Than leave this thread. This is a debate room, so if you like to debate at least offer something to the room or either refute my claims. There seems to be a bit of dislike and hate towards me on this thread. LOL! I guess your just not interested in life becuase you have no clue to what this topic is about. Once you are serious and understand how complicated life is than maybe you wont act like that. Now hopefully you come back with something for us to look at this time so we can follow up with your source. Goodluck.

You wrote: The distance between Earth and the Sun has nothing to do with the temperature of Earth.

The needs to support life are very complex. Distance DOES effect the temperature. The further away you are from the sun, the less heat and light the planets receives. But other things affect the temperature as well, like an atmosphere.

You wrote: Did you know that the hottest planet in our galaxy is not Mercury, which is the closest planet to the sun, rather the hottest planet in our galaxy is Venus.

Yes, I know. Venus is hotter because the amount of heart it recieves from the sun is stored in the atmosphere. So this cause the temperature to increase rapidly. An atmosphere of greenhouse gases will trap heat....Mercury does not have an atmosphere or at least a weak one as I understands it. So therefore, it cannot retained any heat and become less hotter.

You wrote: And on the other end of the spectrum the coldest planet is Uranus, colder than Pluto and Neptune.

Well, Pluto is no longer considered a planet anymore. So Neptune would be the coldest.. Not Uranus. Neptune would be the coldest and farthest planet from the sun. Im sure the temperature is much colder than Uranus by a small degree.

You wrote: This proves your understanding of astronomy is not only flawed, but wrong. And so you take a leap of faith to assume that a single god designed the solar system.

No, its YOU who don’t understand. The universe and our solar system points toward Intelligent Design. Astronomy is one of the area in science that highly supports the existence of God. Consider each characteristic of our solar system is highly improbable. If you consider all together, probability is so small as to be impossible by random chance. Science agrees that there is a start. Since there is a start, there must be Starter. That doesn’t prove the big bang. God is a more plausible explanation, He not only created our universe, but He sustains it today. Our solar system operates and obey the laws of physics and behave in a certain way.

You wrote: If millions of years have not gone by yet then why do we have fossils of dinosaurs that date back almost 3900 million years ago? And if we assume that the Life is only 10000 years old, where are all the dinosaurs?

What dating methods are you reffering to? Carbon dating, Uranuim, Lead? Please tell us exactly why we could trust the dates? Im pretty sure you are smart enough to explain that for us. Plus, Dinosuars does not date beyond 70 million years. Willard Libby who invented Carbon Dating says its only accurate up to a few thousands years. That is why they don’t even date Dinosaurs fossils through Carbon Dating.

In fact, fossil datings are determined by the Geologic timescale which is based on evolutionary thinking. We can circular reason this forever and still doesn’t prove a thing. Geologic Column does not exist anywhere in the world except the textbooks, in the order they like it to be. Although it has been a well preconcieved idea throughout science. But it is imperfect.

There are many theories why Dinosours died out. This was due to consipation, asteriods, catastrophe etc. However, the current theory is they have now evolved into birds. That is funny. Now, tell us how exactly does a reptiles evovled into birds? Im sure you have seen these missing links before. So it wont hurt to explain it to us. Goodluck.

You wrote: Where are the rest of the 99.9 species that have gone extinct? The answer is because evolution was in effect since the very beginning of time. i can go into evolution in depth, but i would like to hear your understanding of evolution first, then i will be more than gladly to refute any of your claims.

We do not know if some of the species have gone extinct. But most have. For example, there are living fossils that have been found and still exist today such as the Ceolocanth fish. It is predicted that the fish have gone extinct about 70 million years ago. Unfortunately, this is hard evidence against evolution. It is firm evidence that evolution never took place. You think this specie survives for 70 million of years? How do you account that?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/fish/anatomy.html

So, you want to know my understanding of evolution? It depend on what you mean by evolution? Micro, macro, cosmic, stellar and planetary, organic or chemical evolution? Which one? Since only 1 of them is scientific, It would have to be Microevolution.

Microevolution – Is evolution below the species level (small scale changes). Or simply put, just variation within kind. I.e, you have many kids but they all look different. Likewise, plants and animals bring forth after its own kind. It’s a fact there are some changes, but the changes are limited within the gene pool. The more further you get away from the norm, the uglier it gets. So thats basically it. Unless you disprove otherwise.

You wrote: You quoted one of my great heroes of sciences, Sir Isaac Newton. So we both know that he said this in his earlier years, meaning before he found out the truth about his religion. I am assuming you know what i am talking about. You are quoting someone who lost all faith in his religion and god at the end of his life.

