Ali Kannibali's creationisten topic deel 3

quote:

Op vrijdag 11 januari 2008 09:07 schreef Frezer het volgende:

[..]

Maw, technologieontwikkeling is een evolutionair proces. Om tot die conclusie te komen moet je natuurlijk net als in de biologie wel in het verleden (willen) kijken, dan zul je van elke technologische vinding een simpeler exemplaar ontdekken. "Uitvindingen" zoals de bv de stoommachine van Watt zijn niets meer als al bestaande machines welke zijn verbeterd of waar iets aan is toegevoegd.

quote:

Microbes and the Days of Creation

The world of germs and microbes has received much attention in recent years. But where do microbes fit into the creation account? Were they created along with the rest of the plants and animals in the first week of creation, or were they created later, after the Fall? These are some questions that creation microbiologists have been asking in recent years. Ongoing research, based on the creation paradigm, appears to provide some answers to these puzzling questions. The answers to these questions are not explicit in Scripture, so the answers cannot be dogmatic. However, a reasonable extrapolation from biological data and Scripture can be made about the nature of microbes in a fully mature creation. This article attempts to provide reasonable answers to when microbes were created and is meant to stimulate discussion and further research in this area.

Very little has been written in Bible commentaries or in creation literature on the subject of when microbes were created. Some have postulated that microbes were created on a single day of Creation, such as Day Three—when the plants were made. This is partially due to the “seed-like” characteristics that bacteria and fungi have—therefore classifying microbes as plants. In addition, we observe microbes (such as Escherichia coli) isolated in the lab and we tend to think of microbes as individual entities much like birds or fish or animals and, therefore, created on a single day. However, in nature, the vast majority of microbes live in biological partnerships, not in total isolation. The natural symbiosis of microbes with other creatures is the norm. Therefore, we postulate that microbes were created as “biological systems” with plants, animals, and humans on multiple days, as supporting systems in mature plants, animals, and humans. This idea is further supported by the work of Francis (2003). Francis calls microbial symbiotic systems a biomatrix, or organosubstrate. He proposes that microbes were created as a link between macroorganisms and a chemically rich but inert physical environment, providing a surface (i.e., substrate) upon which multicellular creatures can thrive and persist in intricately designed ecosystems. From the beginning, God made His creation fully mature, and complex forms fully formed. This would insure continuity and stability for the times to come. Although we cannot be certain as to specifically when the Creator made microbes, it is within His character to make entire interwoven, “packaged” systems to sustain and maintain life.

quote:

Catastrophic Granite Formation

The timescale for the generation of granitic magmas and their subsequent intrusion, crystallization, and cooling as plutons is no longer incompatible with the biblical time frames of the global, year-long Flood cataclysm and of 6,000–7,000 years for earth history. Though partial melting in the lower crust is the main rate-limiting step, it is now conjectured to only take years to decades, so partial melting to produce a large reservoir of granitic magmas could have occurred in the pre-Flood era as a consequence of accelerated nuclear decay early in the Creation Week. Rapid segregation, ascent, and emplacement now understood to only take days via dikes would have been aided by the tectonic “squeezing” and “pumping” during the catastrophic plate tectonics driving the global Genesis Flood cataclysm. Now that it has also been established that granitic plutons are mostly tabular sheets, crystallization and cooling would be even more easily facilitated by hydrothermal convective circulation with meteoric waters in the host rocks. The growth of large crystals from magmas within hours has now been experimentally determined, while the co-formation in the same biotite flakes of adjacent uranium and polonium radiohalos, the latter from short-lived parent polonium isotopes, requires that crystallization and cooling of the granitic plutons only took about 6–10 days. Thus the sum total of time, from partial melting in the lower crust to crystallization and cooling of granitic plutons emplaced in the upper crust, no longer conflicts with the biblical time frame for earth history, nor is it an impediment to accounting for most of the fossil-bearing geologic record during the global year-long Flood catastrophe.

quote:

Op maandag 14 januari 2008 10:43 schreef Invictus_ het volgende:
Lang verwacht, toch gekomen... daar is die dan, de enige, de eerste...
Answers Research Journal Volume 1
[..]


[..]

