Skeptics, Where Is Your Evolution History?

@ElwoodBlues [quote]All your claims are refuted in the following sequence of videos[/quote]

Claims are for those who have to guess, I give testimonies to what is true. Your claims, ElwoodBlues, don't cut it.

Your opinion, @GodSpeed63 is worth every penny I paid for it!

@GodSpeed63 [quote]Claims are for those who have to guess, I give testimonies to what is true.[/quote]

@ElwoodBlues That is so simplistic and silly! Noone is refuting natural selection, and adaptation! But evolutionists are jumping to conclusions about some adaptation and genetic similarities. Corona virus is a good example of adaptation, and all animals adapt and change, we even adapt and change according to diet, and climate, some. We are not evolving though, we are adapting. That does not at all explain major changes in animals from one kind of frog to a human being, those are guesses. flaws in evolution theory!
1. According to some people they believe we came from a pond, I do not believe that is possible.
2. Change happens quickly not millions of years. The theory contradicts itself. Viruses change and adapt but it does not turn into a dog. how do we know? Because many animals are the same regardless of climate and nutrition. Man foreinstance have not evolved, we're getting dummer 😂
3. It does not explain where the first cell came from.
4. God tells us he made man in one day, 6000 years ago, in one day fully grown.
5. if we have evolved from a primitive man we would see many more than just a few. Probably nutritional deformities or climate adaptations of modern man is the explanation.
6. If we have similar genetics as some apes it is a jump to assume we came from apes. That's like saying the moon has dark areas, my cookies have chocolate chips, so the moon has chocolate chips, and they might be related, so my cookies must have originated from the moon 😂

@Carazaa CLOCKS is mostly what I'll talk about. But I'll briefly address your points.

[quote]1. According to some people they believe we came from a pond, I do not believe that is possible.[/quote]
You'd have to point me to specific claims about "ponds." I don't know what you're referring to.
[quote]2. Change happens quickly not millions of years. [/quote] Single "cell" organisms evolve quickly, large mammals evolve over many millions of years.
[quote]3. It does not explain where the first cell came from.[/quote]
True. There are other theories about how organic molecules form, especially in the presence of sunlight, rain, and lightning.
[quote]4. God tells us he made man in one day, 6000 years ago, in one day fully grown.[/quote]
Below I will be describing several forms of "clocks" that indicate things on earth have been happening for much more than 6000 years.
[quote]5. if we have evolved from a primitive man we would see many more than just a few. [/quote] Depends on how long since the last 'primative man' lived. Lots of organic matter can rot away in 40,000 years.
[quote]6. If we have similar genetics as some apes it is a jump to assume we came from apes.[/quote]
The similarities go gene by gene. It's more like comparing the text of the 1603 version of Shakespeare's [i]Hamlet[/i] to the 1623 text. I'd say, based on scene by scene and act by act correspondences that the 1623 version 'descended' from the 1603 version. Likewise with the ape family tree.

[sep][sep][center]CLOCKS[/center][sep][sep]
Visit any limestone cave. Stalactites grow at a rate of about 1mm per 10 years. So a 30 meter stalactite has been growing about 100,000 years. And close examination of cross sections shows the year by year layering (where rainfall is seasonal). These stalactites can be found all over the world. The ages are corroborated by radiometric carbon dating.
[image=https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dominik-Marti/publication/278672394/figure/fig1/AS:614063969169413@1523415667274/Photographs-cross-sections-of-the-stalagmites-M1-and-M2-showing-the-locations-of-the-U.png]

Tree rings are clocks. The oldest living tree goes back about 4800 years. But wood from dead trees can contain records of volcanic events, thus extending the record back much farther.
[quote] Originally developed for climate science, the method is now an invaluable tool for archaeologists, who can track up to 13,000 years of history using tree ring chronologies for over 4,000 sites on six continents.[/quote]The ages are corroborated by radiometric carbon dating (establishing age by measuring ratios of radioactive vs stable isotopes).

Seasonal snowfall on glaciers accumulates to form countable layers. Greenland ice sheet layers can be counted back about 110,000 years. The ages are corroborated by radiometric dating. Other glaciers go back as far as 700,000 years, but on those the older data is mostly radiometric dating.

Salt flows from rocks into lakes and the ocean. If no salt left the ocean, that would give an age of 50 million to 70 million years. However, various geologic processes cause salt to leave the ocean at about the rate it's entering, so 50 million to 70 million years becomes a minimum estimate of the age of the earth.

Layering of sedimentary rocks - such as in the Grand Canyon - forms a series of clocks. These layers correspond to different stages in the evolution of life on the planet. The layers can be dated by positional order (bottom layer formed first), sedimentation rate, age of fossils found in the layer, and of course, radiometric dating. There are five main isotope pairs used for dating sedimentary rocks as well as the 'fissile track' method; you can read about it all here:
https://australian.museum/learn/minerals/shaping-earth/radioactive-dating/

Then there's all the fossils of extinct animals found in the rock layers. They're not exactly a clock, but they are an indicator of the vast amounts of time over which evolution occurs.

