PDA

View Full Version : Talk.Origins Archive



Zyklop
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 07:09 PM
Talk.Origins Archive (http://www.talkorigins.org/)

"What is the Talk.Origins Archive?" The Talk.Origins Archive is a collection of articles and essays that explore the creationism/evolution controversy from a mainstream scientific perspective. In other words, the authors of most of the articles in this archive accept the prevailing scientific view that the earth is ancient, that there was no global flood, and that evolution is responsible for the earth's present biodiversity.
Index to Creationist Claims (http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html)

newenstad
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 08:09 PM
Great link!

I think Iīll spend plenty of time reading the articles...:food-smil

HIM
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 08:53 PM
I have been to that site and others like it many times. They have some interesting articles indeed! The best ones are the article trying to support Creationist claims. I always read them when I need a good laugh. :rofl:

Zyklop
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 08:54 PM
I have been to that site and others like it many times. They have some interesting articles indeed! The best ones are the article trying to support Creationist claims. I always read them when I need a good laugh. :rofl:

Actually the goal of this site is to refute Creationist nonsense.

HIM
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 09:23 PM
Actually the goal of this site is to refute Creationist nonsense.

Yes I know. Sorry, I think I was a bit confusing in my post. I meant the links that they provide to Creationist babble. They talk about what Creationists say and how it makes absolutely no sense. The best one was when a real scientist made up a timeline according to Creationists. It was hilarious. I will see if I can find the link. :D

HIM
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 09:38 PM
Found it! I had actually saved it in my favorites a while back. I was somehow linked to this particular webpage via Talk Origins while I was scanning the site last year.

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/wise.htm


A Creation "Science" Geologic Time Scale
(1) 4000 B.C. Creation Week: (laws of science suspended)
Day 1 - Space, light & dark, earth materials.
Day 2 - Waters above and waters below.
Day 3 - Earth's crust and plants.
Day 4 - Sun, moon, and stars in place.
Day 5 - Atmosphere + animals of the waters.
Day 6 - Land animals + Adam & Eve.
Day 7 - Day of rest.
1,500 years. Pre-Flood "Geology." Laws of science invalid.
(2) Adam and Eve, talking snakes, etc.
(3) World's waters are in great Venus-like atmosphere or in ground
water. No rain, no ocean basins.
(4) Radiometric dating invalid; speed of light changed.
(5) Humans, dinosaurs, mammals, the "works," all live together in
peace. Both lions and Tyranosaurus Rex are vegetarians in Eden before
the "fall."
(6) Human life spans up to 900 years.
(7) Battle of Satan and angels produces craters on moon.

Flood Year: Flood "Geology" - ONE (?) year of normal (?) "science"

Rain - 40 days
(8) Big animals run to mountain tops. Not a single dumb human caught
in all the early flood sediments. All dinosaurs washed off only in
middle flood-time.
(9) Coral reefs (Guadalupe Mountains of Texas) grow to thicknesses of
half a mile during single year.
(10) Vast coal beds accumulate one on top of another, each as original
swamp deposits on order of 100 feet thick, all in one year.
(11) Mile-thick salt formations in Utah form by evaporation (!) of
seawater during (!) the flood.

Flood - about 250 days.
(12) Most of the world's sedimentary rocks dumped on continents to
average thickness of one mile, almost entirely during the flood year.
(13) Most continental drift occurs. Flood waters drain into the newly
formed ocean basins. Atlantic opens at average rate of 1/2 mile per
hour.
(14) Most deep sea sediments (average about 1,500 feet thick) collect
on the newly opened ocean floors.
(15) Hawaiian volcano built 30,000 feet high on new sea floor. (Cools
enough for birds and plants from Ark to colonize soon after end of
flood year.

