Did God use evolution to create life

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Randy how do we KNOW it has been moving for millions of years. All of this stuff is simply based on what people THINK but not what people KNOW.

In the same vein that the analysts know how fast a car was moving when it lost control we can likewise backtrack geological events. Would you say that God created the car crash and the skid marks? Would you say God created a geological formation -and all the signs leading up to its creation?

[RandyWayne]

Atomic "skid marks":

Half Lives for Radioactive Elements

Radioactive Parent

Stable Daughter

Half life
Radioactive Parent - Stable Daughter - Half life
Potassium 40 -- Argon 40 -- 1.25 billion yrs

Rubidium 87 -- Strontium 87 -- 48.8 billion yrs

Thorium 232 -- Lead 208 -- 14 billion years

Uranium 235 --- Lead 207 -- 704 million years

Uranium 238 -- Lead 206 -- 4.47 billion years

Carbon 14 -- Nitrogen 14 -- 5730 years

[coadie]

Originally Posted by pelathais

This is the third or fourth time that I've posted this, and yet you just don't seem to be engaged in this discussion at all.

Evolutionary biology teaches that all human beings are descended from a single "breeding pair" of humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

Take that shriveled knot at the end of your brain stem and employ it in the task of reading this short article. Then you can say, "Science supports the Bible!" and do a little dance.

Using wiki to tell us the bible is not true.

This 'article" from wiki calls the bible full of false doctrine

Doctrine of original sin.

Wiki says EVE was the first human female. She mothered males and females and they call her the mitochondrial origin of humanity.

Wiki says the first human male, Christians call him Adam was as many as 80,000 years later.

God said he formed Adam before Eve. Darwinists say not true at all
If Eve had offspring, the sex partners were not male humans. Monkee sex.


Wiki says she did not become extinct but no male humans to date and have sex with.
So wiki says there was death before Adam arrived.

Pelthais says wiki is true and this verse must be false.


1 Timothy 2:13
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

1 Corinthians 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

When Pelthais attacks the truth of Genesis 1 and genesis 2, he either isn't smart enough to know that other scriptures support those verses and they would also have to be deleted. Or, Pelthais claims the New Testament verses are also false.

I believe God. I believe the Word.

Science supports the Bible!" and do a little dance.

Obviously Pelthais doesn't understand science or wiki is not science.

Action item for Pelthais.

Explain how eve had eggs frozen so that she could have a child with Adam 80,000 years later and be the first breeding pair of humans.

Mitochondrial Eve lived much earlier than the out of Africa migration that is thought to have occurred between 95,000 to 45,000 BP
Pelthais uses this from wiki to claim the geneology of Jesus from adam to the cross is not true. It began with apes and common ancestry.

"Y-Chromosomal Adam", the most recent male-line ancestor of all living men, was much more recent than Mitochondrial Eve, but is also likely to have been long before the Identical ancestors point

When they jump on the Darwin band wagon, there are a lot of scriptures in the New testament that they claim are lies.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

Atomic "skid marks":

Half Lives for Radioactive Elements

Radioactive Parent

Stable Daughter

Half life
Radioactive Parent - Stable Daughter - Half life
Potassium 40 -- Argon 40 -- 1.25 billion yrs

Rubidium 87 -- Strontium 87 -- 48.8 billion yrs

Thorium 232 -- Lead 208 -- 14 billion years

Uranium 235 --- Lead 207 -- 704 million years

Uranium 238 -- Lead 206 -- 4.47 billion years

Carbon 14 -- Nitrogen 14 -- 5730 years

And you don't have the original values for these chemicals. You speculate and extrapolate to arrive at the original values.

We have fun with these dating schemes because it is like measuring the distance to the moon with a 12 inch ruler.

Who made the elements?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by coadie

Using wiki to tell us the bible is not true.

This 'article" from wiki calls the bible full of false doctrine

Doctrine of original sin.

Wiki says EVE was the first human female. She mothered males and females and they call her the mitochondrial origin of humanity.

Wiki says the first human male, Christians call him Adam was as many as 80,000 years later.

God said he formed Adam before Eve. Darwinists say not true at all
If Eve had offspring, the sex partners were not male humans. Monkee sex.


Wiki says she did not become extinct but no male humans to date and have sex with.
So wiki says there was death before Adam arrived.

Pelthais says wiki is true and this verse must be false.


1 Timothy 2:13
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

1 Corinthians 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

When Pelthais attacks the truth of Genesis 1 and genesis 2, he either isn't smart enough to know that other scriptures support those verses and they would also have to be deleted. Or, Pelthais claims the New Testament verses are also false.

