“The Scopes Trial Revisited” - An invitation to examine both sides of the origins debate

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
So-called “junk DNA” has fallen on hard times. Once the poster child of evolutionary theory, its status has been increasingly challenged over the past several years. Functions for junk DNA have been cited at other places on this website and in the Journal of Creation. In The Great Dothan Creation Evolution Debate, the opponent’s main argument, to which he returned again and again, rested on junk DNA. The author warned that this was an argument from silence, that ‘form follows function’, and that this was akin to the old vestigial organ argument (and thus is easily falsifiable once functions are found). We did not have to wait long, however, because a new study has brought the notion of junk DNA closer to the dustbin of discarded evolutionary speculations. Faulkner et al. (2009) have put junk DNA on the run by claiming that retrotransposons (supposedly the remains of ancient viruses that inserted themselves into the genomes of humans and other species) are highly functional after all.

 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Arguments every creationist should know:

1) Global flood destroys the belief in billions and millions of years. You can't have both. If there was (and there was) a global flood then the earth is young. Various lines of evidence support the global flood. Including ancient documents and histories from over 200 cultures.

2) Conflicting dating methods. Absolute dating methods using radiometric isotypes do get deep time dates. But they are in conflict with each other and are in conflict with other dating methods. There are many examples where samples of known age have been given incorrect ages millions to billions of years out. If the rock layers surrounding a fossil say its hundreds of millions of years old, but the carbon dating on the fossil, not rock says its only thousands, you have serious reasons to doubt their proposed millions of years.

3) Unfossilized fossils have been found. Fossils over a million years old can not have un-fossilized remains in them. The fact that there are many that do, show empirically fossils are not millions of years old.

4) Carbon dating has been used to test coal, diamond, un-fossilized dinosaur remains and returns ages not consistent with evolutionary time scales. (Thousands of years not millions). Which means all coal deposits, dinosaur deposits are young, not old.

5) Body plans for most of the phyla in the taxonomy classification were not supposed to be present in the lowest layers and supposed oldest layers of rocks. But they are.

6) Intermediate fossils are missing. Why is there not a blur of creatures? Not just a few missing links, but millions of missing links showing gradual changes. Why are there identifiable animals and not a blur of crossovers with billions of variations which is what we should see if creatures evolved? But what we have is creatures even a 5-year-old can differentiate from each other.

7) Irreducible complexity, examples of machines and processes are constantly being found in biology. These systems, processes show there is no step-by-step way they could be formed. Each component or process needed to be in place for these to work. A chicken and egg problem exists. There are many examples of these. Which show evolution could not have created them.

8) Instructions and information are found in every living creature. But information theory shows information only comes from a mind, and can not be generated by natural processes. So the coding in DNA to create proteins can not be accounted for by the natural explanation Darwinists claim.

9) Genetic Entropy is occurring in all genomes, plant and animal. Mutations are building up, and at the current rate of decay, all life could not be more than the 10 000 years old. Neutral and harmful mutations are overwhelming any rare beneficial mutations and are being stored in the genome and natural selection is incapable of detecting them. This is leading to genetic meltdown and extinction. Each offspring is passing on genetic errors which increases the genetic collapse. Tracking back with empirical rates of mutations observed, all plant, animal and human life could not be old. (thousands of years old not millions)

There are many more arguments, but these ones are quite popular with loads of supporting evidence to back them up.
 

Maldarker

Star
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,269
never understood the carbon dating method when you don't have a carbon perfect model "how to explain" um like a weighs & tares scale when its calibrated -wheres the actual thing that represents zero or the stock sample you align all your equipment with....you can cause radioactive decay to slow or accelerate so idk just never undrestood how they got here starting point.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
never understood the carbon dating method when you don't have a carbon perfect model "how to explain" um like a weighs & tares scale when its calibrated -wheres the actual thing that represents zero or the stock sample you align all your equipment with....you can cause radioactive decay to slow or accelerate so idk just never undrestood how they got here starting point.
Radiometric dates and distant starlight are the favourite evidences for an old universe. I had these issues in my intellectual inbox for a long time. As it turns out, the likely explanation for these phenomena come back full circle to Genesis 1! You might find this an interesting intro…


