The Fossil Record Refutes Evolution

well thare is no such thing as billion's of year's ago only 7.000 years GOD made
us all not the big bang

 

So did dinosaurs exsist 7000 years ago?

 

ya

 

Except there people assume when it's said "Man was created in God's image", they mean physical. However, I doubt that. It means that we have a free will like God, being able to choose what we want to do, or not to do. And when we are born, we are sinless, and pure, like God. When we are created, we are the image of God. Not physically, but spiritually.

Phoenix

 

Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. Were the knuckle dragging guys sinless also? What I mean you wrote free will, and I am guessing that our hunched back ancestors were more animalistic which is to say not as rational as man today. More like a wild beast. and beasts dont have free will. They dont have a conscience. And as you wrote these hunchbacked fellows were god's creations. Right?

 

Phoenix, here is one for ya:

Say that our hunchback ancestors were created from dust by God, where animals created prior to this (by prior I mean have they been around for a few million years)?


stainless

David:

Your "theory" isn't a theory, it is really just a wild guess. It is up to you to come up with some evidence before we can discuss your scenario.


stainless

 

Why is my "theory" any different than any other "theory" being thrown around here? Just because it isn't your opinion?

 

no because you have no evidence


stainless

 

Show me evidence that I'm wrong.
Your ancestors may be knuckle-dragging, tree swingers but mine weren't.

 

I honestly don't know if they were "knuckle-draggers", I was just throwing that out as an example. I don't really know what man looked like back then, other than they think they looked similiar to apes. I'm not saying they are apes, I'm just saying that they could've looked like them. We do know however that man has changed over the years, in physical appearance.

And just because a man looks similiar to an animal, that does not make them that animal. I could look like Justin Timberlake, but that does not make me Justin Timberlake? Or I could look similiar to an ape or so, but that does not make me an ape, does it? I never said that men back then were "wild beasts".

Phoenix

 

Read what Genesis says. And, to make the point again, lol, I didn't mean to refer man to animals, or that they were hunchbacked, I was just making a point that are physical features have changed. I don't know if we were hunchbacked, or if we dragged our knuckles, I was just trying to make a point.

Phoenix

 

So basically, Genisis says that God created the world in less than a week, and life is about 7,000 years old. Yet if I look at a fossil, it is somehow millions of years old.

A book or evidence...hmmmm..though choice.


stainless

PS: Not saying God doesn't exist, but I really need to hear a decent theory on God, evolution, Genisis, and life that is much older than 7,000 years. This is the biggest issue (for me anyways) on whether or not God exist.

 

YOU made the claim, you show evidence.

What were your ancestors then?


stainless

 

Ummmm, the Bible. My ancestors have always looked like me.

 

How do you know that David? I'm not trying to be difficult, but if you make a claim, you need to show evidence to back that claim.

Phoenix

 

f-a-i-t-h

 

There is such a wealth of information and clear fossil evidence of the evolution of the species if one were to just examine them. This is not someone saying it is so, these are bones of actual creatures that not only lived but many of which lived, evolved, changed, and died out long before mammals even existed.

This is a great book that charts the evolution of different species through fossils. One species is found lower than the other in the same areas...the newer the fossils the more it looks like the modern version, there is a great book that charts the evolution of the horse from a small hooves creature that looks almost like a pig / dog. through fossils:

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/5992.html

http://www.amazon.com/Fossil-Book-Record-Prehistoric-Life/dp/0486293718

http://www.fossilmuseum.net/

http://www.agiweb.org/news/evolution/examplesofevolution.html

http://www.fossilmuseum.net/TreeOfLife.htm


If you look at the tapir, a little creature with a large snout like a pig, but which can be wiggled like a small elephant trunk, you have seen what the ancestors of elephants looked like.

Below is a great book I read about the evolution of cats...it seems to me after reading enough about it that all species seem to have evolved from earlier species and I see no reason why the human being is any different. We are, after all, mammals...biological organisms like any other.

http://www.amazon.com/Big-Cats-Thei...r_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227578291&sr=1-12


Through fossils we see that there was a time when there was nothing on earth, then we see the most basic life forms appear...these forms change and become more complex and cells specialize to the point that we end up with GIANT dinosaurs, they die out and then comes the age of mammal domination and evolution. It is clear from this physical evidence that there were all kinds of different species in the end and each one evolved from a lower order...even if human beings did NOT come DIRECTLY from apes, they came from an ape like ancestor that most likely had a common ancestor as apes.

Evolution is called a theory because all is not known, the exact timeline is not known and probably never will be....even so, there are enough links, snapshots in time, to make a VERY STRONG educated guess that, in essence, points to the fact that species on earth evolve and change...mankind can only build the best picture they can from the information they find...and they have found quite a bit.

I have seen that there is a very organize and very determined part of the populous, groups that exist for the sole purpose to discredit evolution by any means. Their aim is to teach creationism in schools as a valid alternative theory to evolution...or to rid the schools of evolution all together.

The difference between evolution as a scientific theory and creationism is the different way one goes about seeking the truth. On one hand one believes what has been written in religious text. God created man and woman as they are. The other is the combine efforts of a huge force of bright inquisitive minds (both professional and amateur) spending months in inhospitable areas, digging, cataloging, years and years of study, comparison of physical fossil records, and forming a theory from the physical facts uncovered. One is Scientific, the other is faith based. One belongs in a science class, the other doesn't.

Now I see nothing wrong at all in teaching creationism in a class devoted to world religions...where we teach students the different beliefs regarding the origins of man put forth by the religions of the world. I just balk at it being included in any way in a science class.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/

 

Well David, I'd love to shut off my brain and not see all the evidence thrown in my face, but I like to learn.


stainless

 

It sure doesn't seem that way- you continue to recycle the same issues & same arguments.

Why should my faith or that of anyone else trouble you so much?

 

read some of your post. When you realize that you have no idea what you are talking about you will then see why it bugs me.


stainless