Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Evolution is a myth? Please explain:

Up until the age of twenty-five I was an atheistic evolutionist. That was the only kind of material I read. One day a friend showed me something from a different scientist which refuted my guy. The difference was the different scientist had the facts. It was so devastating to me I consulted a psychiatrist. Eventually I got back to reading and read some creationist material. I couldn't fault their material.

Just the other day I watch a video by a guy with a Ph.D. He went to a creationist lecture to show him the error of his ways. The problem was the creationist had the scientific facts on his side. Something similar happens every time an evolutionist challenges a creationist. I have a friend who debates evolutionists. The last debate I know of his opponent, a biologist with a Ph.D,, said, "There's nothing I can say to refute Dr. Kindell."

Nope. They couldn't 100% prove it was fake till then, but they had concluded that it was almost certainly a fake within a year of its being proffered. Only the British Museum was slow to reject it, and that mainly due to national pride since it was "found" in England.

Ringman, I'm sorry to break it to you, but you're spouting nonsense. 6-day genesis literalism (the idea the earth is only 6000 years old) is so thoroughly discredited that to continue to believe it the equivalent of believing the earth is flat.

Floods happen world wide, which does not mean that there was a single world drowning deluge. There is plenty of evidence for the former, nothing for the latter. Plus after the ice age, the most probable source of flood stories, people were living in small family units or tribes, hence if a group of people saved themselves from a local flood event, it was a family unit.

Ancient times the world was largely unexplored/unknown to the masses and what made up most peoples 'known world' was not
on a scale of understanding or perspective of the discovered world we know today.

When the Romans went to what we know as Great Britain, there were animal skin tribal folk there that didn't venture
beyond a few villages or hamlets beyond their own...the Roman system of trade, currency, roads and secure travel opened up
to them the Great Britain land mass and also the far greater [already long discovered and developed] parts of the world/globe.

Those who were not afraid to take advantage, discovered there was a much vaster world beyond the little one they knew.

but no doubt there were those content to stay in their narrow perspective comfort zone, 'village world' environment and mindset
and ignorant obsolete myths, folklores and superstitions of old.




what do psychiatrists say to people who believe in a whole bunch of ancient world myths?

I really don't understand why christians try to use scientific evidence to support their biblical beliefs,

considering the basis of religious FAITH rests in the idea that the content of faith is what cannot be proven.

What need is there for christians to have faith, or what value is there in faith,... if they already have proof?

Just ONE???????????? grin

Lake Missoula is estimated to have held about half the water volume of Lake Michigan. During glacial periods an ice dam formed preventing outflow of the Clark Fork River near the Idaho/Montana border. Periodically (on an average of every 55 years) the ice dam would rupture and allow outflow of the entire lake. Most recently over a period of 2000 years, 15,000 to 13,000 years ago.

The oldest evidence of such a flood indicates it happened 1.5 million years ago.

Evidence strongly suggest there were at least 25 massive floods across Montana, Idaho, Washington, and down the Columbia River Gorge. Flow rates are estimated by various authorities as ten times to ninety times the flow of today's Amazon River, with maximum water velocities around 80 MPH.

The core samples previously mentioned show sedimentary layers deposited on the ocean floor from these various flood events with specific dating from each layer.

The "One Flood" would have destroyed all evidence of such paltry events, no?

And the obvious question; how did the Kangaroos make their way from the Ark in the middle east to Australia where they settled?

Once Noah got the Ark built how long did it take him to go to N.America,S,America,Australia,etc,etc and collect 2 of every animal. Then he had to have food for all of them and once the flood was over he had to get the animals back to their proper place. Did he have help from Santa ?

You lot are wasting your time trying to talk sense to that prick.

Evolution is real! Didn't you see the alligator climbing the fence?

I've read that there is far more evidence to prove creation than evolution. Evolution was pushed by athiests, Marxists, and Communists for over 100 years. Get God out of society, and society can be controlled by the State. When they were first going to the moon, NASA scientists were afraid the lunar module would sink in 6' of dust since the moon was supposed to be about 3 billion year old. Didn't happen. Mutations happen, but not complete DNA changes. Life itself is so complicated in molecular structure that it is only present on earth. We haven't found any intelligent life on other planets, not radio or TV signals, etc. They are constantly looking for signs, nothing yet. Then like someone said, look at the Grand Canyon. If it was as old as they say, rain and wind would have rounded all the land around it into hills and sand. Every civilization, from ancient times mentions a great flood, China, India, Egypt, Sumaria, Greek.

Life was created.

Certain discoveries of science, throughout history, have posed challenges to the way Christianity has understood the world. That doesn't mean the science is satanic. Christian theologians, for example, used to believe that heliocentrism was a satanic plot, and the Church tried punishing scientists for spreading the idea. Finally, they had to relent, and then found that it wasn't nearly the obstacle to Christian faith that they had feared.

