Cyklik

Look in Genesis. Look where it starts the whole, "Adam begot Seth" shpiel (hahaha sp?). In there it says that Adam (our first man) lived 930 some odd years. And everyone up till Noah lived for a loooooooong time. Only after God says He is limiting the lifespan do we see the shorter and shorter lives of men. Noah wasn't the only guy living that long. Read the Bible a little more Hammy, it's pretty cool.

Genetic variation is favored as it leads to mutations. Mutations are the driving force behind microevolution. =)

My goodness this thread develops quickly. I have 1 full day of classes, and look what's been posted, almost a whole page! Anyhow, I didn't make this stuff up about hyperbarics, I think I just used the wrong word when I said Ozone. I'm not positive, because I haven't researched it much. But anyhow, the word used on this site is pressurized oxygen. Check this out, it's interesting and informative, even if it doesn't help this debate. http://www.hypertc.com/abouthypernew.html

First of all, about the 600 year old Noah thing. Before the flood in Genesis 7, God said (I think in chapter 6) that He would limit the days of man to 120 years. The effects took place gradually. But now, due to this and our environment, the average lifespan of a human is between 70-80 years. Also, it is theoried that the pre-flood air was actually ozone (O3). Today we have the technology to make chambers filled with ozone, called Hyperbaric chambers. These are used many times for patients with certain diseases, and the benefits have been pretty impressive. When things were grown under this atmosphere, tomato plants have produced up to the size of basketballs! Wounds heal faster, things grow better, and the air you breathe in is much more nourishing. I personally think that the impact from this was huge. Also, another theory is that before the flood, the earth was surrounded by a barrier of ice in the atmosphere, which would GREATLY reduce the amount of UV rays getting through. This would also prolong life to some degree. The backup for that is in Genesis when, describing the beginning of the flood, it says "and the windows of Heaven were opened." The science backing up this theory is the physical properies of superconductors. They have been used in Japan on certain tram-lines to make the cars actually levitate above the tracks (or in between them, I don't remember). And this principle could be applied to make this large ice sphere stay up where it was. ___________EDIT_____________ As far as the "Certainly Not!" thing, I was referring to there not having to be animals from every single specie. I was making the statement that if there were only a few different species from every genus, and maybe even less, that microevolution could lead to the proliferation of other species. And you're right Hambone, those instances aren't coincidence, they are microevolution in effect. __________EDIT #2___________ Ardea herodias, or the Great Blue Heron, is in the class Aves (Birds). Strange enough, so is Struthio camelus, or the ostrich. The Geococcyx californianus, also known as the Roadrunner, is in the Aves class as well. These are examples of microevolution. Think about flowers for a second here. I'm sure you know about how polyploidy can lead to the birth of new species, and through self fertilization this specie can flourish. It's just an example, but I thought it might be pertinent.

Hey guys, let's settle down a bit here. Hammy conceded that he was being somewhat of a jerk earlier, let's not do the same with comments such as "Mr. Facts." Let's be civil here and respectful of one another. I think that this debate could actually be decent if we don't start down this path again.

Eh, I can see your point there, but then again, your new dog is still a dog, is it not? There is a difference between a new breed and a whole new organism. Your new dog isn't going to eventually be a lion or some other type of animal. So technically, you won't even be leaving the genus. And when sites say that it was physically impossible for Noah to take ALL those animals on the ark, I think they are forgetting the very thing they are supporting. Noah didn't have to take animals from every single specie of beetle! He only really had to take 1, maybe a couple more for variation. Once the animals multiplied back on earth and began to spread to different environments, microevolution does it's work. Animals will adapt to their environment, much as Darwin discovered with the finches on other islands. Physical features can be changed slightly throughout generations and we will see that many species arise from just the few beetles that started. ______________EDIT_______________ The Strong's Concordance is a marvelous thing. I did a bit of research about the creation and looked up the hebrew word for "of its kind" (Occurs many times in Genesis 1). Here's what I found: 04327 miyn {meen} from an unused root meaning to portion out; TWOT - 1191a; n m AV - kind 31; 31 1) kind, sometimes a species (usually of animals) ++++ Groups of living organisms belong in the same created "kind" if they have descended from the same ancestral gene pool. This does not preclude new species because this represents a partitioning of the original gene pool. Information is lost or conserved not gained. A new species could arise when a population is isolated and inbreeding occurs. By this definition a new species is not a new "kind" but a further partitioning of an existing "kind". Ignore all the funny numbers, and concentrate on the definition and the following paragraph. As you can see, in Hebrew, Microevolution may actually be mentioned in the Bible. Take it as you will, but I still think it's a strong point. We have to remember that the translations of the Bible can sometimes leave very important things out. ____________EDIT numero dos____________ After a little more research, I believe my theory was correct about the ark. The exact same Hebrew word mentioned above was used in Genesis 7 when it describes the animals that were put on the ark. Coincidence? as Paul would say, "Certainly not!"