Final Retreat - ? 100 days ?
(16)Volcano of Mount Ararat built 7,000 feet high underwater and cools
in time for grounding of the Ark.
(17) Successive Yellowstone ash beds bury 10 to 27 forests one on top
of another, all grown during single year.
(18) Grand Canyon cut by receding flood waters. Flood sediments
de-water and harden in one year to rock strong enough to stand as
steep, mile-high cliffs.

Post-Flood Geology - 4,500 years of normal (?) science to
Present
(19)From Ark, Noah (?) directs streams of distinctive animal and plant
communities to migrate to Africa, Australia, South America, etc.
(Ferry service ?) (Some creationists use post-flood continental
drift at rates up to one mile per hour !)
(20)Sun stands still for Israelite battle. Earth stops rotating and
then starts again due to near-miss by Venus out of its orbit ?
(Velikovsky)
(21)Only one ice age as post-flood atmosphere cools.
Geologists' abundant evidence of many great ice advances
separated by sub-tropical vegetation and development of thick soil zones
between some advances are wrong.
(22)Late-flood granite masses, formed at 1,000 degrees (F.), cool to
present low temperatures at rates in violation of all laws of thermal
physics. Fit to radiometric dates is mere coincidence.
(23)Extreme rates of continental drift typical of flood (1/2 mile per
hour) suddenly slow to present-day laser-measured rates of inches per
year. Accord of present rates with radiometric dates is mere chance.
(24)Coral reefs (Bikini, Eniwetok) grow 1/2 to 1 mile thick in first
1,000 years (rate of one foot per month) then slow to present measured
rates of inches per century.

Zyklop
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 09:39 PM
Nice find. I have to save this :D

The Horned God
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 09:44 PM
When I was in secondary school we had a very interesting visit from a creationist, he was a Baptist I think, he believed the bible word for word, that the world and all the creatures in it were created about 6000 yes ago. Therefor the dinosaurs must have existed at the same time as the early human, it sounded like bad science fiction;

http://people.uncw.edu/smithms/Ace%20singles/sF-series/F-213.jpg

HIM
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 09:50 PM
When I was in secondary school we had a very interesting visit from a creationist, he was a Baptist I think, he believed the bible word for word, that the world and all the creatures in it were created about 6000 yes ago. Therefor the dinosaurs must have existed at the same time as the early human, it sounded like bad science fiction;

The followers of Archbishop James Ussher are always a strange bunch and a bit out of touch with reality. I used to have some really funny James Ussher caricatures, but alas I lost them when my old hard drive crashed.

Death and the Sun
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 10:24 PM
Please do not make the mistake of thinking I'm a Creationist while reading the following.

(Btw, I haven't read everything on that site yet, and I may yet find the answers to the questions I'm about to ask below there.)

Evolution is a theory. It is a good theory, the best one we have, and very likely it is correct for the most part.

However, it remains a theory, because some central tenets of the theory have not yet been proven. (but neither, I should add, has anyone proven they are incorrect).

For example, do we really know what the "primordial soup" consisted of? Has anyone ever recreated the conditions that existed in the primeval seas? Has anyone ever managed to create a living cell out on non-living materials in laboratory conditions? Not to my knowledge.

Then there's the problem of micro vs macroevolution, not to mention the most illlogical thing of them all from the point of view of evolution: human consciousness. Human intelligence just doesn't make any sense, if you think about it.

newenstad
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 10:41 PM
Human intelligence makes sense or you wouldn´t be able to ask a question like this....

Death and the Sun
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 11:32 PM
But does it make sense that evolution came up with it?

newenstad
Sunday, July 3rd, 2005, 11:39 PM
Nature seperates the weaks...

...and sometimes you donīt need muscles to be the strongest...

HIM
Monday, July 4th, 2005, 12:25 AM
Evolution is a theory. It is a good theory, the best one we have, and very likely it is correct for the most part.

However, it remains a theory, because some central tenets of the theory have not yet been proven. (but neither, I should add, has anyone proven they are incorrect).