For a deeper dive, check out Barry’s YouTube channel:

 
Last edited:

Seekeroftruth55

Established
Joined
Jul 12, 2022
Messages
312
It seems alot of things don't add up. It seems not possible for this world to be as old as they claim, like all the points Red Sky at Morning has mentioned. Just seems like this world really couldn't be that old, only in the thousands. If we are to come from God, which I fully believe, how could we be apes or monkeys, first? Just doesn't make sense. None of the theory of evolution makes sense with the idea of God. The only belief I can remotely have is us humans and other living things maybe only evolve a very small amount over a long period of time. Maybe our face structure changes a tiny bit. I've seen footage of old video from the early 1900's and humans did look a bit different... But that's about it. I have a feeling these so called scientists kept pushing evolution to get others to deny God.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
It seems alot of things don't add up. It seems not possible for this world to be as old as they claim, like all the points Red Sky at Morning has mentioned. Just seems like this world really couldn't be that old, only in the thousands. If we are to come from God, which I fully believe, how could we be apes or monkeys, first? Just doesn't make sense. None of the theory of evolution makes sense with the idea of God. The only belief I can remotely have is us humans and other living things maybe only evolve a very small amount over a long period of time. Maybe our face structure changes a tiny bit. I've seen footage of old video from the early 1900's and humans did look a bit different... But that's about it. I have a feeling these so called scientists kept pushing evolution to get others to deny God.
The thing is, variation, natural selection, isolation and speciation are true, but none of that is evidence for macro-evolution.

God built genetic variability into all life He created, giving plants and animals the capacity to survive in changing conditions. Picture the “orchard of creation” with many kinds of trees and diverging branches, set against the evolutionary “tree of life”.
 

Seekeroftruth55

Established
Joined
Jul 12, 2022
Messages
312
The thing is, variation, natural selection, isolation and speciation are true, but none of that is evidence for macro-evolution.

God built genetic variability into all life He created, giving plants and animals the capacity to survive in changing conditions. Picture the “orchard of creation” with many kinds of trees and diverging branches, set against the evolutionary “tree of life”.
That definitely sounds more accurate. That's the thing with this evolution theory, it just doesn't make sense in the long run. The idea of plants and animals changing a bit to be more tune with conditions makes way more sense than completely evolving from a different species.
Alot of these theorists also keep forgetting that one species can be closely related to the other, doesn't mean that it evolved from them..they would argue that both apes and us have the same digits on our hands and feet, but that can just mean we are sort of related?
 

Maldarker

Star
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,269
Radiometric dates and distant starlight are the favourite evidences for an old universe. I had these issues in my intellectual inbox for a long time. As it turns out, the likely explanation for these phenomena come back full circle to Genesis 1! You might find this an interesting intro…


For a deeper dive, check out Barry’s YouTube channel:

also heard of the theory of the wave trough which distorted time at the beginning
 

Maldarker

Star
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,269
Im barely, vaguely familiar with that concept. What do you make of it? Both in general and as it relates to this thread specifically...
think it really matters would explain age of expanse being different then age on earth. wish had a chart of it to explain it would recommend the video cuz stuff just doesn't line up right with the time of things or the scope of it.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Im barely, vaguely familiar with that concept. What do you make of it? Both in general and as it relates to this thread specifically...
Both the work of Russell Humphries and Barry Setterfield relate to astrophysics and cosmology. They propose different models but I think both have more merit than the “standard model” which appears to be sinking right now…

So:

Russell Humphries, Starlight and Time


Barry Setterfield

 

TempestOfTempo

Superstar
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
7,351
think it really matters would explain age of expanse being different then age on earth. wish had a chart of it to explain it would recommend the video cuz stuff just doesn't line up right with the time of things or the scope of it.
Both the work of Russell Humphries and Barry Setterfield relate to astrophysics and cosmology. They propose different models but I think both have more merit than the “standard model” which appears to be sinking right now…

So:

Russell Humphries, Starlight and Time


Barry Setterfield

Hey thanks a lot you guys... looks very interesting!
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Hey thanks a lot you guys... looks very interesting!
From what I have read and watched, and from conversations I have had with physicists, I personally think that Barry has got it right.