Soul 1. The animating and vital principle in humans, credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion and often conceived as an immaterial entity. 2. The spiritual nature of humans, regarded as immortal, separable from the body at death, and susceptible to happiness or misery in a future state. Mind 1. The human consciousness that originates in the brain and is manifested especially in thought, perception, emotion, will, memory, and imagination. 2. The collective conscious and unconscious processes in a sentient organism that direct and influence mental and physical behavior. 3. The principle of intelligence; the spirit of consciousness regarded as an aspect of reality. Heart (I only selected the definitions not applying to the physical organ) 1. The vital center and source of one's being, emotions, and sensibilities. 2. The repository of one's deepest and sincerest feelings and beliefs. 3. The seat of the intellect or imagination. See, they're all pretty abstract, aren't they? I'd say that you would have to discredit all of them, or believe in all of them. There isn't really a picking-and-choosing here. By the way, these definitions are from www.dictionary.com

I usually hate talking about this, but I guess if it may help others, I might as well. Both of my parents are Christians, but didn't really become Christians until I was very young, probably during my toddler years. But the thing that has really impacted my life is that I have a little bit of a problem. I was born with a disease called cerebral palsy. It has pretty much only affected the muscles in my legs, fortunately. What happens is basically this: my brain doesn't send signals to the muscles in my legs properly. The way it affects my daily life is huge. Walking around is tiring, and I usually don't engage much in physical activity, which has led to me being on the computer all the time. Because of this, I've always been extremely self conscious. I don't know how many times I would've attempted suicide if it weren't for God giving me hope and life. Jesus is the only reason I'm alive. When I was 2-3, the doctors first noticed the problem and rashly diagnosed muscular dystrophy, which, if you don't know, would mean I'd degenerate over the years and die by 16. I turned 16 this year, and I've thought about it a couple of times. I have God to thank for getting me through all of the depression and anxiety. All I can hope is that maybe my testimony will touch the life of another, and *tries not to be selfish* it'll all be worth it.

I have a question for you as well Hambone. What is a mind? This is something we've heard over and over again throughout school and life in general. When someone is losing their mind, what is really happening? Does your mind have mass? Can you sense the physical presence of your mind? Or is it, too, incorporeal? Humans are based on feelings and emotions, who's to say that the mind and soul aren't mere extensions of their feelings and emotions? The spiritual or emotional definition of a heart can also fall under this category.

isnt what makes us different from wild animals is that we have debate and that we question something that we think is wrong??....what makes us civilized is that we dont not follow leadership blindly debate is healthly for everyone and my pastor (yes i got to confomration) even encourages us to come and challenge his beliefs...he says it only makes him believe more....try looking at this post that way Mack, I think you're missing the point. There is nothing wrong with debate, but this has gone far past that. People's views are no longer being respected as they should. Debate doesn't mean you go and flame on people's beliefs. You support your beliefs and try to refute the points of your opposition. You do not go and attack the person's beliefs, you attack the points. The points are no longer being addressed.

Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes arw clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse." Basically, every man who has seen all the wonders of creation can see God. And therefore, they have had a chance to worship Him. Therefore every person has a chance. _________EDIT__________ Unless you've been around for the whole thing, you probably don't realize how much grace Congregation has given Hammy with his posts. And Revs even told him, on several occasions, that his offensive attitude needed to stop. I read that "deleted post" before it was ever deleted, and some of the thoughts in there were just unecessary. But I do agree with MC Ranger, that this thread would be better closed or deleted.

I'm with you mack! Vertigo is so underplayed! The only complaint I have about it is when You have the guys running down that ladder in the very beginning. I just don't think that the team spawns should be so close in that way. But other than that, I love it! I'm also of the opinion that we should try out some escape maps, that could be fun.

There is no such thing as hate if it cannot be contrasted. And to contrast it, you need some other frame of reference. You guessed it! Love! Without love there is no such thing as hate, and likewise the other way. Sorry man, there's no other way it can happen. ___________Edit___________ I think it would seriously be nice if this whole evolution/creation thing simmered down, since we obviously cannot agree on many points at all. While I respect your views, I don't share them. I just hope that you can feel the same way. Let's be mature about this.

Jesus was and is the Son of God. When He came down to earth, He was blameless. You can not, nor can anyone, point out a single sin in His life. He did everything right. Because of this, He was able to defeat the Law and free us from it. He died for our sins, and became sin for us. When He was crucified and went to Hell, He fulfilled our sentence. And when He rose again, He defeated death for us. Because of all that, we can live in the hope of seeing Him up in Heaven.

OOOOH OOOOH OOOH, let me answer this one before I go!!!! Jesus is perfect pal, something we can never achieve. That's what makes him atone for all of us.

I truly think that this really has gone far enough. Can we not concede that our views will stay the same, and that now at least some of us are a little bit more aggitated with others. I think that much is pretty easy to see. The last thing I want to say in this post is that I believe Jesus Christ died on the cross for me, and for all of you, whether you accept that or not. Because of this, I believe the Bible to be true, and I believe that God created everything in the universe which goes way beyond our little earth. I also believe that this argument will go nowhere because as Christians, we have something that nonbelievers do not, an active relationship with Jesus Christ. I have felt His presence, I have seen Him move in the lives of myself and others, and THAT is what my evidence is. You concentrate on the science portion, but none of that matters to me because I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that God is with me and enables me. I would strongly recommend that this formerly-debate-turned-argument-turned-insult-hurling-session be closed, and that we all accept the fact that people are entitled to their own beliefs. What other purpose has this entire thread acheived? _______EDIT__________ I just saw what you posted. And my only answer is this: The human mind cannot comprehend God. Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, because they couldn't understand the complex principles in any other way. I think of this in the same way. God merely refers to Himself as male because we are not capable of understanding the fullness of His entity. ______Goodness how many times must I edit?_____ Hambone, in reference to what you said about that sentence, let me say this. God is a loving God. And because of this fact, He gave us something that we could never thank Him enough for: the ability to choose. He gave us the capacity to love, and likewise with that, the capacity to hate. He knows EVERYTHING that will happen, He knew it before He created the world. But He loves us so much that He would do it all again for just one person to come to Him, OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL. Because that is one of the greatest gifts He's ever given us. Had He created us as robots, what good would we be? It's like creating a group of little machines to constantly bow saying, "All hail Hambone" or something along those lines. But, because of this free will, He also knew that we would end up screwing stuff up. But He considered that the good outweighed the evil. Also Hambone, maybe you didn't know this, but the human eye can only see at 40 frames per second. Considering that, don't you think that God could hide heaven if He wanted to? My thoughts are that Heaven is a place, not in this physical realm, but in the spiritual realm. I'd continue but I have work. So I may have to continue this later.

Hambone, hambone, hambone. You're not understanding the concept of prayer. God has 3 answers to prayer, not just 1. God will answer us by either saying "Yes," "No," or "Wait." So you see, God answers every prayer, just it isn't always in the way we like. And I think I've seen enough of you bashing my relationship with God, and making Him out to be some idiot. Did you ever think that maybe God created the universe to be the way he did. And let me tell you, He understands the universe far better than you do. It's not like He didn't know exactly what was gonna be happening now way back when he created the universe.

