How old is our creation really?

[Skovand]

Absolutely true .. The Word of God creates not only the physical world and upholds it but even within a physical world and if Jesus turned the water into wine then all is true as He spoke, speaks and inspired to write and even beyond if we hear His voice on a matter that becomes substance once you hear answered prayer in prayer .. You can take it to the bank ...We don't speak it enough .. But otherwise the most faithless nonbeliever can rely on physical law 100% . Unless God intervenes supernaturally at His will or our request according to our faith ... What goes up must come down dependable .. LOL . The chicken definitely came first .. And a chicken laid it with genetics created from the original created kind .. I actually remember thinking about that question before I believed in God .. Even thinking whatever laid the first chicken egg was not a chicken lolol, how ridiculous and a waste of time that was ..

That’s not accurate whatsoever of how science explains the chicken and the egg. It’s not a dinosaur suddenly becoming a chicken. You’re talking about slight genetic differences between an offspring and a parent over hundreds of generations and each generation carrying the genetic ancestry of all before it. It’s more like something that’s “99.99” A giving birth to something that’s “99.98 A and .02 B” that then births something 99.97A and .03 B”. We see these offsprings falling to selective pressures , including isolation from its other kind resulting in subspecies and eventually its own species. Often, after millions of years it even moves from subspecies to species to its own genus with multiplied species within it to its own order and family and ect...

 

[Skovand]

Perhaps Adam and Eve were not the only created on day 6
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

To go along with this we can look at other aspects of the creation account as well. In chapter one we see male and female made on the sixth day. In chapter two we see Sdam created, and then Adam naming all the animals on earth and finding no partner God puts him in a deep sleep and creates Eve. Chapter two is creating a impossible amount of work to be done in one 24 hour period. If someone then argued it was not a 24 hour period then it can be any amount of time we want.

Then in genesis 4 we see the clear issue that Adam and Eve at one time only had two kids. Cain and Abel. No other kids, including the many sons and daughters verse, is not mentioned until after that. The context of the story makes this clear. When Cain killed Abel, then later on Eve birthed Seth she said God replaced Abel. If she already had several kids she would not realistically had this paradigm of replacement. So if Adam and Eve was there, and Abel was murdered, and the other kids was not yet born how did Cain find a spouse, who did he fear, and how did he create a whole city.
a better explanation is that God called two humans to a promise land and they gave birth to kids. Other humans existed beyond the gate of paradise

 

[Dino246]

Not true at all. These are not mindless assumptions. These are algorithms created by experts in dozens of isolated fields that don’t depend on one another to generate their time frames. But they do triple check their time frames against other methods and when they all converge on the same era we can be certain it’s accurate.

"Mindless" is your word, not mine. My word is "unproveable".

Radiometric dating relies on assumptions about the consistency of radioactive decay and the beginning concentrations of "parent" and "daughter" isotopes, none of which can be proven. Similar problems exist with all the methods you noted.

 

[Dino246]

That’s not accurate whatsoever of how science explains the chicken and the egg. It’s not a dinosaur suddenly becoming a chicken. You’re talking about slight genetic differences between an offspring and a parent over hundreds of generations and each generation carrying the genetic ancestry of all before it. It’s more like something that’s “99.99” A giving birth to something that’s “99.98 A and .02 B” that then births something 99.97A and .03 B”. We see these offsprings falling to selective pressures , including isolation from its other kind resulting in subspecies and eventually its own species. Often, after millions of years it even moves from subspecies to species to its own genus with multiplied species within it to its own order and family and ect...

Your position relies on the addition of genetic information, which has never been proven, and which observation disconfirms.

 

[bojack]

That’s not accurate whatsoever of how science explains the chicken and the egg. It’s not a dinosaur suddenly becoming a chicken. You’re talking about slight genetic differences between an offspring and a parent over hundreds of generations and each generation carrying the genetic ancestry of all before it. It’s more like something that’s “99.99” A giving birth to something that’s “99.98 A and .02 B” that then births something 99.97A and .03 B”. We see these offsprings falling to selective pressures , including isolation from its other kind resulting in subspecies and eventually its own species. Often, after millions of years it even moves from subspecies to species to its own genus with multiplied species within it to its own order and family and ect...

I'm saying that God created all the DNA/RNA in the beginning so vast that it needed no evolution .. Last I heard they were saying 97% DNA is junk DNA . So who's to say .. And there could be triggers factored in .. I don't think Adams DNA and all it's traits were utilized exclusively in Adam .. But included possibilities and all information that could account for every hair on every head of his offspring ... If evolution were possible I don't think there would be any distinct kinds but all would be different or all extinct .. There may be loss of information but I don't think helpful information could ever be added, imo there are no helpful mutations

 

[bojack]

To go along with this we can look at other aspects of the creation account as well. In chapter one we see male and female made on the sixth day. In chapter two we see Sdam created, and then Adam naming all the animals on earth and finding no partner God puts him in a deep sleep and creates Eve. Chapter two is creating a impossible amount of work to be done in one 24 hour period. If someone then argued it was not a 24 hour period then it can be any amount of time we want.