*t00t*

quote:

Op maandag 14 januari 2008 10:59 schreef Papierversnipperaar het volgende:

Maar ze houden dus vast aan een "flexibele" snelheid voor radioactief verval?

quote:

Op maandag 14 januari 2008 10:43 schreef Invictus_ het volgende:
Lang verwacht, toch gekomen... daar is die dan, de enige, de eerste...
Answers Research Journal Volume 1
[..]


[..]

*t00t*

quote:

Op maandag 14 januari 2008 11:06 schreef Doffy het volgende:

[..]

Dus dat noemen ze research?

quote:

Op maandag 14 januari 2008 11:06 schreef Doffy het volgende:

[..]

Dus dat noemen ze research?

quote:

Op maandag 14 januari 2008 10:43 schreef Invictus_ het volgende:
Lang verwacht, toch gekomen... daar is die dan, de enige, de eerste...
Answers Research Journal Volume 1
[..]


[..]

*t00t*

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 januari 2008 12:12 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Er valt meestal toch niet echt serieus te discussiëren met creationisten, dus je kunt het ook anders aanpakken.

quote:

“Hiiiiiii!” I shouted like a maniac at anyone within earshot. “Yow!” I yelped in unison with one firm clap of my hands. I bounced in the wheelchair with glee, for I was among God’s special people. I almost envied them in a way. Unencumbered by reason and logic, their minds drowned with sweet ignorance and incredible fairytales, they were the true freaks. You have to admire that sort of commitment to delusion. I let a strategic pool of saliva slowly dribble from my gapping maw. I wanted to fit in.

quote:

Message Board Poster Overturns Evolution; World of Science Agog

A new theory of how life develops, posted on an Internet message board, has sent biologists back to the drawing board.

Declaring that “science has absolutely no idea what it is that makes an animal what it is,” the poster, Guzman, unveiled on Sunday his own theory that includes thinking molecules, the inheritance of acquired characteristics, the demotion of mutations from their presumed central role in evolution, and prayer.

“Molecules have minds,” Guzman explained, “and when prey approaches a predator, the molecules think what do. ‘Dear God,’ the molecules say, ‘we pray that the prey of which we are a part will instantly sprout some pointed spines or big teeth or something, to scare off that animal that is about to eat it and us.’”

If the organism is worthy, Guzman emphasized, “the Angel of the Lord” descends upon it, and grants the molecules’ prayers. But if the organism has been bad, Guzman noted, God refuses to answer the molecules’ prayers, and the organism perishes.

“My theory explains both extinction and the development of new traits,” Guzman said. “God does not answer the prayers of the molecules of bad organisms, and those organisms get what they deserve: they are cast into the Outer Darkness.”

But, Guzman added, “The prayers of the molecules of good organisms are answered, and then the new trait that the organism acquires by the grace of God is then passed on to its offspring.”

Guzman called his theory “the predator and pray paradigm.” Random mutations, Guzman noted, play no role in his theory, because “no structure can come from random activity. Everyone knows that from the random, you only get the random.”

Biologists were speechless.

“Jebus Christ, I’m speechless,” the biologist P.Z. Myers wrote at his well-known science blog, Pharyngula. “I’m just — I can’t — I — I — ahhhh!”

Not everyone was as praiseworthy as Myers. Some biologists complained that the visual materials that Guzman posted with his theory were unclear at best, and misleading at worst.

The charts, which Guzman created with Crayola crayons, labeled “genes” as “jeans,” and identified “atoms” as “Adams” (though it was unclear late on Sunday whether the latter was a deliberate reference to the Biblical first man). A diagram of a cell showed a circle, with curlicue-like markings inside. “Stuff Here,” the cell was labeled, with a crude arrow pointing to its interior.

Apprised of the new theory, Francis Collins, the head of the human genome project, said, “The scientific community will need to rethink some long-held views."

quote:

Op maandag 21 januari 2008 10:39 schreef Monolith het volgende:
De creationisten hebben toch nog gelijk gekregen:
[..]

quote:

Op maandag 21 januari 2008 10:39 schreef Monolith het volgende:
De creationisten hebben toch nog gelijk gekregen:
[..]