Thanks for your input. Why didnt you post your best evidence? Its a recurring theme here "there are tons of examples’, ‘endless lists’, ‘mainstream scientists agree’… Majority opinion doesnt mean anything. Are you guys still proud you voted for bush and his dad?
Again, ambulocetus was a 4 legged land mammal with hooves. Not a whale. If youre an expert, how do whales mate? How do they attach to one another? …
Thats the only link i posted? Now youre just lying. Dont bear false witness.
Reef
I appreciate very much that you continue to respond.
But I do have to say that you are only responding. Not actually answering or engaging in debate.
Again, please be specific. We can talk in generalities forever.
I knew you were lurking! Thanks for the appearance! Any comment on how Pearl Harbor and 9/11 werent false flag ops?
Post the dates they were written please. Again, the Wycliffe/vulgate/catholic bible is not the one im recommending.
‘Although Wycliffe’s Bible circulated widely in the later Middle Ages, it had very little influence on the first English biblical translations of the reformation era such as those of William Tyndale and Miles Coverdale, as it had been translated from the Latin Vulgate rather than the original Greek and Hebrew; and consequently it was generally ignored in later English Protestant biblical scholarship. The earliest printed edition, of the New Testament only, was by John Lewis in 1731. However, due to the common misattribution of surviving manuscripts of Wycliffe’s Bible as works of an unknown Catholic translator, this version continued to circulate amongst 16th century English Catholics, and many of its renderings of the Vulgate into English were adopted by the translators of the Rheims New Testament. Since the Rheims version was itself to be consulted by the translators working for King James a number of readings from Wycliffe’s Bible did find their way into the Authorized King James Version of the Bible at second hand.’
There are no such things as MACRO evolution or MICRO evolution.
There’s just evolution.
But why don’t you give us an example of an animal that was created?
One that has no fossils of it nor its entire species before, say 10.000 years ago.
We don’t care what you are recommending.
We want you to explain why God couldn’t write clearly what he means before the writing of the KJV nor after
WHY isn’t the Catholic bible the same as the KJV?
A transitional animal. Thanks for your input.
So you *are *afraid to answer this question. I find it ironic that you have spent this entire thread asking for specifics yet you continue to spout generalities and second hand sources.
How long, in years, do you believe the earth has existed? In your own words please.
Youve obviously never seen a cow or horse before…Those arent whales.
Again, the burden of proof is on evolutionists to prove their theory worthy of being in public science books as fact. Why are you asking me to prove the bible to you? Im not asking for God to be put in the books. The fact that you dont get this concept is very troubling to me.
You are “debating” dishonestly.
I’m not asking you to prove the bible.
Let’s try this. If you won’t answer this directly and honestly, then answer one of the following:
A. Why won’t you answer the question?
or…
B. Please cite the passage (exactly) so I can look up the age of the earth, in years, for myself.
[sup]For your sake I’ll overlook the childish and laughable tactic of you being “troubled” by my question. You did open this as a debate, right?[/sup]
Read the first 8-10 chapters of Genesis (from the kjv). I cant explain it any better.
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/
All the best to you.
Ambulocetus does not have hooves.
Why do you state it has?
Hmm. I read the link you provided (thanks) and it did not say one word about how old reef shark thinks the earth is. Maybe you’re not understanding the question. I shall restate:
reef shark, I want to know how old you think the earth is in years, in your own words. I’m not asking how old the KJV says it is. However, if you agree with the KJV please free to re-state in your own words.
Sure you can! Fill in this blank:
The earth is _________ years old.
It’s easy really.
I suspect you have an unworkable definition of ‘observe’, at least as applies to your opponents in this discussion. Is Noah’s flood observable?
I am guessing reef shark is getting his bullet points from articles like this:
But he’s doing a pretty bad job and mixing up a lot of the counter arguments. Can’t you even keep your creationist talking points straight? you need to go back and brush up a bit.
The article by Harun Yaha does seem to actually have some good points against the claimed transitional fossil sequence from Ambulocetus to Whales, any one want to explain if its got any merit or not?
We’ve noticed that about your posts.
Your inability to actually engage in a discussion, simply throwing out Creationist tripe and running away, accompanied by a lot of utterly silly mixtures of politics, poor theology, and distorted history are not actually persuading anyone to do anything but point at your posts and laugh.
Why don’t you pick a single topic and make the effort to engage other posters at an intellectual level? Posting bumper sticker canards is really failing in whatever effort you think you are making.