Then in genesis 4 we see the clear issue that Adam and Eve at one time only had two kids. Cain and Abel. No other kids, including the many sons and daughters verse, is not mentioned until after that. The context of the story makes this clear. When Cain killed Abel, then later on Eve birthed Seth she said God replaced Abel. If she already had several kids she would not realistically had this paradigm of replacement. So if Adam and Eve was there, and Abel was murdered, and the other kids was not yet born how did Cain find a spouse, who did he fear, and how did he create a whole city.
a better explanation is that God called two humans to a promise land and they gave birth to kids. Other humans existed beyond the gate of paradise

I have no reason to think Adam was not created on the 6th day .. IMO God created all in 6 days ..

 

[Skovand]

I have no reason to think Adam was not created on the 6th day .. IMO God created all in 6 days ..

If he created everything on the sixth day, why do we not find fossils in the say geological layers? Why do we not find humans in the same layer as T-Rex? Why do we not find giant american sloths in the same layer as the earliest ferns? We see distinct ecosystems and habitats in different layers and when we get ice core samples , and compare it to the microscopic layers in petrified woods within layers all dating to the same time we see similar chemical compositions that clue us into things like the atmosphere. We see different life forms in different layers. We see different chemical compositions in these layers. When we check these layers in America against the same layer in China we see the same indicators. For example, if we go back far enough we see reptiles but we don’t see mammals. We can go back so far that only tetrapods exists and there are no bipedal animals. We can go back through layers and see conifers, but no angiosperms. The layers line up with dozens of radiometric dating methods depending on which ones we need to narrow in on a date. If we go back we stop seeing tools being used. We see no bones with tool made scars or tool scarring patterns on it. Then we begin seeing some and see them get more and more complex.
That’s in direct contradiction to the unscientific notion that everything was created within literal six days of one another.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

If he created everything on the sixth day, why do we not find fossils in the say geological layers? Why do we not find humans in the same layer as T-Rex? Why do we not find giant american sloths in the same layer as the earliest ferns? We see distinct ecosystems and habitats in different layers and when we get ice core samples , and compare it to the microscopic layers in petrified woods within layers all dating to the same time we see similar chemical compositions that clue us into things like the atmosphere. We see different life forms in different layers. We see different chemical compositions in these layers. When we check these layers in America against the same layer in China we see the same indicators. For example, if we go back far enough we see reptiles but we don’t see mammals. We can go back so far that only tetrapods exists and there are no bipedal animals. We can go back through layers and see conifers, but no angiosperms. The layers line up with dozens of radiometric dating methods depending on which ones we need to narrow in on a date. If we go back we stop seeing tools being used. We see no bones with tool made scars or tool scarring patterns on it. Then we begin seeing some and see them get more and more complex.
That’s in direct contradiction to the unscientific notion that everything was created within literal six days of one another.

Once again, the global flood answers this question

 

[Skovand]

I'm saying that God created all the DNA/RNA in the beginning so vast that it needed no evolution .. Last I heard they were saying 97% DNA is junk DNA . So who's to say .. And there could be triggers factored in .. I don't think Adams DNA and all it's traits were utilized exclusively in Adam .. But included possibilities and all information that could account for every hair on every head of his offspring ... If evolution were possible I don't think there would be any distinct kinds but all would be different or all extinct .. There may be loss of information but I don't think helpful information could ever be added, imo there are no helpful mutations

We see helpful mutations now within viruses. Junk DNA is a misunderstood statement by most lay people. You can check out the writings by the Christian scientist , Francis Collins, who lead the human genome project and is one of the leading geneticists in the world. He explains the genetic side of these arguments and why the whole “ dna/rna” speciation without evolution is simply not plausible.

The fossil record also undermines it. As stated in a post prior to this one. As we go back further and further we can see the morphological developments within clades.
For example what is the earliest fossils of tetrapods? Are their canines found in any of the geological layers at that point? If not, then what was the first one? What’s the first mammalian bipedal creature? Why is not found in the same layers as the earliest tetrapods?

 

[Skovand]

Once again, the global flood answers this question

Actually, a global flood would make the layers all messed up as opposed to organized....

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Actually, a global flood would make the layers all messed up as opposed to organized....

Nope

a flood would make things organized, as layer of sediment is dropped. and it would also seperate the fossils from that of the weakest to that of the strongest

this is exactly what we see..

you should look up some Christian scientists and read them, they changed my view of an aged earth, and I was avid old Earth believer for most of my life

 

[peldom10]

That’s not accurate whatsoever of how science explains the chicken and the egg. It’s not a dinosaur suddenly becoming a chicken. You’re talking about slight genetic differences between an offspring and a parent over hundreds of generations and each generation carrying the genetic ancestry of all before it. It’s more like something that’s “99.99” A giving birth to something that’s “99.98 A and .02 B” that then births something 99.97A and .03 B”. We see these offsprings falling to selective pressures , including isolation from its other kind resulting in subspecies and eventually its own species. Often, after millions of years it even moves from subspecies to species to its own genus with multiplied species within it to its own order and family and ect...