I believe God. I believe the Word.



Obviously Pelthais doesn't understand science or wiki is not science.

Action item for Pelthais.

Explain how eve had eggs frozen so that she could have a child with Adam 80,000 years later and be the first breeding pair of humans.

Mitochondrial Eve lived much earlier than the out of Africa migration that is thought to have occurred between 95,000 to 45,000 BP
Pelthais uses this from wiki to claim the geneology of Jesus from adam to the cross is not true. It began with apes and common ancestry.



When they jump on the Darwin band wagon, there are a lot of scriptures in the New testament that they claim are lies.

There is one small problem with your theory that any of the stuff Pel has said or that Wikipedia has said disproves the bible. Wikipedia says the MOST RECENT male ancestor didn't live at the same time as the MOST RECENT female ancestor. It says nothing about the MOST ANCIENT male and female ancestor.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

In the same vein that the analysts know how fast a car was moving when it lost control we can likewise backtrack geological events. Would you say that God created the car crash and the skid marks? Would you say God created a geological formation -and all the signs leading up to its creation?

Your analogy won't work. The car has reached stasis.
Darwinism says the molecules lined up and the car self created itself without external intelligence and created it's own energy from nothing to reach velocity.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by jfrog

There is one small problem with your theory that any of the stuff Pel has said or that Wikipedia has said disproves the bible. Wikipedia says the MOST RECENT male ancestor didn't live at the same time as the MOST RECENT female ancestor. It says nothing about the MOST ANCIENT male and female ancestor.

You need to cut and past from wiki.

Mitochondrial Eve is the most recent common matrilineal ancestor for all modern humans

Yesterday you proved to me you couldn't quote the bible or other posters with accuracy.

The date when Mitochondrial Eve lived is estimated by determining the MRCA of a sample of mtDNA lineages. In 1980, Brown first proposed that modern humans possessed a mitochondrial common ancestor that may have lived as recently as 180 kya. In 1987, Cann et al. suggested that mitochondrial Eve may have lived between 140-280 kya.

If this is true, you are saying the bible is false.

There were many other women around at Eve's time with descendants alive today,

More from wiki.

Like Eve, "Adam" probably lived in Africa; however, Eve lived much earlier than Adam – perhaps some 50,000 to 80,000 years earlier than Adam – due to the greater variability in male fecundity.[11]

The darwinist apologists say the bible is a lie. Adam the first human male with descendants living today and eve the original woman with descendants living today lived tens of thousands of years apart.

This is how they peddle false doctrine and say evolution is true, the bible is false and there was death before Adam.

Is wiki article true or false?

[coadie]

Discovered in 1974 by Donald Johanson, Lucy is special because she lived so long ago (3.2 millions years) and because almost half of her skeleton was found. (Most fossil finds are just fragments -- sometimes a tooth or a piece of a skull.) Johanson named her after the Beatles' song, "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/tryit/evolution/lucy.html

We have enough bones to fill a casket that are classified as bones between humans and apes during transformation. Of course there are books and books written on stories making claims how some apes had offspring that evolved into humans.

The deal killer is they have no actual DNA. They can't produce actual DNA but claim to know what it would be like. No proof. Just voodoo.
A lot of zealots are working hard to take a stab at proving a godless creation.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by coadie

You need to cut and past from wiki.


Yesterday you proved to me you couldn't quote the bible or other posters with accuracy.


If this is true, you are saying the bible is false.

There were many other women around at Eve's time with descendants alive today,

More from wiki.



The darwinist apologists say the bible is a lie. Adam the first human male with descendants living today and eve the original woman with descendants living today lived tens of thousands of years apart.

This is how they peddle false doctrine and say evolution is true, the bible is false and there was death before Adam.

Is wiki article true or false?

Read these words very carefully. MOST RECENT. Mitrochondial Eve was the MOST RECENT.... It doesn't say she was the MOST ANCIENT. It's not making a claim that she was the start of humanity. It's making a claim that we are all related to her and nothing more. We could also all be related to a much older woman but Mitrochondrial Eve is the MOST RECENT...

[coadie]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Read these words very carefully. MOST RECENT. Mitrochondial Eve was the MOST RECENT.... It doesn't say she was the MOST ANCIENT. It's not making a claim that she was the start of humanity. It's making a claim that we are all related to her and nothing more. We could also all be related to a much older woman but Mitrochondrial Eve is the MOST RECENT...

More gibber jabber

Afraid to answer?

Is wiki article true or false?