Terrible news for the Creation Science museum (and Republicans)

[Darth Omar]

Radiation is not synonymous with and does not imply optical light.

The electromagnetic spectrum is enormous, with optical light only comprising a tiny fraction.

It is quite a stretch for you to claim the reference to light in Genesis actually refers to microwave radiation.

The multiverse theory is quite a stretch lol.

The point is ‘light’ could be interpreted to be any or all wavelengths of EMR since there’s no ancient Hebrew words for any specific wavelengths of it. And there’s no reason to expect there would be.

Again, the early verses of Genesis 1 describe the BB in rough outline.

 

[BidenPresident]

The multiverse theory is quite a stretch lol.

Not really. It's an extension of relativity. If no absolute measure exists what we have is a system of relations.

 

[Cypress]

The multiverse theory is quite a stretch lol.

The point is ‘light’ could be interpreted to be any or all wavelengths of EMR since there’s no ancient Hebrew words for any specific wavelengths of it. And there’s no reason to expect there would be.

Again, the early verses of Genesis 1 describe the BB in rough outline.

The multiverse is highly speculative, but it is well within the realm of respectable scientific speculation.

Claiming that Genesis is referencing the cosmic background microwave radiation is just nonsense.

We cannot see past the comic background microwave radiation, aka the edge of the observable universe, so we do not know if the big bang was the origin of the universe, or if it was just one event which occurred in a much larger multiverse.

Genesis and the entire Torah should be read, in large measure, metaphorically. And that is exactly how the early preeminent Christian scholars read it. The desire of fundamentalists to embrace biblical literalism and consider the Torah a historical account is just bad theology.

 

[Grokmaster]

Y-CHROMOSOMAL ADAM = SINGLE MALE HUMAN SOURCE OF Y-CHROMOSOMAL DNA FOUND IN EVERY MALE HUMAN ON EARTH.


MITOCHONDRIAL EVE = THE SINGLE FEMALE SOURCE OF MITOCHONDRIAL DNA FOUND IN EVERY FEMALE HUMAN ON EARTH


ONE MAN ONE WOMAN. GENETIC DONORS TO EVERY MAN AND WOMAN ON EARTH.

REMINDS ME OF SOMETHING I READ....

GENETIC FACT.

 

[Cypress]

Y-CHROMOSOMAL ADAM = SINGLE MALE HUMAN SOURCE OF Y-CHROMOSOMAL DNA FOUND IN EVERY MALE HUMAN ON EARTH.


MITOCHONDRIAL EVE = THE SINGLE FEMALE SOURCE OF MITOCHONDRIAL DNA FOUND IN EVERY FEMALE HUMAN ON EARTH


ONE MAN ONE WOMAN. GENETIC DONORS TO EVERY MAN AND WOMAN ON EARTH.

REMINDS ME OF SOMETHING I READ....

GENETIC FACT.

There were also talking snakes in the Garden of Eden, so you are supposed to read it metaphorically.

The so called Mitochondrial Eve and Y chromosomal Adam were not even the first homo sapiens. Homo sapiens existed tens of thousands of years prior to them. So that contradicts the Genesis interpretation.

 

[Darth Omar]

The multiverse is highly speculative, but it is well within the realm of respectable scientific speculation.

Claiming that Genesis is referencing the cosmic background microwave radiation is just nonsense.

We cannot see past the comic background microwave radiation, aka the edge of the observable universe, so we do not know if the big bang was the origin of the universe, or if it was just one event which occurred in a much larger multiverse.

Genesis and the entire Torah should be read, in large measure, metaphorically. And that is exactly how the early preeminent Christian scholars read it. The desire of fundamentalists to embrace biblical literalism and consider the Torah a historical account is just bad theology.

Your opinion is noted.

 

[Into the Night]

there is a scientific theory of evolution, but it is limited to variations within a species that in the extreme case may result in a new species of the same creature, being unable to cross produce with the creature of origin......

Not a theory of science. Just an observation.

The Theory of Evolution states that present day life evolved from more primitive life forms. That is also not a theory of science. It is unfalsifiable. There is no way to go back in time to see what actually happened.

 

[Into the Night]

Maybe maybe not lol?

Even the first chapters of Genesis imply a sequence to the act of creation. God said “let there be light” and the rest follows from there. Well, if all the matter in the universe was allowed[?] to escape from something like a singularity, before the energy coalesced into matter, the universe would be a pretty bright place. To put it mildly.

I think if more theists had a better understanding of the BB they’d find it’s maybe not such a bad theory after all lol.

So where was God before a universe existed for God to be in?

 

[Into the Night]

Jesus fucking Christ, nutjob. 45 posts in a row??? Posting began a 11:50 and ended at 01:41. Did you cum on your keyboard afterward?

Bulverism fallacy. Insult fallacies.

 

[Into the Night]

The fossil record and comparative anatomy unequivocally demostrstes fins turned into legs, and vice versa.

Your only move left is to claim the fossils are fake and were put out there by Satan to trick us.

