| Off Topic > Off Topic |
| Missing Link Found |
| << < (29/64) > >> |
| Block Builder:
The stuff to make life couldn't have always existed? |
| Thorax:
--- Quote from: Block Builder on May 21, 2009, 07:35:02 PM ---The stuff to make life couldn't have always existed? --- End quote --- --- Quote from: Thorax ---God wasn't made. He always has existed. Now, you make a good point by stating that life could just be "here", but science has already proven that there is a beginning. Now you could say that super molecule that started it has always been here, but then how would it have exploded if it was going on indefinitely? The only possible answer I've ever heard somewhat clearly answer this question is that the universe is slowly contracting to the size of a molecule, then exploding and expanding to what it is today, only to be sucked back in and start the process over again. Now I have some personal theories as to why this wouldn't work, but I won't state them because they'd be misinterpreted as fact. --- End quote --- Read. |
| General Omega:
I will skip all the bible stuff for I have not done any studying and I am more interested in TF2 then reading the bible right now. I will,however proceed with the science stuffs. --- Quote from: Thorax on May 21, 2009, 07:20:21 PM ---The mathematical challenges of this theory almost make it difficult to believe. The average number of mutations in an organism is 1 in 10 billion (107). To get 2 related mutations is 1 in 100 trillion (1014). To get 3 related mutations is 1 in 1 billion-trillion (1021). To get just 4 related mutations is 1 in 1028. And just 4 mutations aren't enough to make any real, progressive structural changes. Not to mention you'd have to multiply the chances by 2 so that there would be 2 organisms with the same mutations. I'm not even going into detail on the chances of survival and the odds of the two mutated organisms meeting and having off-spring that would survive to carry on those traits and mate. Although it is possible, it's not probable. Life as we know it was not a stuff load of mutations at one time. It was 1 or two over the course of centuries. Life can also evolve by the preferance of one thing to another. So if a bird likes flowers more then fish, the beaks would be shaped diffrently to be better suited to that food source. A combination of mutations, eviromental preferances and other factors cause evolution. The whole process of Carbon Dating (Also know as C-14 dating) is a correct one, but there is one flaw in the starting assumptions on which it was created. Dr. Willard Libby (The man who came up with the method) ignored a simple, yet important fact. Assuming you know how the process works, if the input of Carbon into the atmosphere is equal to the decay of it, it's said to be in equilibrium. If it's not, it becomes extremely hard to calculate. Now in Dr. Libby's original work, he believed that the earth is billions of years old, but it wasn't in equilibrium. This offset him because he believed that the earth was old enough to reach it. His calculations showed that it would have take 30,000 years to reach that point. Dr. Libby chose to continue on with his work, but he was misinterpreting the data. If the atmosphere wasn't in equilibrium, then the earth could be a lot younger, meaning that all those billions of years could be reduced to mere thousands. Carbon is reused a ton of times by plants and animals. It is just not going to stay in the air. God wasn't made. He always has existed. Now, you make a good point by stating that life could just be "here", but science has already proven that there is a beginning. Now you could say that super molecule that started it has always been here, but then how would it have exploded if it was going on indefinitely? The only possible answer I've ever heard somewhat clearly answer this question is that the universe is slowly contracting to the size of a molecule, then exploding and expanding to what it is today, only to be sucked back in and start the process over again. Now I have some personal theories as to why this wouldn't work, but I won't state them because they'd be misinterpreted as fact. We are in just one of many realities. The rules in those are different. In our universe, matter has to be in balance but also has to be created. There is nothing to say that there was an original universe with the rules saying that you can create stuff or it can be spontaneously made out of nowhere. All that remains is that that matter goes from A => B. Blackholes take matter in. And everything has an opposite. We all have the same facts. We have the same earth, the same stars, same universe, same bones, same dirt, same everything. It's how we interpret them that gives us different beliefs. K I have yet to see the "Big Bang" reproduced in an experiment. I do not want to die, do you? --- End quote --- |
| TheWorm:
--- Quote from: Thorax on May 21, 2009, 07:20:21 PM ---The sun doesn't determine time, it's simply an indicator. And the first day would still have been Twenty-four hours because God would have designed the sun's gravitational pull to allow the earth to travel around it in Twenty-four hours. --- End quote --- Hm, but you're wrong. According to your beloved book, God did not in fact make the Earth revolve around the Sun, but he made the Sun revolve around the Earth. There is also proof against the twenty-four hour day, as in Psalms 90:4 it is explained that one day to God is equal to thousands of years. |
| Swholli:
--- Quote from: Thorax on May 21, 2009, 07:20:21 PM --- I have yet to see the "Big Bang" reproduced in an experiment. --- End quote --- Ha ha ha, LHC. Duh. If it works, in your face, if it doesn't, then in mine. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |