Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter ledhed
- 9,687 comments
- 446,962 views
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,453
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
Earth
What about Leviathans?
Isaiah 27:1
In that day the LORD with his hard and great and strong sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will slay the dragon that is in the sea.
Here's a little something that a good friend of mine typed up out of a book he was reading.
- 1,620
I would like to know the awesome engineering feat Noah must've had to pull off to construct the biggest container ship ever concieved, out of wood, with a few hammers and chisels. He must've had quite the ship-building skillz... Considering the ark would've had to be much bigger than any ship (more akin to a floating city) we could make even NOW, it poses an impossible logistical and engineering problem. Noah must've been quite the craftsmen. 
There would've been as many holes in the ark as there are in the bible's stories, and thats a lot!
And thats ignoring the fact the flood is an impossibility, regardless of geological arrangement at any time in Earth's history.
Its not even fair to debate really, perhaps the evolutionists should tie one hand behind their backs and only post while blind drunk, just to make it fair?
There would've been as many holes in the ark as there are in the bible's stories, and thats a lot!
And thats ignoring the fact the flood is an impossibility, regardless of geological arrangement at any time in Earth's history.
Its not even fair to debate really, perhaps the evolutionists should tie one hand behind their backs and only post while blind drunk, just to make it fair?
- 4,494
- Vancouver, BC
The ancient Greeks thought that a Giant Squid was the Kraken. It's all mythology of normal (although rare) animals. Perhaps Leviathan was a Giant Squid as well, the tentacles could resemble a serpents body. Dragons of course do not exist. Especially not fire breathing ones.
- 1,620
Mythical creatures have always been part of the human imagination, in every religion, in every culture and time. Kick arse big monsters make cool stories. Even if the bible mentioned dinosaurs explicitly, and had many stories about them (there is zip, nada, nothing..) it would just mean that like every other part of the bible, the author simply had a good imagination and/or had seen a dinosaur skeleton that was dug up and it got his creative juices flowing.
Dinosaurs were as real as you or me, but humans living amongst them? Appealing as an idea (it would be too cool), but sadly full of poop.
I think we should base our entire understanding of the history of the world on a 2nd or 3rd hand fictitious account of just how thick a certain unspecified creature's tail is compared to a certain unspecified thickness of a cedar tree. I believe it, oh yeah now that kind of story really talks to ME...
Dinosaurs were as real as you or me, but humans living amongst them? Appealing as an idea (it would be too cool), but sadly full of poop.
I think we should base our entire understanding of the history of the world on a 2nd or 3rd hand fictitious account of just how thick a certain unspecified creature's tail is compared to a certain unspecified thickness of a cedar tree. I believe it, oh yeah now that kind of story really talks to ME...
Danoff
Premium
- 34,043
- Mile High City
So swift,
Are we off of this "accident" nonsense yet? Have we reached an agreement that evolutionists do not think that human beings came about by accident? But rather by natural processes - that life and intelligence are the logical outcome of the laws of physics.
Are we off of this "accident" nonsense yet? Have we reached an agreement that evolutionists do not think that human beings came about by accident? But rather by natural processes - that life and intelligence are the logical outcome of the laws of physics.
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
danoff
Ok, here's the problem. They/you say natural causes. Well, where did the nature come for the causes? I'm serious. Gravity and magnatism are very apparent. However, they both require mass. So, where did the mass come from? That's my question. I understand that if you took a few million tons of "stuff" in a zero gravity environment that things would start to come together. But where did the stuff come from? That's the "accident" part I'm talking about.
- 15,855
- QLD, Australia
- Small_Fryz
if thats what your on about swift, where did god come from?
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
Small_Fryz
Exactly! As I said before. Asking where God came from is the same question as asking where did the stuff for the universe come from. There is no spiritual explaination that will satisfy an evolutionist. And as far as I can tell, there is no scientific evidence that will satisfy a creationist. So it comes down to again, what you believe.
Edit: Also what Pako said.
