Faith ... is not the sole realm of Religion. go look up the definition of Faith and have faith that you understand what you are reading.

your 6000 year thing is not in the bible ... its some person's deduction of some dates in the bible that do not jive with what we know about how long people can actually live. Physiological fact. You seem to want to go into physics and laws for the purpose of your lame anti evolution argument now use it for your lame 6000 year old bible people argument.

Your dismissal of c-14 dating is premature. it gets faultier after 20k years but does not disintegrate so by the science community [of which I can assume you are not part of] it is still used and accepted. Also there are other ways of dating geologically, that in a properly excavated site, goes way , way back into millions of years and is very acceptable when dealt with by professionals.

Now ... a creator ... He? ... how about It? ... no masculinity involved.

Evolution is beyond life ... it also goes to our Earth ... evolving out of star dust and our Galaxy too. We are observing 13.8 billion years at the speed of light for size of the known Universe. The earth is a tiny dot in a mid sized galaxy in a small galactic cluster in this one of possibly many Universes that 'a creator' made to evolve. [if you so want to believe in a creator] ... The Earth would be about as significant to this 'creator' as one green algae cell would be in a frog pond.

You humans think too much of yourselves.

Ussher deduced that the first day of creation began at nightfall on Saturday, October 22, 4004 BC, in the proleptic Julian calendar, near the autumnal equinox. He elsewhere dates the time to 6 pm. Lightfoot similarly deduced that Creation began at nightfall near the autumnal equinox, but in the year 3929 BC.WIKI


I still meet People who tell me that Cro-Magnon wasn't really a Man,since God didn't create him,and therefore he was lacking a Soul!

Certainly ! And how about this one?

If the earth is 4.5 billion years old and Adam is 6,000 yrs old. How does this fit together?

Genesis 1:27
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.



We do not look or act like God. We need to be changed to look like God.

1 Corinthians 15:51
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—

1 Corinthians 15:42
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable;

Philippians 3:21
who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.




Should Gen 1:27 be translated " So God is creating man in his own image, in the image of God he is creating them, male and female he is creating them"

To me that makes a lot more sense, because nobody is like God until after the resurrection.

My apologies, Adam is dated back 6000 years ago, so 4000 BC

Saturday, October 22, 4004 BC

So did Dinosaurs exist before the planet or have I read that wrong? Or maybe as the planet was moving it picked up Dinosaur Bones from other planets along the way making them look like they belonged to earth? This whole when did the world began in terms of religion is confusing, I vote Science, although more complex it actually makes more sense.

"Sonic hedgehog gene provides evidence that our limbs may have evolved from sharks' gills"



"Latest analysis shows that human limbs share a genetic programme with the gills of cartilaginous fishes such as sharks and skates, providing evidence to support a century-old theory on the origin of limbs that had been widely discounted.

An idea first proposed 138 years ago that limbs evolved from gills, which has been widely discredited due to lack of supporting fossil evidence, may prove correct after all—and the clue is in a gene named for everyone's favourite blue hedgehog.

Unlike other fishes, cartilaginous fishes such as sharks, skates and rays have a series of skin flaps that protect their gills. These flaps are supported by arches of cartilage, with finger-like appendages called branchial rays attached.

In 1878, influential German anatomist Karl Gegenbaur presented the theory that paired fins and eventually limbs evolved from a structure resembling the gill arch of cartilaginous fishes. However, nothing in the fossil record has ever been discovered to support this.

Now, researchers have reinvestigated Gegenbaur's ideas using the latest genetic techniques on embryos of the little skate—a fish from the very group that first inspired the controversial theory over a century ago—and found striking similarities between the genetic mechanism used in the development of its gill arches and those in human limbs.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-04-sonic-hedgehog-gene-evidence-limbs.html#jCp"

the seed of mankind spreading every where~~~~till the earth was totally occupy.....then war~~~~then the seeds returns again~~~~~~or spores~~~~~~~~~~~"don't using that word" no they will.......

Its always funny reading through these types of posts. You have someone going on about more evidence for evolution and big bang and so on and it all sounds some what logical as to this is how something happened or might of happened. On the flip side you end up with some religious nutter that responds in a way like "and then the lord blessed us with his divine smile" and this somehow makes scientific evidence obsolete. I think these religious nutters need to have a psychological assessment because what they say is well over the line of mentally ill so one must only assume that they behave in a mentally ill way also and that they are danger to themselves and more importantly a danger to others.

Before you regurgitate any claims you should check them.

[The law of increasing entropy, also known as the second
law of thermodynamics, stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill", toward disorganization and decreased
complexity.]