Of course outer space offers many clocks. Accumulation of craters on airless bodies like the Moon forms a clock. Shells of glowing gas left over from novas and supernovas form clocks (the Lambda Orionis Ring is about 1 million years old). The redshift of light from galaxies billions of light years away form clocks. The Hubble expansion of the universe forms a clock. The frequency shift of big bang radiation to form the cosmic microwave background is a clock.

No one clock is perfect, but they all corroborate each other pretty well, and they ALL give life FAR MORE than 6000 years to evolve.

If you argue "God hid those dinosaur bones (and all the isotopes used for dating) in the rocks" I can't disprove it. If you argue "God built all those layers into the glaciers and into stalactites, made the nova remnants appear millions of years old, etc." I can't disprove it. But you've got to ask yourself, why would God put all these inter-corroborating clocks all over the Earth and all thru the galaxy if they were all false???

@Carazaa [quote]Noone is refuting natural selection, and adaptation! But evolutionists...[/quote]
And that right there is when I tuned you out. You use language ridiculing evolutionary theory.

@LordShadowfire Evolution is Satans lie!

@ElwoodBlues
This is a picture from a Chinese atheist evolutionistDaniel Lee who explains evolution!

Cells are made from God and we did[b] not [/b]come from fish! We are made by God fully human on day 6. I am not about to discuss a silly theory!

@Carazaa I don't know the true source of your image; it was more likely made to try and discredit evolution. I agree it would be silly to discuss that image.

But what I was discussing was evidence for the VAST amounts of time available for things to happen on Earth. The evidence, from many different physical phenomena says Earth is BILLIONS of years old; many interpreters of the Bible agree with billions of years. Certain other Bible interpreters say 6000 years.

Many devout Christians consider evolution compatible with the Bible. My argument is only about time; you can argue the evolution questions with them.
[b]https://biologos.org/articles/famous-christians-who-believed-evolution-is-compatible-with-christian-faith[/b]

@ElwoodBlues No, the christians who believe in evolution are not devout Christians. They are not reading their Bibles, they are followers of any crazy thing, likely voted for Trump because he "said" he was christian, they are not following[i] Jesus[/i], they are deceived by Satan like the rest of the world, they listen to pastors who went to seminary that told them not to study the Bible but to skim it for the exams, and preach a watered down gospel. If you study the Bible you know what Jesus said, and you know we are in the end times, you know that the Bible teaches that we are 6000 years old, and that God made man on the 6th day.

Jesus warned that many pastors are not born again in the last generation, and he will say to them

[b]"I never knew you"[/b]

I follow Jesus come what may!

@ElwoodBlues @LordShadowfire [quote]But what I was discussing was evidence for the VAST amounts of time available for things to happen on Earth. The evidence, from many different physical phenomena says Earth is BILLIONS of years old; many interpreters of the Bible agree with billions of years.[/quote]

That is just world view and not science.

@GodSpeed63 You have that exactly backwards.

Science is about evidence. Particularly when multiple sources all provide corroborating evidence. Science is an edifice built with many individual bricks. It doesn't need each brick, but a large assemblage of bricks will support a reliable solid edifice.

Accepting the Bible regardless of evidence is just worldview. So your theory is that God hid all those dinosaur bones and other fossils in the appropriate stratigraphic layers and faked all those radioisotope ratios? To what purpose??

@ElwoodBlues [quote]You have that exactly backwards.[/quote]

Wrong. The scientific evidence is there but your world views are not there.

@GodSpeed63 Would you be so kind as to point us to the alleged scientific evidence that refutes ages of rocks and fossils found in the geologic record??

Or is your theory is that God hid all those dinosaur bones and other fossils in the appropriate stratigraphic layers and faked all those radioisotope ratios?? To what purpose???

@ElwoodBlues Nope. He prefers to belittle you for asking.

@ElwoodBlues @LordShadowfire [quote]Would you be so kind as to point us to the alleged scientific evidence that refutes ages of rocks and fossils found in the geologic record??[/quote]

The alleged scientific evidence of ages in rocks and fossils found in the geologic record.

@GodSpeed63 The scientific evidence of ages in rocks and fossils found in the geologic record shows the Earth is 4.7 billion years old. Thank you for acknowledging that you are not communicating with integrity or in good faith. I had expected you to be a better representative for your beliefs, but hey, them's the breaks.

Visit any limestone cave. Stalactites grow at a rate of about 1mm per 10 years. So a 30 meter stalactite has been growing about 100,000 years. And close examination of cross sections shows the year by year layering (where rainfall is seasonal). These stalactites can be found all over the world. The ages are corroborated by radiometric carbon dating.
[image=https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dominik-Marti/publication/278672394/figure/fig1/AS:614063969169413@1523415667274/Photographs-cross-sections-of-the-stalagmites-M1-and-M2-showing-the-locations-of-the-U.png]

Tree rings are clocks. The oldest living tree goes back about 4800 years. But wood from dead trees can contain records of volcanic events, thus extending the record back much farther.
[quote] Originally developed for climate science, the method is now an invaluable tool for archaeologists, who can track up to 13,000 years of history using tree ring chronologies for over 4,000 sites on six continents.[/quote]The ages are corroborated by radiometric carbon dating (establishing age by measuring ratios of radioactive vs stable isotopes).

