,

The article covers that.... is this where we both go... "I know you are, but what am I?"
14 months ago: You say the article covers it.

But what do you say.
14 months ago: Stan,

I say that it was when Adam met Eve! This is the same answer for when the first of any "race" met of their "own" ...I believe what the Bible says is true... and scientific DNA evidence doesn't disprove it... rather, upholds it as fact...

"...(God) has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings..." Acts 17:26, New Testament
14 months ago: So, Adam and Eve were Caucasian, and African and Australian Aboriginies?

You know that two ethnically Australian people don't have African offspring right?

You are dodging the point, and I suspect you know it.

14 months ago: Stan,

You are smart! OK, I believe that after Babel, the gene pools were separated and no longer able to mix... with divers languages they were separated and could not communicate and had to disperse throughout the Earth. With first-hand info on the Ark, they could have made ships that could carry live-stock and other animals such as pet or just animals of conquest/interest... like Columbus did... to other regions of the globe. Many may have traversed by land-bridges, but I believe that ships were easily used as a major form of transportation.

As to the "Caucasians" ... definitely a "diminished" gene group... God probably did that so they wouldn't have the smarts to know that they really weren't Superior! But all kidding aside... the language groups and the "race" groups can be traced to similar points in history... I say Babel.

Were you just fishing to see if I was a supremacist?
14 months ago: No I'm fishing to see if you have an explanation for how the first Caucasian man happened to turn up at the same time as the first Caucasian woman.

Also, were the parents (2 each) of these first Caucasians also Caucasians?
14 months ago: Stan,

As I said, being separated their gene pools were diminished... and eventually we have what we have today... however in years to come we will see the remaining pools uniting together... just as our languages now are. I still think we have lost some of which we cannot get back, and some mutations remain... but it will be a healthier future for the human race if the pools again become blended.
14 months ago: Stan,

You probably hate this site by now, but if you are looking for approximate dates for the separation of people groups... there some divers material and other historical evidence for the Tower of Babel, where I believe the first peoples were separated...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation...
14 months ago: So, how did the first Caucasian man happen to turn up at the same time as the first Caucasian woman.

Also, were the parents (2 each) of these first Caucasians also Caucasians?
14 months ago: That site (http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/peleg.asp) seems to say that the tower of Babel occured about 100 years after the flood. How many descendants did Noah and all have in that 100 years?
14 months ago: Stan,

I think you have found your million dollar question! The Bible only lists the generations that pertain to certain bloodlines and settlements, or teachable moments... given that we cannot accurately say for certainty that the population was this or that. But what we can say is that people back then were very prolific... raised as a Catholic with parents that didn't use birth control we had 8 kid in our family... their respective families were 13 and 15 kids. Also in our town there was a family with 26 children counting twins and triplets... given the great gene pool and virility, one could say a family of 15 children per generation would not be unheard of.

The 100 years could be true, but we do know by the Biblical account that there was at least 3 generations before Babel.

IF that was so... the population could very well have been greater than anticipated given that Noah lived over 300 years after he left the ark and could have had more children. The population could have been over 3000 people (if each generation had 15 children per family) and up to 50,000 if they include the children from the next generation. I know that disagrees with the 2.5 increase... I don't know what happened from then until now... populations increase and decrease... the average now seems around 2.5 ...spike populations and plagues are mentioned in the Bible as well.... it all seems feasible.
14 months ago: Stan,

This has been great... talk again tomorrow!
14 months ago: I'm looking forward to it, Truthbrary but I don't know if I'll be on the computer to reply for a couple days.
14 months ago: Stan, the quote (for our readers)...

"if man has been on the earth for a million years or so, his populations have proliferated only in modern times. How could it be that the planet only now is experiencing a population crisis--why not several hundred thousand years ago, soon after man first appeared on earth?"

According to the solid generational increase in population, he is saying this population explosion should have happened a long time ago if a "million" years for mans life on Earth is true. You say agriculture and industrial developments caused this explosion only now... well, it has done more to shorten life with increased pollution, mining and poor medical practices. Despite the poor work conditions and so on... population has exploded until recently with population control measures.

As too fertilizer... are you aware that Mexico has the most types of corn on the planet? And they also are not GMO... guess what... they don't need Monsanto fertilizer and they are self-seeding! The whole world was in better shape in the past... look who is seeing things from the wrong end now!?! IF you look at archeology you will find more people lived in the country with large farms and families... only now we have been forced into cities and feed-lots.