His research incorporates the new findings in plasma physics, explains the mystery of “zero point energy”, accounts to the “dark matter” problem as well as addressing the apparent deep time indicated by distant starlight and radiometric dating questions.

My first degree was in life sciences so I haven’t sufficient physics to fully articulate what is outlined, but I have researched it myself and it definitely merits some consideration.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Somebody posted this on Facebook and I think they were correct…

In The Beginning, God Created The Heaven And The Earth...

Question, if Special Creation by God is such an obvious fact, then why do we live in an age of endless scoffers?

Good question, and here's some of my reasons why.

1.)------//The Bible predict in the books of Romans chapter one, first and second Timothy, and of course second Peter chapter three vs five that in the ladder days scoffers will appear out of the woodwork scoffing at the original Creation and the following Global Deluge and at God's very own existence itself. Even some professing Christians mock the truthfulness of God's words, especially regarding the original Creation and the following Global flood.

2.)------// Many individuals think that we live in a new age of reason, an age where superstitions and miracles are explained a-way by science and technology. They see explaining things (like the cosmos, life and the natural world) by means of God or gods as conjuring up magic or hocus pocus.

They rather believe that the cosmos created itself and produce life via by natural means only, yet in their worldview the origin of life remains a mystery.

3.)-------// Many professing Christians are also at fault as well, allow me to explain. When you have Christians unable to answer scoffers and critics with sound biblical knowledge (2 Timothy 2:15, study to show yourself approved & 1 Peter 3: 5-15, be ready always to answer critics about why you believe what you believe) as well as living a life-style contrary to what Jesus Christ taught as a wholesome and righteous lifestyle, no wonder the world mock modern Christians. Plus compromising biblical truths with modern man's rhetoric coupled with preaching a prosperity theology is also a big stumbling block to the growth of Jesus's one true church today, no wonder the church pews are becoming more and more empty in today and times.

Closing reflections;

I've said my peace, and I'm quite correct.

Reference..

King James version (kjv)...

AIG... Already Lost.. 75% of Christian youth abandoning their faith in Christ their first year of secular college...”
 

TempestOfTempo

Superstar
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
7,351
From what I have read and watched, and from conversations I have had with physicists, I personally think that Barry has got it right.

His research incorporates the new findings in plasma physics, explains the mystery of “zero point energy”, accounts to the “dark matter” problem as well as addressing the apparent deep time indicated by distant starlight and radiometric dating questions.

My first degree was in life sciences so I haven’t sufficient physics to fully articulate what is outlined, but I have researched it myself and it definitely merits some consideration.
Quick question before I delve deeper into the topic on my own... in you opinion, do things like fractals and chaos theory play any role (for or against) these schools of theory?
 

Maldarker

Star
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,269
From what I have read and watched, and from conversations I have had with physicists, I personally think that Barry has got it right.

His research incorporates the new findings in plasma physics, explains the mystery of “zero point energy”, accounts to the “dark matter” problem as well as addressing the apparent deep time indicated by distant starlight and radiometric dating questions.

My first degree was in life sciences so I haven’t sufficient physics to fully articulate what is outlined, but I have researched it myself and it definitely merits some consideration.
I do to...with pray and research it lines up very well.
 

Maldarker

Star
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,269
As for chaos theory seems to be summed up with the term order out of chaos





Image result
Chaos theory states that within the apparent randomness of chaotic complex systems, there are underlying patterns, interconnection, constant feedback loops, repetition, self-similarity, fractals, and self-organization.

or to sum it up in an easy statement even in a chaotic enviroment there are patterns to it even a perdictablility to it.




Chaos theory aims to find the general order of social systems and particularly social systems that are similar to each other. The assumption here is that the unpredictability in a system can be represented as overall behavior, which gives some amount of predictability, even when the system is unstable.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Quick question before I delve deeper into the topic on my own... in you opinion, do things like fractals and chaos theory play any role (for or against) these schools of theory?
Fractals and the Mandelbrot set are very interesting in their own right as they indicate an infinite mind behind the universe but they don’t specifically relate to the findings of plasma physics etc…

 
Top