Newton was more devoted to his faith than science. He wrote more books on religious ideas than his science. Im pretty sure he rejected some of his theological views on the Trinity and such, but he was no diest.. He was a theist. His view on God was that, God was acted in the universe. He accepted religion and was a Christian. There is no dispute in these pionts. Tell me why he rejected his faith and please provide your source so I can follow up.

You wrote: God didn't create the sun, moon, and stars until the 4th day of creation according to the bible. So how does one know how many days have gone by during those supposedly three to four days because time didn't exist until the fourth day which "God “set” the sun, moon and stars in the heavens to govern the days, months, seasons and years (verse 17). When God “set” the lights in the heavens, it was much like when we “set” a clock. And that really is what God did—He “set” His clock on the 4th day." Perhaps millions and millions of years went by...

The word “day” in Hebrew means a literal 24 hours (yom). The main reason why most people doubt the days of creation as being literal 24 hour usally has notthing to do with the bible itself. But rather the issue is outside influence. The reason is because secular scientists think they have prove the earth to be billion of years old then the creation days cannot be ordinary days. But this is not true at all. Its obvious that the creation days are reffering to a literal 24 hour day.

You meantioned: "time didn’t exist until the fourth day".. What makes you think that time didn’t exist unitl the fourth day? Please be a little more specific. “Time” was already exist when God made the heavens and the earth. This includes time, space and matter – Gen 1:1. Consider this passage:

Exodus 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

Exodus 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

This is showing that God was speaking to the Jews that they should work 6 days “ ordinary days” and rested on the 7th day (following by one literal day of rest) because God made all (heavens and earth) therein. God didnt told the Jews to work for 6 million years and rest for 1 million year?…No. Likewise, there are major problems when inserting “long days” to fit the creation model. There are other passage were it is literal and aligorized depend how the passage is use.

The sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day – Gen 1:16. But the Author is re-telling the creation story since everything was completed in the beginning – Gen 1:1. If you read everything in its context – it is clear that the word “yom” or “day” is referring to ordinary days jus tlike today.

You wrote: And you are certainly correct, but we both know what those creationist sciences Preached, such as, " the world was flat, earth was the center of the world, blah blah blah..

Wrong. That is heresy. There is no historical records that supports such claim. That is a falsely accuse of Christians because the bible doesn’t teach that. The bible teaches a round earth:

Isaiah 40:21 Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
Isaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

Your science has a long history of being WRONG too. Educated people back then were well aware the earth was a sphere. You have been indoctrinated by people who hate Christians because that is the only thing they can do. History is kinda mess up cuz people changed it the way they wanted.. So have to be careful.

You wrote: And i know what you're gonna say, "that they lacked technology." That is true, but the problem wasn't technology, but it was the ignorance of using the bible as knowledge and facts, rather than its real purpose which is to set up faith and values.

The bible was indeed right all along son. Historcial facts do not show that Christians were opposing science and the lack of techonology back them. This is a PROPAGANDA of evolutionists spreading lies and falsely accuse believers. Your science came along afterward. The bible was more than 2,000 years ago and prophecy were written long before your science ever came into existence.
Christopher Columbus sailed to search for the new world and he already knew the earth was round. How did he know? Becase he read his bible. It was something he wanted to prove to the world. Sailors were afriad they would fall off the edge of a round earth because many people didn’t understand much about the world back them.. You see how Evolutionist would want us to believe lies?

You wrote: This proved nothing. Science has proven that the Earth is young. 4.5 billion years old is young compare to the universe which is about 13.7 billion years old

There is a huge major difference between 4.5 and 13.7 billion years. But 4.5 billion years is OLD compare to 6-10 thousands years. Science hasn’t prove the earth is old.. No. There are as much as evidence for a young universe as well depeding how you look at the evidence. Science has prove this too.. What's your point?

You wrote: Because you have no other evidence you use faith to believe in the 6 days of creation. But can you test it? Can you verify it? in science the verification and rectification of the age of the Earth and universe have been test numerous times over and over. You say that there is science to prove your claim that the world was created in 6 days, please share.

