My rejection of the macro-evolution model has nothing to do with the Bible. In fact, some believe that the Bible leaves room for evolution. I reject it because it is false science, and has never been reproduced or observed.
That statement in it's entirety is flase and shows you have not done any real research.
I rejected evolution long before I ever became a Christian. As I mentioned earlier, genetics has disproven evolution conclusively. It may take while for the rest of "science" to catch up to this. But those at the highest levels already admit it. My own father in-law,the late Dr. Willard Centerwall, was a top genetics scientist and this was his conclusion as well. Evolutionists always make the false claim that evolution is only resisted on religious grounds. But that is another red-herring. The truth is, evolution is held onto on (quasi) religious grounds, and is every bit as much faith-based as creationism. Go back a few pages and look at some of the reasoning. Or perhaps if you can find some proof that macro-evolution has ever been actually observed or reproduced, please submit it for my perusal.
I personally feel that even Darwin would have given up by now.
No reputable scientist with any peer reviewed documentation has come out with any research that disputes the fundamentals of evolution.
If creationism had any foundation the Dover case would have not had the blow out it did against creationism. You can disguise creationism any way you want. It doesn't stand up to the science and it doesn't stand up in court.
The bottom line, Brendhan, is that when someone in the government or at a college tells you that a piece of marble is 1 million years old, you believe them and do not question. How is that any different from the fundamentalist Christian who asks his pastor and believes without question?
Because when I ask them to back it up with proof and show me how the came up with their answers they will show me and none of it is based on faith.
When some says that a diamond takes millions of years to develop, you believe them in spite of the fact that it has never been observed, but only theorized.
Wrong again. The very science that discovered how diamonds are formed is used to create artificial diamonds.http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-artificial-diamonds.htmhttp://www.popsci.com/beers/article/2006-05/flawless-man-made-diamondshttp://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Features/Columns/?article=BNArtificialDiamondshttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/02/040226070311.htmhttp://www.gemsutra.com/diamonds.htmlhttp://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/diamonds/composition.html
When someone says that stalactites take many thousands of years to form you believe that as well, and take it as fact. The truth is that we have stalactites ten feet long that hang from public water pipes that are only 50 years old.
Yes, and the mineral composition and density is very different. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-stalactites.htm
Stalactites formed from water pipes are generally limestone, in caves they are calcium.
I had a piece of actual rock with a tire track it taken from a lake that was dug out only 35 years ago, people have found 100 year old hammers imbedded in coal that was dated to be over a million years old ( that's an old hammer!)
Sorry your hammer is not proof of creationism. http://paleo.cc/paluxy/hammer.htm
Chances are your tire track has a better story than what you are assuming.
, there are footprints of humans found along side dinosaur tracks in Texas,
which National Geographic refused to look at when offered a tour
Again completely false http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC101.html http://paleo.cc/paluxy/color.htm
.The Icca stones in Peru, which are only a few hundred years old, have fully developed and fleshed dinosaurs drawn on them.
A complete hoax. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH710_1.html
We are fully willing to look at the evidence,Brendhan, but we are also fully willing to question it and ask the finders "How far was the apeman's head found from the apeman's leg? And wait to hear the answer, which in some cases would "5 miles".
Good here is proof of macro evolution. The issue is this is not some simple one sentence answer. You have to actually think. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
I have just completely dissected all the points you made that you thought had any merit. My biggest issue is that this dribble is trying to infect itself into our school systems. Just because you are not a geologist (nor am I). Does not mean the scientist are correct. But at least I am looking at the research.
The ideas you perpetuate are not only wrong they are dangerous. They elude to the idea that if it isn't clearly spelled out by God it simply cannot be.
Not all the answers are in the bible. I am sure sure penicillin was somewhere in the Book of Romans.... oh wait it wasn't.
I don't think I will change your mind. But I don't think it is correct for you to spout off unsubstantiated ideas and conjecture.
The idea behind Creationism (aka Intelligent Design) has been time and time again shown to be filled with falsehoods and a religious agenda. Not only by the
scientific community but by the courts.
I said on page four of this thread:
I will be simple here. This is why children in today's school system turn out the way they do.
It has been shown in this thread that there is a definite threat to the current education system.
Jerrymac, I don't know if the seeds of life on Earth came from Mars. But I know they didn't come Adam and Eve.