- 2,208
Pako
Yes. That's exactly what I'm talking about. The reference in the bible is obviously to whales, but the author of the book your friend is reading pulls plesiosaurs out of thin air.
The quote of the creationist author is "So, in the first chapter of the first book of the Bible, God may be describing the great sea dragons (sea-dwelling dinosaur-type animals) He created."
This came strictly from the vivid imagination of the creationist author, didn't it? As he himself said, the King James Version says "whales", yet he twists it around to "dragons", then turns them into dinosaurs. Give us a break.
Your friend even says Leviathan "breathed fire". Does he think dinosaurs breathed fire!? And you take this seriously? You think there's any validity at all to something written by a guy who thinks the bible is referring to fire-breathing marine dinosaurs?
Your friend could not have given us a better example of the fanciful, silly interpretations of the bible that creationists come up with. It's a perfect illogical progression from there to the Creationist Museum, or the roadside little-kids-living-with-velociraptors "museums", isn't it?
Danoff
Premium
- 34,043
- Mile High City
Swift
I don't know. I'm serious, I don't know. Stop asking.
How can it be an accident if the answer is "I don't know". How does that mean that I think it's an accident?
(BTW: I don't see how you guys have to question that but don't have to question the origins of your God)
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
danoff
I want everyone to take note of this. He says "I don't know" Now, when I'm challenged with a question and say I don't know" I'm looked with no credit and a person that just believes in a book that was finished about 2000 years ago.
You say stop asking. Well then everyone else needs to stop asking "where God came from" Let's level the playing field.
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,453
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
Zardoz
I was pointing out that the bible mentions animals that loosely fits descriptions of dinos. The passage in Job 41 may be meant to be literal or it could be that the writer was trying to describe something that man could not slay, but by the might of God, this evil (leviathan, demon, illness, addiction) could be slain. Keep in mind that dragon or leviathan was often used as a symbol to describe Satan.
- 325
Swift - Let me inform you of something. Most of creationist babble is taken from the bible and morphed to suit specific needs. That way, you can get all the answers.
In Science, it is impossible for one experiment, even one taking years, to validate all points of a hypothesis. Thusly, we can never get all the answers in our lifetime.
This is why we ask you to stop asking about the origins of the universe - there is no possilbe way to find out where all that stuff came from, and why it happened. In Creationism, you do not get that liberty, since you have the "good book" of all the answers.
In Science, it is impossible for one experiment, even one taking years, to validate all points of a hypothesis. Thusly, we can never get all the answers in our lifetime.
This is why we ask you to stop asking about the origins of the universe - there is no possilbe way to find out where all that stuff came from, and why it happened. In Creationism, you do not get that liberty, since you have the "good book" of all the answers.
- 325
Of course. Current theory explains what we can observe. It would take an understanding beyond that capable of modern humans, and a time machine, to understand the origins of the universe. (The religious copout to all this is that the Creator has no creator. Science doesn't work that way.)
I do follow science closely, doesn't mean you have to, but if you're planning to get in a debate against science, expect your theory to be smashed into the ground. It happens all the time.
I do follow science closely, doesn't mean you have to, but if you're planning to get in a debate against science, expect your theory to be smashed into the ground. It happens all the time.
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
(G)
LOL, I find this quite comical. So, you are literally saying that we CANNOT understand the origins of the universe through science. Hmm...should you not try another way? Not saying you have to go with the Genesis account, but if it's beyond the understanding of science, how can you you apply science to it?
Stop asking where the universe came from? Then stop asking how Noah fit all the animals on the Ark.
- 325
We could use science to get a rough idea on how it happened, but we'd need technology out of our scope to figure out exactly what happened.
We've answered your question with our knowledge, and that currently availible. It was honest. We didn't say anything along the lines of "It was always there," or the like.
However, for the Noah account, it was very different. People where there, and it was written down. It isn't the same as asking about the beginning of the universe. And it was placed in that book you hold way too much of an attachment to. (The bible is for morals, not science.) You have it all in front of you, why not give answering it a shot? If science really knew, it've been said by now.
