Proof that at least one of two (evolution, ice age) key theories is false

official school material ^ | 04/05/21 | self

[Truth666]

These are three of the dogmas which we are endoctrinated nowadays in school : #1 - origins of the current forms life forms: by evolution from previous forms #2 - appearance of Homo Sapiens (from encarta): The oldest known fossils that possess skeletal features typical of modern humans date from between 130,000 and 90,000 years ago. #3 - last ice age (from encarta): the most recent ice age, the Pleistocene Epoch, lasted from about 1.6 million years to 10,000 years before present ... when temperatures were 5° to 7° C cooler than today.

#1 and #2 are part of current evolution theory; #3 is part of current ice age theory.

There can be no doubts that no other theory has so much impact on modern society as evolution theory. In view of the signs of climate change from the last years, ice age theory is impacting society more by the day.

From these dogmas we immediately can take the following conclusion : homo sapiens has already experienced an ice age.

Now hold on to your seat : relying solely on the assumptions of both theories, there's plenty of evidence that AT LEAST one of these theories is false ! In other words : these theories are incompatible.

Let's take one piece of evidence that any high school student can understand.

Lord Howe Island - living proof

This is not just another coral reef. This is Lord Howe Island, by far the southern-most coral reef in the world. Its existance is only possible due to particular climate conditions that affect an area of the world where no other land rises even remotely near sea level. In fact there's nothing but deep ocean until Port Macquarie, on the NSW coast, 550 kms away.

This wonder of the world would be immediately destroyed, if the ocean temperature would drop just one degree Celsius. If the temperature would drop 5°C both endemic unmistakable palms (including the most popular indoor palm of the world, howea forsteriana) would also perish. So, just to take these two examples, both the coral and the howea would have had to have developed from scratch during the last 10,000 years. A claim that nobody would dare to make.

[Physicist]

...and I should also ask: why is that important?

[Truth666]

answer you later, have to go

[whattajoke]

Until that first "living" organism is located and examined as evidence, the best one can do is to take what is available and "guess" what the data means as to the origination...

Another OJ juror...

The origin of "life" is what evolution is suppose to explain.

Really. Please send me the literature that backs this up. I would think I'd have been aware of this sweeping change to evolutionary theory. HINT: You are blatantly wrong.

everytime time there is a "new" discovery the E's never use it to give credit to the possibility of a Creator, rather it is used to disprove a Creator.

A much better and more accurate statement would be, "everytime there is a 'new' discovery, scientists never ever mention anything about a supernatural deity." Just trying to help.

Actually if the E's had any understanding in the "spirit body", they would then have the missing links they keep looking for in the physical flesh body

Huh? First of all, I'm sure quite a number of "E's" understand the "spirit body." But... which "spirit body" are you referring too? My Navajo friend has quite a different idea about it than you do, I'm sure. Your 2nd sentence is a bit too off the wall for me.

I reject evolution not only because of what is the consequences,

Which are? Less coral reefs in the world?

but because it is not true.

Wrong.

Evolution is a religion,

Wrong.

void of a Creator,

Right. All science avoids supernatural explanations.

By the way I do not believe this earth is 6,000 years old the evidence disproves that story.

Hooray. Perhaps BibChr and bondserv would like to discuss this with you, however.

[Jack of Diamonds]

Coconuts do indeed float

[PatrickHenry]

PatrickHenry remains aloof ...

[Truth666]

That site requires java, which I never use.

[Truth666]

"You imply that coral can't possibly have propagated across the 550 km to Lord Howe island"
I don't require to that as I explicited mentioned several times before in this thread, because as evolution theory doesn't claim that coral could have evoluted in the last 10,000 years (Physicist thinks so, btw, but he is not in charge of official material for evolution theory ...)

[Truth666]

two different species of corals don't produce viable offspring.

[Physicist]

Well, gosh, but that's true of all animal species. If that's all it takes to prevent evolution, I'd think that somebody would have noticed, by now.

