No.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Dinosaurs are fake and leads to atheism!
- Thread starter Ktoyou
- Start date
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
It's available online. A quick read. Classic Asimov sci-fi if you're into that sort of thing.
I do not believe that anything roamed the Earth hundreds of millions of years ago but certainly do not deny that dinosaurs existed.
I believe the same.
Earth is only about 6000 years old
I believe some big lizards may have lived and died in the flood.
About 7500, actually, give or take 100 years. And the flood happened around 3290 BC, again, give or take 100 years.
Exactly, which proves secular dating methods are likely off by at least a factor of ten.
We no longer have saber-tooth tigers or fire-breathing dragons either.
And some survived the flood as well. There's evidence, both biblical and secular, of creatures that lived along side humans but that "science" would have believe died out millions of years ago.
Give or take 100 years?
That seem like a very strong assertion. Could you give the evidence for such a dating?
I think that there were particular primordial conditions on earth, this is something different than the Goldie Locks condition's to support life. These conditions are no longer in effect at least in part. There were temperate nutrient zones with electric storms. Within the ocean chemical reactions and physical properties of the environment created spheroid chambers like bubbles with a lipid bilayer. Sometimes amino acids were trapped in the bubble. Over a million years some bubbles split in two when the amino acids orientation was disengaged by a random protein present in enough quantity. This resulted in two bubbles with mirror amino acid combinations in them.
Someday in an accelerated fashion we will be able to simulate these primordial conditions enough to be more secure in our understanding of how this happened.
Last edited:
There has never been any serious defense of the silly theory of abiogenesis by even the most ardent atheist evolutionist scientist. Although most may not have admitted it, George Wald likely expressed the opinions of thousands of intellectuals when he said:
Spontaneous generation theory held that mice were generated from dirty rags. Spontaneous generation does not occur and never occurred in that complex a fashion; but generation of protocells did occur by chance and by chemical necessity under the slimest of odds.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
did you stamp your little foot when you said that?
As a professional chemist with a master's degree and years of lab work under my belt, I'm at a loss for what you think you mean by "chemical necessity"
Whenever I consider a chemical process, I always consider that there is an equilibrium constant at play. The process can be driven in one direction or the other by catalysts or conditions, but not willy-nilly, as you seem to be proposing.
You think? Nobel Prize winners like George Wald and Francis Crick did not think so.
The problem is that you're starting with amino acids already in existence.
Water is a problem for your position.
To add to the atheistic problems, where did the water come from, the big bang? If water was invented by the big bang then why are all the other planets we know of so dry?
I couldn't ever muster the faith that it would require to be an atheist.