We've answered your question with our knowledge, and that currently availible. It was honest. We didn't say anything along the lines of "It was always there," or the like.
However, for the Noah account, it was very different. People where there, and it was written down. It isn't the same as asking about the beginning of the universe. And it was placed in that book you hold way too much of an attachment to. (The bible is for morals, not science.) You have it all in front of you, why not give answering it a shot? If science really knew, it've been said by now.
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
(G)
Ok, so your entire theory has no basis in anything concrete in science.
But I hold too much of an attachment to the book that does explain everything? Not to mention how to live.
This is what turned me away from this theory in the first place. I'm not saying that science is iconsistent. But the evolutionary theory very much is. The goo may have happened, or there might have been multiple pools that developed different types of bacteria and what not, so on and so forth.
That theory has all the holes that you see in creation. You simply choose that as I choose creation through faith.
- 325
I don't quite see where you got that from.
No, not quite. Many of the "holes" you're most likely thinking of have been shown to you.
Many organisims that once existed will never be charted, soley because few if any of thier fossilized remains survived to this day. The earth is an active, changing place. Any fossils that do remain intact enough for proper classification can be destroyed by the actions of the earth's crusts. We know this, and so we can't get every single fossil.
But most of all, creationism is by no means based on science. There just plain isn't any in there. You're fine to believe it. But by no means should it be brought up in serious scientific conversation without some strong evidance that backs it up.
- 4,494
- Vancouver, BC
Swift
Whoah. Are you saying that science is a religion without faith/spirituality? If so, what is wrong with it? Is modesty no longer a moral?
- 3,802
You want evidence for one, yet you blindly believe the other. Odd that. You want inconsistencies, look at the book you use as your evidence. Show me flood evidence. How did Noah build a boat big enough to hold all those damn animals? How did animals from other continents get to the boat? These are only from the flood, but there are far more examples. Faith is indeed blind.
Imagine some one tells you they think the Earth is flat. To prove them wrong you take them in to space, and fly them around the globe 30 times. You land and ask em if they still think the Earth is flat. They say "yes". This sums up what I can tell about your opinion. No matter what your shown, no matter how strong the evidence is, you will simply ignore it, and believe what you did before. I seriously don't understand how you must think.
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
code_kev
Yeah, right. There's going to be scientific evidence for every single event in the bible. Right. Please, there isn't scientific evidence for half of the theory of evolution. But that's fine. But cause creation isn't based on science. I'm not afraid to say that. It's based on the power of God that few of you want to recognize. Now, that's ok.
However, you come at me with questions about the ark, after the world is created. I come at you with, where did the mass for the earth come from and I get the "I don't know" Now that's fine. But it doesn't mean you're right. Honestly, I'm getting really bored of the quesitons about the flood just like you're getting bored about my questions about where did it all come from.
Uh, didn't say that. I'm saying that to believe in the creation of on our planet from the gathering of matter(that we don't know how it got there) to evolution takes a lot of faith since there isn't concrete scientific evidence for it.
So, you just gave a very logical and well thought out reason why there are going to be big old holes in proving the theory of evolution. But that DOESN'T mean that the holes aren't there.
- 325
No, there's plenty of it. I just don't see how you can just discount over a hundred pages of posts without looking through them.
Please, for the sake of the length of this argument, don't answer questions with other rediciulous ones. It isn't going to win this debate. I haven't read anyone ask were God came from without the explicit purpose of pissing off Creationists.
Even still, we did answer correctly. We don't know, and for the foreseeable future, can never know.
The Flood is a legitimate point in your argument exposed to weakness. But you're question is mixing two different branches of science, biology and physics. It's unrelated to Evolution in the immediate sense.
Did I misspell something? I acknowledged that there are gaps in the fossil record. Every pro-evolutionist did. I know I'm also not the first to explain how those gaps appeared. We know the holes are there. We know that many fossils got wiped off the face of the earth. That's why there are gaps. Not all fossils survive. We make use of what we have.
Honestly, this has been said since the beginning of the thread. How did this even reach 100+pages?