[Physicist]

because as evolution theory doesn't claim that coral could have evoluted in the last 10,000 years

Evolutionary theory fairly demands that it has.

(Physicist thinks so, btw, but he is not in charge of official material for evolution theory ...)

LOL, but Encarta is, huh?

It's just not Evolution^TM without the Official Seal.

[PatrickHenry]

Placemarker (bailing out to watch Bush's speech at 8:00).

[qam1]

This wonder of the world would be immediately destroyed, if the ocean temperature would drop just one degree Celsius.

Your silly argument comes down to the ice age and/or evolution is false because

1)It was too cold for the corals to survive the ice age
2)10,000 years isn't enough time to reconstitute the reef

Well, If Noah's flood happened what do you think the ocean temperature would be several thousand feet under water where those corals would have ended up? It would be around 4°C which is much lower than the drop of 1-5°C experienced during the ice age which most certainly would have killed the corals (As well as the pressure, change in salinity and silt levels).

So even if we ignore the fact that your assertion has been overwhelmingly debunked at least a dozen different ways on this thread already and believe you that this poses a problem for evolution and the ice age, Well than it would totally debunk the Bible as historical fact because you would have been dealing with even more extreme cold and conditions and a shorter 4000 year time frame.

[qam1]

This wonder of the world would be immediately destroyed, if the ocean temperature would drop just one degree Celsius.

Your silly argument comes down to the ice age and/or evolution is false because

1)It was too cold for the corals to survive the ice age
2)10,000 years isn't enough time to reconstitute the reef

Well, If Noah's flood happened what do you think the ocean temperature would be several thousand feet under water where those corals would have ended up? It would be around 4°C which is much lower than the drop of 1-5°C experienced during the ice age which most certainly would have killed the corals (As well as the pressure, change in salinity and silt levels).

So even if we ignore the fact that your assertion has been overwhelmingly debunked at least a dozen different ways on this thread already and believe you that this poses a problem for evolution and the ice age, Well than it would totally debunk the Bible as historical fact because you would have been dealing with even more extreme cold and conditions and a shorter 4000 year time frame.

[Just mythoughts]

You laugh now, but as the old saying goes He who laughs last laughs longest, whattajoke.

[PatrickHenry]

P L A C E M A R K E R

[general_re]

I don't think anyone here knows what you're arguing any more, possibly including you - either you're not getting your argument across effectively, or you're hopelessly confused yourself. Why don't you try restating it in the simplest possible terms, perhaps as a broad outline summarizing the main points of your argument?

[Truth666]

Until February 1788, when it was discovered, Lord Howe Island was just a unique (and most probably the ultimate) example for the beauty of Creation.
Only a few years later it had become also a unique (and most probably the ultimate) example of destruction of the creation by man ...

[Truth666]

A puzzle with only four pieces, and yet only one result - this :

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&q=+%22Lord+Howe+Island%22+%22ice+age%22+%22evolution+theory%22+proof

[Truth666]

For the record :
Results 1 - 1 of 1 for "Lord Howe Island" "ice age" "evolution theory" proof. (0.09 seconds)
User Posts
... point, like in any other, Lord Howe Island is the ... reference to prove that it's incompatible with evolution theory. ... one of two (evolution, ice age) key theories ...
www.freerepublic.com/~truth666/in-forum - 100k - 24 May 2004 - Cached - Similar pages

[Truth666]

I think I said enough about the subject if this thread.


I take off now and the text isn't the only sad thing I see in this aerial photo of Lord Howe Island.
I imagine this is February 2001, as Mankind has entered the XXI (and most probably last) century of its History.

For the part of Mankind in the lowlands it's (most probably) too late to escape being swept away by the gigantic wave approaching on the horizon.
But I see some standing at the top of Mt. Gower and Mt. Lidgbird. They are about to jump from the cliffs.

Will they decide to have a last look to the Pyramid ?

And will they understand the (most probably ultimate) warning God is giving them ?