Healthier and happier until "modern man" screwed things up.
14 months ago: I'm not arguing for or against the prudence of modern agriculural and industrial society in arguing that Mr Morris doesn't know what he's talking about.

I do think people are rapidly destroying the limited capital this planet provides.

I'm all for healthier and happier, but it is modern agriculture, not subsistence farming, that feeds the huge populations on the planet. As a proportion, fewer and fewer of us are farmers, freeing up more and more people to do other things than procure food.

Life expecancy has been increasing all over the world, in general, in recent centuries.

Medicine as we know it is another recent thing that decreases the death rate dramatically.

More and more of the world is being dedicated to mining, farmland and human habitation.
14 months ago: Oh Stan,

You might want to check that figure "2.5" figure again... it seems the stats crowd works it out differently... depending on which subject they are talking about... or when it comes to verifiable facts...

"Census Bureau projections show this slowdown in population growth continuing into the foreseeable future," stated the Bureau's brief on the findings. "Census Bureau projections suggest that the level of fertility in many countries will drop below replacement level before 2050... In 1990 the world's women, on average, were giving birth to 3.3 children over their lifetimes. By 2002 the average was 2.6, and by 2009, 2.5. This is marginally above the global replacement fertility of 2.33. This fall has been accompanied by a decline in the world's population growth rate and in the actual annual population increase."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_...
14 months ago: As Bible believers we at least have "eye-witness" accounts and recorded historical information... evolution doesn't even have that, without sources like the Bible. "They" merely have a random fictitious date that is so far removed from our present... by pure imagination it becomes credible? Sorry, we may BELIEVE the Biblical record is true without being there... but everything in the evolution camp isn't based on anything but speculation derived from less than legend. Even legends from all over the globe agree with the evidence we find in every rock strata... that there was a global flood; evolution would have us discount this massive amount of information and evidence merely because they said so?

Polystrate fossils are enough evidence for such a flood (like a tree that is a fossil through many layers of rock strata)...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...

...how did we get polystrate fossils? They have been existing of reeds, and not just hard material like trees. It is easier to point and laugh, than it is to come up with answers and workable models... "the burden of proof" as turned on the "scientists" that up until now have rested on their credentials to impress the oogling public.
14 months ago: There is "science", an activity that builds up a body of knowledge by inviting disconfirmation.

Then there is "creation science", which starts with the conclusion and dismisses disconfirmation.

One of these sciences is the source of the new scientific knowledge in the world. The other isn't.

When you say you have "eye-witness" accounts of Adam and Eve and the Flood, you also have "eye-witness" historical accounts of Zeus, Appollo and Krishna which you should incorporate.

You should also take into account the earlier "eye-witness" accounts of the flood myth, on which the Jewish accounts seems to be based. Since they are older, aren't they more likely to have been written closer to the event, and hence more accurate?

The evidence we find in rock strata from all over the world, specifically disconfirms the alleged Biblical flood. Science is not about people "saying so" and that being it. It is quite the opposite. Anti-science, however, is about claiming to know the infallible word of God, whatever the evidence.

The Scientists studying geology and similar sciences aren't obsessed with "lets distort everything just to prove the Bible and the Koran and the Greek Gods wrong." For the most part religion shouldn't enter into it. Their study is not "Anti-Christian" or "Anti-Muslim", just as with the scientists who add to our knowledge of chemistry and medicine.

The Bible is not of any particular help, hindrance, or significance to the physical sciences. Sorry.

You say it is easy to point and laugh. Would you point and laugh at an eastern Religionist who said - "My god book says "science" is wrong, so "science" is wrong. There's no such thing as bacterial disease, it's about curses and vapours". I wouldn't point and laugh. I've seen it all before and it's not funny.

Polystrate fossils are not contrary to anything known about sedimentation. You can read about it on a geology site, rather than a religion site.
14 months ago: Stan, you said...

"Then there is "creation science", which starts with the conclusion and dismisses disconfirmation."

I agree "creation science" starts with observable evidence. If you look at a can of Pepsi, you don't assume that it evolved... nor a building, plane, or a complex computer program... we take what we see and find out how it got here. As to other accounts of other religions... they are not as comprehensive as the Bible, and nor do they answer all these questions.. if they do please do tell.

However there are many flood stories available, and not from the "bad" Jews either...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...

I do appreciate the help with the "creation science" by trying to get all our "i"s dotted and our "t"s crossed... because it would seem unreasonable or impossible to "fix" what is wrong with the dubious evolution theory... or by now call it a myth...

"Debunking Evolution:
problems, errors, and lies exposed,
in plain language for non-scientists..."
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32....