Fossils don't denote any kind of lineage. Any lineage you assign to them is YOUR speculation, nothing more.
Fake fossils are also a big business. It's worth money to people to fake fossils of the so-called 'missing links'. Some rube scientist will always come along to buy it and claim his fame by 'discovering' the 'missing link'.

Meanwhile the artisans that fake these fossils are laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Into the Night]

you obviously never heard of the peppered moth one nanosecond before you read my post.

Sure I have. They change colors with the seasons.

Rabitts and foxes have fur. Moths don't.

So?

Peppered moths do not change color with the seasons.

Yes they do.

The random genetic mutation for dark colored moths was selectively favored in the 19th century because of environmental conditions.

Nope. They change color with the seasons.

Complaining about fake fossils is the last refuge of the young earth science denialist

The age of Earth is unknown. Science has no theories about the age of the Earth. They are unfalsifiable. No one can go back in time to see what actually happened. Science has no theories about past unobserved events.

There is quite an industry in producing fake fossils. Some of these artisans are quite good at it.

 

[Into the Night]

No, the universe was opaque for the first 300,000 years before conditions allowed the free motion of photons and the universe became transparent.

How do you know? Were you there?

Even then there was no optical light a human eye could register. Electromagnetic energy was in the microwave spectrum.

So...the only light that existed was lower energy light than visible light??? What about all that so-called concentrated energy????

That is why it is called the cosmic microwave background radiation.

Cosmic rays have no frequency. They are high energy particles emitted from stars (including our own Sun).

Optical light in the universe would not have been present for hundreds of millions of years after that, when nucleosynthesis got underway and the first stars formed.

WTF is 'nucleosynthesis'???? Buzzword fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

The hypothesis

Theory, actually. Hypothesis come out of theories, not the other way around.

that fin-bearing animals evolved into leg-bearing animals is emminently testable by careful field observation

Describe this test and where it was conducted and by who.

and study of the fossil and comparative anatomy.

Fossils don't contain lineage information. You are speculating.

Your only move at this point is to holler Satan created the fossil record to deceive us

Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

 

[Into the Night]

His faux forum is like shining a flashlight into his brain. It's his manifesto.

A forum isn't a manifesto. You can join that forum there if you like. Nothing's stopping you.

 

[Cypress]

How do you know? Were you there?

So...the only light that existed was lower energy light than visible light??? What about all that so-called concentrated energy????

Cosmic rays have no frequency. They are high energy particles emitted from stars (including our own Sun).

WTF is 'nucleosynthesis'???? Buzzword fallacy.

You are obviously unfamiliar with the basic lexicon and concepts of cosmology and astronomy. You would have to pay me to teach you, and I have neither the time nor inclination to bring a scientific illiterate up to speed.

 

[Into the Night]

Matter in the form of energy

Matter is not energy. It can be converted to energy, but is not energy. See Einstein's theories.

gives off radiation and light

Light IS radiation.

in Genesis can be interpreted as radiation

Because light IS one form of radiation.

since I doubt the ancient Hebrews had a word for Gamma rays lol.

Frankly, they didn't care.

As a broad outline, the first verses of Genesis describes a distinct beginning to the universe began by an Entity that exists separately from it.

Nope. It doesn't. It only describes the creation of Earth. If any entity exists 'outside the universe', then it isn't a universe. It isn't universal. Paradox.

Theologians would say exists ‘in eternity’ which could be rendered as the absence of time since time is an emergent property of the universe.

Time is not a place. You can't have a universe that is not universal. Nothing can exist outside the universe, not even God.

It all fits.

Nope. You are locked in paradox.

 

[Into the Night]

Magical and imaginative interpretations. Dude, the Sun rises every morning and sets every night. Occam's Razor says that's where the ancients got the idea for Light and Darkness. There's no fucking way they could have understood Gamma radiation.

Good luck with your Creationism puzzle. It'll never allow you to pass a Biology 101 course, but you dropped out years ago so it doesn't matter.

You don't get to quote all biology tests. You are not God.

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed. There's also a lot of confusion in Genesis regarding the nature of the Tree, the nature of the Serpent in Genesis 3 plus this curious statement in Genesis 3:22:

"And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

Who the fuck is "us"? Knowing good and evil makes man like God and his drinking buddies? There's a Tree of Knowledge and a Tree of Immortality? Obviously metaphors, but of what? Also, Genesis has indications of multiple writers and editors. Too many inconsistencies to be one author telling a single coherent story.

What's inconsistent about it?

 

[Into the Night]

This is why American Christians are perceived as morons.

They insist on trying to read the Bible literally, which is just bad theology outside of fundamentalist Protestant circles.

Bigotry. Not all Christians are fundamentalists or Protestant.

 

[Into the Night]

I am speaking in broad generalities.

Catholic theology does not promote a biblical literalism and inerrancy the way the Protestant tradition did (particularly protestant fundamentalists) but undoutedly a some lay Catholics treated the bible literally

Bigotry. Not all protestants are fundamentalists.