Same with evolution. It's not. It's only an obstacle to a sort of faith that's based solely on a childish reading of the Bible, one where God literally took some mud and molded it (presumably with his "hands") into the shape of a man, then blew on it to make Adam. That's what's called metaphor. It's not necessary to understand it literally in order to be a believing Christian. The Bible is full of metaphor. "Unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" doesn't mean you have to reenter your mother's womb and come out again, for example. They are throughout the Old and New Testaments.

Except that one was clearly intended to be a metaphor and the other wasn’t. Why believe anything if you don’t take what the Bible says on face value?

See Jesus wasn’t literally resurrected, it’s just a metaphor.

No, the sun didn’t stop while there was a battle, that’s just a metaphor.

No, Jesus wasn’t born of a virgin, that’s just a metaphor.

God, didn’t talk to Abraham, that is just a metaphor.

Even if you take Genesis metaphorically, that isn’t what you are doing. It is quite clear that God was involved at every step of creation. If that is a metaphor, it is a metaphor for a very hands on God who intelligently designed and directed creation as opposed to the one you espouse who stood back and watched it all happen without any intervention whatsoever.

I have no trouble distinguishing. Your mileage may vary.

Here is what you need to understand, if human beings are an evolutionary accident, then the entire Bible is a lie. The Bible says that God created us in his image. It says that he has a specific plan for us. It makes no allowances for any scenario where we were mere accidents. If you want to believe in evolution, then your only choice as a Christian is to believe in an evolution designed and directed by God himself. There is no room for what you seem to espouse.

Where have you read that? On christian sites? with christian biases? Where is this evidence? How does it dispute the vast fossil record?

Correct. It would be. That's not what I believe. As a pro bowler is capable of releasing the ball in such a way as to intend a strike, and, once released, be sure that he threw a strike. How much more so can God set the universe in motion in such a way as to be sure of all the outcomes that result, in accordance with his will.This doesn't necessarily refer to our physicality, and almost certainly doesn't, since God, in his essence, is spirit. So it's reasonable that this verse refers to our resembling him in the sense that we are, in our essence, spirits, in a certain way, like God.Yes. Agreed, as explained above. I strongly disagree. The Bible says that God delegated the bringing forth of all the living creatures to the earth and the waters, i.e., the natural world that he created. I strongly disagree.

All the evidence supports evolution. The Bible creationists have nothing but faith. That is why it is called Faith.
Nothing wrong with that, but do not call it evidence when it is all Bible based faith.

Nobody knew how deep the moon dust would be until we stepped into it. No reason for it to be anything but what we found.
DNA changes have always evolved and are still evolving.
Claiming that life only exists on earth is stupid as the evidence for life in the universe mounts up. You are claiming a negative.
The age of the Grand Canyon is in the rocks for all to read who have honest eyes.
All those ancient flood accounts happened at different times and none them match with Noah's flood.

As I have said several times...it is too bad that the Bible authors did not have Hubble.

I want to note a few things concerning the flood:
2 Pet. 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

The world that was destroyed by the flood was the world that then existed--meaning the Mesopotamian population center of that time and the original pre-flood topography. This is also an indication that the world was different pre-flood versus post flood.The flood affected the whole world as it then was. This verse also indicates that water from the earth and heavens were involved in the deluge--that by "these" (is a plural word).

There are indications in the scriptures that the flood was the starting catalyst for moving the earth into continents from the fountains of the deep opening up. In the original creation all the water was gathered into "one place" in distinction from one land mass.

And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered into one place, so that the dry land may appear.” Here is the Pangaea.

During the flood it is said ... "on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened." This is inferring there were topographical changes from the water pouring forth from below the earth. Not all the water came from above--in fact it suggests that the water already on the earth acted like a Tsunami and initiated the flood. This agrees with what Peter was explaining. This would have made massive topographical changes which we believe led to the subsequent ice age.

This also likely initiated the Pangaea breaking up so that after the re-population of the fracturing pangaeac earth, the peoples and animals were scattered across continents and then separated.

The division of the earth is also noted: the name of the one was Peleg (means division), for in his days the earth was divided,

It was common to name children according to notable signs of the time.

In summary the ark was populated and then repopulated in a world that was a Pangaea which then later divided as the frozen channels melted from the ice age and new and vastly changed topography emerged which included large masses of water now separating land. This breakup does not infer all tectonic plate shift thought that could have been part of it, but also the melting of the water and its gatherings would have created separations. This process would have produced a series of local floods and more topographical changes very rapidly. There is evidence of major flooding all over the world some of which were local and yet of epic proportions--but we believe these were precipitated by the one world wide flood of the world that then existed. The massive fossil record shows evidence of tremendous flooding and rapid fossilization and current non-native species scattered all over the world.

Obviously many folks won't believe this ... because this is what the Bible says or because they have a different view of science, but on the other hand I'm reading a lot of objections that indicate a lack of knowledge as to what all the Bible does say about the flood.

Then creation isn’t random, it’s designed. So why do you argue against intelligent design? If everything is set in motion by the intent of the creator, then it follows that nothing is random throughout. Unless you wish to argue that the position of the bowling ball halfway down the lane towards the pins is coincidence and not dependent upon the intent of the bowler.