14 months ago: Pepsi cans don't have babies that are a bit like their mother and a bit like their father, with a bit of random mutation thrown in.

Two parents. 10 Children. All children different from each other, unless they are identical twins. How did the individual kids get there? Were they spontaneously created by God without a gentetic link from the parents, or a result of the same sort of biological genetic process that all mammals originate from? If so, your proof that doesn't come from the Bible or another book of myths is what?
14 months ago: Stan,

Fair enough... I will give you my proof that doesn't require the Bible, as soon as you give me yours without use of your textbooks...
14 months ago: Let me get this clear, you are going to explain how children are spontaneously created by God without a genetic link from their parents, as distinct from the normal process that occurs with mammals?
14 months ago: Stan,

No... it is just that man does not know everything about DNA. Every few months "they" discover something new about it... genetic links are there... the "scientists" say that mitochondrial DNA links us all to fruit flies...

We all have DNA links that prove we are all human... that is enough. Any genes that fail to show up may only be "traits" that are not there in others.
14 months ago: Stan,

I know we all want the solid facts, but we weren't there. Because of that we need to accept by faith the conclusion (where we are) by a reasonable process based on that evidence. The stories of Evolution and Creation are just that... we need to determine which is supported by the evidence, and also determine who we can trust for it. And it is this latter part of the determining factor that is really the main part of the issue.

As a generalization many have called on God and found that He didn't give them what they wanted, needed, or expected... or they have had their conscience and wonder about God "educated" out of them... and it is true we see this world through the "glasses" we wear, one bias or the other; one hurt or another. As I have discovered, if we get the second part of the equation nailed down... we can see clearly to understand the evidence. That is why on the issue of "God" we must accept on personal level and not a intellectual one. And it is a perfect "stand-off" ...God must reveal Himself for us to really appreciate His personal presence.

You can explain this another day long, but if I am "blind" ...I am going to need surgery or a miracle to help in that direction. This is why the challenge is a personal one... if we call on the Lord as He instructed... He will answer as He promised.

"Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6

"And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." Acts 2:21
14 months ago: No offense to truthbrary, but why is he a know-it-all about geology, archeology and astronomy? Or is he a know-it-all about the great work of literature, called the bible? Or does he know it all from reading a website or blithely listening to some stories told to him when he was impressionable, perhaps a fairytale mystical view of how the universe is organized/ made up?

You know, I never crawled out of the darkness as truthbrary says he did -- like he had a bad past -- no, I have always worked hard, I was brought up catholic and had nuns teach me, licked that the first week I went to a high-end east-coast boarding school, then went to a high-end quaker liberal arts school, then I went off to grad school at UCI then started a non-profit company, got married, have 2 children, retired from our company and moved and live on a farm working for myself and not relying on others so much.

Now why is he, quoting literature as a know-it-all when he basically has for his justifications, a troubled past that was obviously poorly educated! You came out of the darkness lured by some clap-trap about being saved by god: why didn't you just not screw up in the first place, go to school, learn, work hard and be a helpful member of society? Having been a screw up when you were younger is no college degree, it is to be ashamed of: while you were a mess up, others were working hard to make a good, moral life, and now that you've come out of your hole from younger years, you feel like an authority on the age of the earth. This is all so damn stupid!
14 months ago: Pluto,

You are probably right... guess what? I know who I am, you are still tying to prove yourself... but I think you are worth every drop of Jesus' blood! And it is cool how Jesus can use the despised things of this world, the thins the world has thrown away to do His bidding, and be His representation on Earth...

"But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong" 1 Corinthians 1:27
14 months ago: Pluto,

I think it strange that you equate "faith" to something only a "deadbeat" knows something about... every job I have had I have excelled at, and have been self-employed since 94 without any income assistance. But just because I point to another's work; to a group that has had an education... all of whom are probably more accomplished scientists than we could ever be... you take that as an affront. I would hope you are better than me, but I suspect you are not better than those you have thrown in the "trailer trash" with me. I may have worn out a few corn-cob pipes in my day... but these guys aren't "hick" by no means... your arrogance takes on a new level.