No scientific theory can ever be proven. But the theory of evolution is the most scientifically supported theory in the history of mankind; even moreso than gravity!


For example, do we really know what the "primordial soup" consisted of? Has anyone ever recreated the conditions that existed in the primeval seas? Has anyone ever managed to create a living cell out on non-living materials in laboratory conditions? Not to my knowledge.

Yes, we have a pretty good idea of what the "primordial soup" consisted of. Yes, scientists have recreated the early conditions of the primitive earth. And by recreating these early conditions, scientists were able to create amino acids in a laboratory in only a matter of weeks. Just think how much more could be created given a billion years. Check out the Miller-Urey experiement.

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/wise.htm

Death and the Sun
Monday, July 4th, 2005, 08:12 PM
No scientific theory can ever be proven. But the theory of evolution is the most scientifically supported theory in the history of mankind; even moreso than gravity!

But we can observe gravity at work every single second of our waking lives. It takes a lot of work in clinical conditions to observe evolution at work even in a very tiny degree. Gravity is a physical law, while evolution is still just a theory -- a theory with overwhelming evidence to support it, so it's safe to assume it is at least mostly correct, but a theory nevertheless.


Nature seperates the weaks

That's exactly the problem. Compared to most animals, humans are extraordinarily weak and helpless, especially as infants. Because of our large craniums, we are born unfinished (other primates spend the equivalent stages of the first months of a human baby's life in the womb), and we are by far the species that remains dependant on our parents the longest.

How did evolution, supposedly an unthinking process that inexorably follows the laws of nature, end up producing something as unlikely as human intelligence?

Zyklop
Monday, July 4th, 2005, 08:16 PM
How did evolution, supposedly an unthinking process that inexorably follows the laws of nature, end up producing something as unlikely as human intelligence?

Although I don´t remember his argumentation anymore, there is a good description about this in "Unweaving The Rainbow" by Richard Dawkins, which I read some time ago. Check your local library ;)

If I remember correctly the evolution of human intelligence is mostly linked to the evolution of language and abstract thinking (drawing maps etc), which gained early Humans the ability to invent hunting strategies. So those individuals with better evolved intelligence survived better and this way the brain size increased.

HIM
Monday, July 4th, 2005, 08:16 PM
But we can observe gravity at work every single second of our waking lives. It takes a lot of work in clinical conditions to observe evolution at work even in a very tiny degree. Gravity is a physical law, while evolution is still just a theory -- a theory with overwhelming evidence to support it, so it's safe to assume it is at least mostly correct, but a theory nevertheless.


Yes, but it is much harder to observe gravity on a large scale. For example, how gravity pulls stars together to create galaxies and how it becomes warped by a Black Hole. The General Theory of Relativity is still a theory just as Evolution is still a theory.

newenstad
Monday, July 4th, 2005, 08:48 PM
That's exactly the problem. Compared to most animals, humans are extraordinarily weak and helpless, especially as infants. Because of our large craniums, we are born unfinished (other primates spend the equivalent stages of the first months of a human baby's life in the womb), and we are by far the species that remains dependant on our parents the longest.


Last week I saw a documentation about a Czech who "owns" two little bears. What he didnīt learn them they donīt know ie: killing a sheep.
Humans have to learn a lot more and therefore they stay with their parents (and Mum is still an excellent cook and donīt forget Dads car ;)). When children living together with animals they act like them. Young creatures learn from the older and as a human being who have to learn a lot of things. In some tribes (all over the world) you are a man after killing your first animal. Therefore you need to learn how to act with some weapons and how to behave while hunting...

To life in "tribes" is the best way for humans. Everyone has different talents and you learn from the other to become a strong individual and strong individuals mean a strong tribe. As a human being you have to be interested in everything, you have to learn whatever you can learn and "force" the other members of the "tribe" to learn or train "everything". The better your are trained the better is your tribe and your tribe will beat all enemies. The smallest "tribe" is the familiy...