The old chicken and the egg adage is mythical...a Christian knows that God created the chicken first and she laid an egg.

 

[Skovand]

Nope

a flood would make things organized, as layer of sediment is dropped. and it would also seperate the fossils from that of the weakest to that of the strongest

this is exactly what we see..

you should look up some Christian scientists and read them, they changed my view of an aged earth, and I was avid old Earth believer for most of my life

But that’s simply not true lol.
What do you mean fossils that are weakest to strongest? We find insects, plants, and mammals mixed together in various layers and we find insects and plants prior to dinosaurs but no bipedals?

Bone density, nor chemical density, is a way of categorizing fossils. I have talked with creation scientists. They fail every debate and rely on god of the gaps type arguments. The majority of scientists who are also christians believe in evolution. Not even .2% of scientists who are Christian believes in creationism. Not from a scientific or theological argument.

Since we are debating science let’s use real science.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

But that’s simply not true lol.
What do you mean fossils that are weakest to strongest? We find insects, plants, and mammals mixed together in various layers and we find insects and plants prior to dinosaurs but no bipedals?

Bone density, nor chemical density, is a way of categorizing fossils. I have talked with creation scientists. They fail every debate and rely on god of the gaps type arguments. The majority of scientists who are also christians believe in evolution. Not even .2% of scientists who are Christian believes in creationism. Not from a scientific or theological argument.

Since we are debating science let’s use real science.

Lol
they use real science

the science you use is wish washy at best

i think people like those who wrote genesis flood and earths catastrophic past are quite knowledgeable, far more than you and I,

amd they explain very clearly why the fossil layers prove a flood.

by the way, a fossile can ONLY be formed in a flood state, an animal has to die, be covered with sediment, and the sediment must harden before the animal decomposes for there to be any hope of a fossil

so if you want to use science, it would help if you understood it

 

[Skovand]

I

The old chicken and the egg adage is mythical...a Christian knows that God created the chicken first and she laid an egg.

ll be honest. I’m not trying to sound condescending, but I don’t have time to go through 14 years of basic science to answer this in detail.
Maybe you can try this.
what’s the earliest geological layer that we see chickens in? What’s the species of Gallus we see in the records verses the earliest Species in the aves class? Why are they not found then?

 

[Skovand]

Lol
they use real science

the science you use is wish washy at best

i think people like those who wrote genesis flood and earths catastrophic past are quite knowledgeable, far more than you and I,

amd they explain very clearly why the fossil layers prove a flood.

by the way, a fossile can ONLY be formed in a flood state, an animal has to die, be covered with sediment, and the sediment must harden before the animal decomposes for there to be any hope of a fossil

so if you want to use science, it would help if you understood it

What about fossils found in volcanic ash?

I am certain I understand it. That’s why you can’t answer it. That’s why they can’t answer it either. Maybe you can present some arguments from a Christian paleontologist? Just link the peer reviewed journal from a scientific community and we can go through it.
whose the best and most knowledgeable creationist who proves that a flood organized the fossils?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What about fossils found in volcanic ash?

I am certain I understand it. That’s why you can’t answer it. That’s why they can’t answer it either. Maybe you can present some arguments from a Christian paleontologist? Just link the peer reviewed journal from a scientific community and we can go through it.
whose the best and most knowledgeable creationist who proves that a flood organized the fossils?

Volcanic ash would be a local occuring event

come on, you are just ignoring the fact so you can support your theory,

like I said, I was an avid gap theorist, I reject that now. Far to much evidence proves otherwise, you can go look it up, or continue as you are, no sweat of my back

 

[Skovand]

Also, I limit the time of spend doing these kinds of discussions. I mostly do it so that future college kids who are seeing a issue with a literalist interpretation vs clear scientific evidence.
Again if you believe in God and also see that science clearly teaches an old earth and evolution look into the forums at BioLogos.

https://discourse.biologos.org/

There are dozens and dozens of real Christians and scientists there.

 

[Skovand]

Volcanic ash would be a local occuring event

come on, you are just ignoring the fact so you can support your theory,

like I said, I was an avid gap theorist, I reject that now. Far to much evidence proves otherwise, you can go look it up, or continue as you are, no sweat of my back

Not at all. There are thousands of journals out there about fossilization that does not require a global flood.

I’m not the one avoiding 99.99% of scientists and experts and scientific papers. In a few more weeks I’ll have more time and I’ll start making posts every few weeks centered around all these issues.

Anyways. Best luck until then.

 

[peldom10]

I

ll be honest. I’m not trying to sound condescending, but I don’t have time to go through 14 years of basic science to answer this in detail.
Maybe you can try this.
what’s the earliest geological layer that we see chickens in? What’s the species of Gallus we see in the records verses the earliest Species in the aves class? Why are they not found then?

When u find a scientist who can answer that...please share.