No it doesn't. A better statement would be "in every real process the sum of the entropies of all participating bodies is increased."
If you don't include all the participating bodies, the law doesn't hold. This is usually expressed as the law only applying to 'closed systems'. The real world is not a closed system as the sun dumps huge amounts of energy on the Earth, as you go on to misrepresent.

[Evolutionists may argue that evolution is a fact anyways]
It is a fact because it has been observed. Try this reference:
http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplained/a/ObservedEvolution.htm

[... the conflict is resolved by noting that the earth is an "open system"]
There is no conflict.

cool... someone with some actual knowledge and logic represents here...

evolution may not be "fact", but it is pretty close to it... if someone is believing in a creator theory, just remember, there is not a lot of logic to base it on... that whole idea is just based on the fact that you can't explain why things happen the way they do, so they create a mythical being to fill in the blanks...

This statement is quite the opposite of reality.
Life rises and takes root on planets that support such life. There are literally BILLIONS of planets just in our Milky Way galaxy not to mention the Trillions of planets in the BILLIONS of other galaxies.
To think "someone" picked this planet for it's habitual nature is ridiculous.
There is life all over the universe, the earth is just an insignificant speck in a incredible universe teeming with life!

people just don't get the mathematics involved in this...

our galaxy = 100 billion stars = 10 trillion planets... so if 1% of those are in the "goldilocks zone, thats a billion planets that could support life as we know it...

and to complicate that further, there's over 100 billion galaxies (est.) that we know of...

Darwin did pretty good with the resources he had to work with!

Wait for it, any moment now we are going bound to get some medley of speech that rifles like this “Ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish of the sea inform you. Which of these does not know that the hand of the Lord has done this? In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.”

I have asked the animals and I got a Woof, a Meow, a Baa and a Moo and they didn't teach me anything, except when I observed them for a length of time, I saw them do more or less what we do but on a much limited mental budget but still they pull off survival well enough.

I asked the birds and their tweets were less understanding than the ones on twitter and didn't tell me anything. I spoke to the earth and that was a waste of my time and didn't teach me anything except for the fact that no matter what the climate, life will find a way. The fish didn't inform me of anything but tasted good with chips. Which of these doesn't know that the hand of the has done this? Easy question, none. In his hand is the life of every creature? Now this makes me think "the lord" that I haven't met IS the Earth? and he is the breath of all mankind or waste of breath rather without any actually proof.

I can obtain rapid proof of me making a cake so if there isn't rapid proof of whoever creating the earth then I don't want everyones time wasted. Besides, isn't obvious that all Atheism would be wiped out the second, whoever this imaginery person is supposed to be, if he was to appear and commune with the much more civilised than thousands of years ago world. But until then, the only ones that will ultimately be able to say "I told you so" is us. Have a nice day planet earth, whatever the weather.

Yes, I seen a show on science channel last week about what's now the most viable orgin now. Read about some scientists on some site how about 2 years ago they recreated conditions that they think would have got all living beings started and the results were astonishing. Their test was the same exact idea as the show on science channel. Has anyone viewed the single tree of life that links all living beings as coming from a single source? It's available for everyone to see.

Very spot on. God is MERELY a story, just as Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny ,the tooth fairy. Now we all believed in these characters when we were small, before we knew better, we had faith. As we come of age, we wonder and ask questions and find out, damn none if these are real. Then we get proof they are not real. Now for someone as God is supposed to be, since no proof exists that he is real, one would figure if he really was, then he would make hisself known and he hasn't and why well because he don't frigging exist .The answers are here all around us these believers refuse to seek and I guarantee you they all doubt the existance on occasions, but push it aside, until they all harness their brains full intellect, they'll keep on believing in a nothing that is nothing. Interestingy, most all athiests ARE more intellect than people who believe in God. That info is there too but I bet they won't seek it cause they think their God has the answer.

I would be interested in the basis of your opinion and your refutation of the overwhelming evidence in favour of the theory of evolution.


That's like saying "the fact that my DNA closely resembles my brother's does not mean we're related".


We ARE apes. Humans and chimps have evolved differently (because of different environmental pressures) from a common ape ancestor.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evograms_07


You are begging the question by asking 'who'. What evidence do you have that these things were brought into existence by a person? A better question would be 'how did these things come to be?'


I assume you are aware that the Earth's orbit is an ellipse so there is no 'exact measurement' of its distance from the sun? It varies between about 147 and 152 million kilometers. I wouldn't call a variation of 5 million kilometers 'exact'.
The moon's rotational speed has been locked to the time of its orbit around the Earth by tidal forces.


The one factually correct thing you have written.


There are countless creation myths and they appear in all cultures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths

A basic book on astronomy should give actual answers to most of your questions.