I am just some mentally challenged hobo giving directions to the museum. The pay now isn't that great... but the benefits are out of this world. When our world comes crashing down... or is pulled out from under us... at the end of the day, I have hope.
Content Removed by Stan Five
14 months ago: Plutonmister, you say "No offense", but I'm not sure that's what you meant. I think you're a very smart man, and you're frustrated by what you think is so wrong. But we're each struggling through the world as best we can with what we know.
14 months ago: Here is (again) a list of "smart" people that support Creation...
"Do real scientists believe in Creation?"
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/e...
14 months ago: Stan,

"Virtually all evolutionists would now say that the various people groups did not have separate origins. That is, different people groups did not each evolve from a different group of animals. So they would agree with the biblical creationist that all people groups have come from the same original population."
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/ra...
14 months ago: If you think scientists are an authority on science then you might be interested to know that "virtually all biologists would now say that the various primates do not have separate origins. That is, the various modern primates have a common mammalian ancestor."
14 months ago: Stan,

..just going to copy and paste my answer from the other post, it seems to cover it...

You are too smart to let this one pass your notice... sometimes I think you are a "closet Creationist" ...let me break it down into terms we can agree on:
1) mate a human with a human = Human
2) mate a horse with a donkey = mule that only survives one generation
3) mate a chimp with a human = what evolutionists have been doing all along!
... bestiality is an abomination, it doesn't work and never will...
...I believe you are awake now... don't go back to sleep.

There are some really intelligent people that are simply blind, and some by choice...
...and yet others by God's choice... to shame them!

"Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done." Romans 1:28
14 months ago: You would have to be open to the conclusion that God is shaming you by condemning you to dodgy dogma.
14 months ago: Stan,

I think you are getting it... God uses that whole "turn the other cheek" to get bozos like me to humble myself, and have faith in His plan... God uses that whole faith thing to humble bozos like me to trust in His wisdom... Yeah, what you said!

I think God messes with us a bit, like I do with my teens in arm wrestling... He is bigger and stronger... but He likes the interaction and the personal touch. I believe that God even appreciates it when we are angry at Him... at least He has our attention. Even in His Word He says that He would have us "hot or cold" for or against... it is this indifference and "luke-warmness" that makes Him sick...

"I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see." Revelation 3:15-18
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...

14 months ago: Stan,

Do you have a link with refs for that "virtually all biologists" thing?
14 months ago: I'm still waiting to see how "Time is Relative"...

Any takers?
14 months ago: TCG,

Relative meaning... "kissing cousin" or twice removed?
14 months ago: Shut up! My guess is they will start by saying there was a "Big Bang".

That will be the end of the conversation.
14 months ago: Ok, I'll have a go.

Time is something that is typically measured by determining how long it takes for things to change.

For example, how long does it take for a pendulum to swing back and forth. How long it takes for the earth to spin around. How long it takes for the earth to orbit the sun.

According to the theory of relativity there is no such thing as absolute speed. That is you can only measure speed in relation to something else that is travelling at a different speed, such as a planet, or the sun, or the ground.

However, the funny thing about light is that everyone measures its speed as the same, no matter how fast they are travelling. Time, distance and speed are kind of more relative than light is.

So, if you are flying in a jet at 1000mph and shoot some light off the front of it to a distant mountain, the people on that mountain will measure the speed of the light as the same as the speed of the light that comes out of their stationary lightbulb. They won't measure the speed of the light from the jet as 1000mph faster than normal.

So, if you are travelling at enormous speeds relative to someone else, the fact that light speed remains a constant means that other things such as time and distance "adust themselves" to keep consistent.

This seems to make no sense at all. This is very annoying.

However, apparently, the GPS satellite system has to take this time adjustment into account, otherwise it would be way off. It takes it into account, and it's accurate.

Like I said, it's very annoying.

14 months ago: On the topic "Time" is most definitely relative... but I am going to make a quantum leap and respond to where you are going with this one. I know you will correct me if I am wrong....
http://www.apologeticspress.org/article/...

...OK I'm back.
14 months ago: Hey Truthie? How did you miss this one? Are you just getting caught up in your own little RR world? Too late.

http://www.rantrave.com/Rave/What-is-Nor...
14 months ago: TCG,

Thanks for the wake-up-call... you are right on both counts! My Mom was an invalid with MS for over 30 years.... it is no easy thing dealing with diseases that incapacitate. It is a pity that the system is designed to be more of a business than a public service... if National Security has central data bases... the medical system should too... but I fear that unless we yell and put up a stink, we don't see much action.

My brother has a child with CF, and is really struggling to work a couple of jobs and still be their for his family... more and more we are going to need to lean on each other in order to just make it. But, that's not all bad.

[Feel free to slap me up-side the head anytime... you know I need it !:]

Thanks for sharing man, our prayers are for your family...
...may God's richest blessing and healing be on your family in Jesus Name.
14 months ago: I'm in agreement with that. Amen.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.