Seasonal snowfall on glaciers accumulates to form countable layers. Greenland ice sheet layers can be counted back about 110,000 years. The ages are corroborated by radiometric dating. Other glaciers go back as far as 700,000 years, but on those the older data is mostly radiometric dating.

Salt flows from rocks into lakes and the ocean. If no salt left the ocean, that would give an age of 50 million to 70 million years. However, various geologic processes cause salt to leave the ocean at about the rate it's entering, so 50 million to 70 million years becomes a minimum estimate of the age of the earth.

Layering of sedimentary rocks - such as in the Grand Canyon - forms a series of clocks. These layers correspond to different stages in the evolution of life on the planet. The layers can be dated by positional order (bottom layer formed first), sedimentation rate, age of fossils found in the layer, and of course, radiometric dating. There are five main isotope pairs used for dating sedimentary rocks as well as the 'fissile track' method; you can read about it all here:
https://australian.museum/learn/minerals/shaping-earth/radioactive-dating/

Then there's all the fossils of extinct animals found in the rock layers. They're not exactly a clock, but they are an indicator of the vast amounts of time over which evolution occurs.

Of course outer space offers many clocks. Accumulation of craters on airless bodies like the Moon forms a clock. Shells of glowing gas left over from novas and supernovas form clocks (the Lambda Orionis Ring is about 1 million years old). The redshift of light from galaxies billions of light years away form clocks. The Hubble expansion of the universe forms a clock. The frequency shift of big bang radiation to form the cosmic microwave background is a clock.

No one clock is perfect, but they all corroborate each other pretty well, and they ALL give life FAR MORE than 6000 years to evolve.

@ElwoodBlues [quote]The scientific evidence of ages in rocks and fossils found in the geologic record shows the Earth is 4.7 billion years old.[/quote]

That's a world view, ElwoodBlues, and not scientific fact. Science points to God as its Creator.

@GodSpeed63 I notice you 're strong on assertions and completely devoid of evidence. None the less, I'm compelled to ask: where is your scientific evidence for this claim that science points to your particular worldview of God?

@GodSpeed63 [quote]Science points to God as its Creator.[/quote]
What science?

@LordShadowfire [quote]What science?[/quote]

True science that is not polluted by evolutionary world views.

@GodSpeed63 [quote]True science that is not polluted by evolutionary world views.[/quote] Dude! You're just proving you've made up your mind before encountering the evidence!! That's a perfect example of a "worldview," [b]LOL!!![/b]

BTW, there's nothing about EVOLUTION in 110,000 yearly layers of ice in Greenland glaciers!!

There's nothing about EVOLUTION in measurements of radioisotopes in 1000 meter thick layers of sedimentary rock!!

There's nothing about EVOLUTION in observations of light that have been traveling from distant galaxies for 20 to 100+ million years!!


Light from these galaxies has been traveling for over 1 billion years!
[b]https://esahubble.org/images/heic0611b/[/b]

@ElwoodBlues [quote]Dude! You're just proving you've made up your mind before encountering the evidence!![/quote]

I've proven that I've made up my mind because of the evidence. Those posters show the glorious work of God with your misunderstanding of it. Those stars have not been there for billions of years as you suppose but for 6000 years instead.

@ElwoodBlues ❤️ The Holy Spirit teaches usall truth, Satan deceives, so please be careful. Being wrong about evolution will not have permament consequences, but being wrong about Jesus will.

@GodSpeed63 You didn't mention the galaxies, some of which have been sending light to us for over a billion years. Each spiral galaxy is made up of tens of billions of stars. Oh, wait, the Bible doesn't mention galaxies either. Does that mean they don't exist? Or does it mean the Bible is a historical document based on the limited understandings of people thousands of years ago??

BTW, the Bible mentions, multiple times, the "four corners of the Earth" (Isaiah 11:12 Job 37:2–3 Jeremiah 9:26 Revelations 7:1 etc). Does that mean the Earth is a quadrilateral? Perhaps a square??

Or does it mean that sometimes the Bible is not always literal, but sometimes allegorical and metaphorical? You don't believe in a flat, four cornered Earth, do you?? so how can you be sure which parts of the Bible are literal and which parts are metaphorical???


[sep][sep][sep][sep]

@Carazaa I'm making no claims about Evolution or Jesus. I'm stating evidence for the great age of the Earth and even greater age of the millions of galaxies we can see in the vastness of space. And I'm sorry to say that Godspeed63 is not engaging with the evidence despite his broad claims about science.