What you guys are forgetting to mention is that the amino acids produced by this experiment were only in chains of about 14. Only when they put in either iron or zinc (can't remember which, AP Bio racked my brain last year. Oh yeah, I got a 5 on the test!!) did they produce chains up to 100 amino acids long. Sorry fellas, but 100 amino acids doesn't do squat. Most proteins are at least somewhere around 100,000 amino acids long (at least the important ones). I read a book called Darwin's Black Box the year before last, and it had some very interesting points that shot a few holes in Darwin's theories. 1 of these was about the blood coagulation pathway. The theory of evolution describes things as going from simple to more complex, but this pathway evident in the human immune system does not follow that concept at all. I won't go into much detail (I'll leave you to read the book), but there are a cascade of proteins involved in this pathway. 1 protein sets off another protein, that sets of another protein, and so on. Well, the final protein in this cascade is part of the beginning as well, so that it makes somewhat of a circular pathway. The way it happens could not at all be simplified from it's current state. There are several other examples among the field of Biology that the author mentions that are just not able to be simplified and still work. How can one explain growing of complexity in something that is not reducable? I really recommend all of you who are truly interested in this area of dispute to check the book out, it's kind of hard to read, but interesting at the same time. And I personally think that this dispute is way too overdone, because neither concept is scientific at all. How do we know if it's science? If it's observable, measurable, and repeatable. And guys, we can't repeat that.

I have to disagree about these 3 religions being very similar. While Judaism and Christianity have very some very similar characteristics, Christians were freed from the Law. In the New Testament we learn that the Law was merely established to make sin known to us. Had there been no rules to break, we wouldn't know we are incapable of keeping them. This is a HUGE difference between Judaism and Christianity. Jews try to keep the Law to please God, Christians know they can't please God through the Law and are therefore dead to the Law. Also, let me point out that as Christians, we know that we can't reach God, but we allow Him to reach down to us and pull us up to Him. All we have to do is believe that He sacrificed His life for us, and understand that he is the Lord of our life. EVERYTHING SHOULD REVOLVE AROUND HIM. That doesn't mean that we won't screw up, because He knows that. And He will forget our sins in an instant if we ask Him and repent, and He will never remember that sin again. You will notice that the other 2 religions mentioned above have us trying to make our way up to Heaven, something that is impossible. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO NOT SIN, God only asks that we try our best to obey Him, and recognize when we screw up. Jiffy, and everyone else, I would love to discuss this more with you, should you be remotely interested, or in the mood for debate. While I may not know the whole Bible, I try my best to represent my Savior.

I think I'll give my little take on swearing and foul language. Paul clearly states that everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial. Elsewhere in the Bible, Ephesians 5 I believe, it condemns idle talk, and perverse mouths. Ultimately, I believe that the only truly condemned words were those straightforwardly disgracing the Lord. Such things as using His name in vain and the like. Another passage in the New Testament (I forget where at the moment) says that we should not stumble our brethren. It says that something may not be a sin to you, but it is to your brother. Therefore, if you, by doing this thing, are causing your brother to stumble, you are sinning. When it comes down to it, I think that swearing isn't the issue, it's the consideration of others and (like stated before) a problem with respect. Maybe the Lord hasn't set it in my brother's heart that swearing is wrong, and therefore when I "drop a bomb," it won't be a problem with him. I think that it is all about convictions. Unfortunately, society in general has exaggerated the harshness of swearing so much so that it has become a shield for sins that now go unnoticed. Our nation is quick to correct someone who swears, but they won't stand up for what is right when someone chooses to kill the child God has given them while it's still in their womb. It's all about where we're looking, and where we should be. That's my longwinded take on things, and I would be happy to look up some of these references should anyone like to check.

75 (And I sure as hell didn't refuse sex with my girlfriend!)