Sure. There are many scientific evidence to show that earth is still young. Let me give you just a few:

1. POPULATION STATISTICS - In 1800, there were at least 1 billion people in the world. In 1930, it cross the 2 billion mark. Right now its about 6.4 –6.7 billion people in the world. Based on these facts, i believe you have billions of people that grew out of only about 4-5 thousands of years ago. If it were billion of years, the world ought to be crowded by now. The question is, where did all these people came from? Id’s say, 6.4- 6.7 billion people today could easily originated from 8 people in the ark in the past few thousand years only. Here is a link for you to follow up.

http://ldolphin.org/popul.html

2. CARBON DATING - In 1940, Willard Libby invented carbon dating. He says carbon dating can only last up to a few thousand years. He also says that we should reach equalibrium in the atmosphere in 30,000 thousand years or so. Right now, we haven’t even reached equalibruim yet. We’re only 1/3 of our way to equalibruim. What does that tells me? It tells me that the earth is still young. Oh btw, there are many assuptions that are built on these dating methods which is likely to be inacurrate. Im sure you know what they are do you?

3. MOON RECIDING- Our moon is slowly moving away from us today. If we rewind back to the past, about 1 million years ago, the moon could of have been so close to the earth that it had caused tides. By using this logic, If we rewind 2-3 million years ago, the earth could not orbit at all. Evolutionist would ignored everything that teaches that the earth is young because they desperately need the billion of years to make their evolution theory look reasonable.

4. POLYSTRATE FOSSILS – There are fossilized trees that cut through many sedimentary rock layers at one time through rapid deposition. How could this be if those layers were many ages apart? This is evidence that go against the idea that the earth is old. If these layers were many ages apart (million of years), we would see erosion rates. Unfortunately, we don’t. All we see is a big crack on the ground (grand canyons) formed by lots of water in a short amount of time at one time. So the whole idea of the geologic column is a hoax and fraud. Although its a great tool dont get me wrong. But that is how they interpret the evidence in the light of this dumb geologic column..

http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/43/43_4/polystrate_fossils...

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1991

You wrote: I will agree that we don't understand it fully, but i will argue that they can be tested. Light and gravity can easily be tested so im going to skip those two. Love on the other hand is more complicated. Can we test love you ask? Let me answer your question by asking one myself, Isn't your god testing his followers' love for him? didn't your god ask Abraham to kill Isaac as a test of love? If we can't measure love then we all must be going to hell according to your religion.

Light is not always a constant - so who knows? It could had been decay. Gravity operates by natural law and simply obey rules. These are objective laws that govern our universe. So why is the universe the way that it is? How is your evolutionary thinking account for this? Love on the other hand cannot be measure. So therefore, your science failed miserably.

God was testing Abraham’s faith. Of course we cannot measure love – in this sense, God’s love. We cannot live up to God’s standard of morality and that is why we deserve to go to hell. Abraham offerred his son was a picture of Jesus Christ dieing for the sins of the world. God will provide the sacrificed, not Abraham. Im surprise you are on your way of learning this.

You wrote: If Darwin didn't know much during his time, that would also be true too with the creationist world.

Let me tell you what is really going on back them:

Darwin predicted that all life share a common ancestor. Prior to Darwin, Lyell and Hutton, people were shaped and were greatly influenced by Christianity worldview. Many people believe in a young earth during the time until evolution came along. But there wasn’t any evidence for the theory until 40 years later. These evidence are built on lies! Remember the “ human embryology” by Earnst Haeckels? This was one of the strongest evidence Darwin knew at the time. Plus, people didn’t know about DNA and genetic. That was discovered not too long ago.

Creationist knew what the bible teaches and had always stick to that worldview - That God created all things including mankind. Let me point some things out: Hitler came along after Darwin and killed many inferior races. He believes people are just an animal. In fact, this is how racism originated...Caucasoids, Negroids, Mongoloid, and Australoid. All becuase of this evolution thinking - that man is somehow SUPERIOR and we should eliminate the weaker ones.. That's what Hitler did. He eliminated the Jews becuase He thought the blonde hair blue eyes were the stronger one. Jews were rich too.

Christian do not hold to this view. They believe men were created equal before God and that Jesus gave His life for all. So therefore, human life is valuable. So now look what your theory has done to people dude...Look at Jospeh Stalin, Pol Pot, etc... Cant always blame and demean Religion as a whole. Even in the animal world, Champazee fights all the time.. It a selfish hungry human nuture..

You wrote; Remember they once believed the world was flat and the earth was the center of the world. And these people are the one's interpreting and writing the bible.

The flat earth already have been refuted.. It’s a myth spread by evolutionist we know.. Now you tell me what does the bible says about a flat earth? And who were the writers…It would be nice if you can show us that. Im pretty sure the bible doesn’t teaches a flat eart.h. It teaches a round earth.. Unless something is wrong with your interpretation.

You wrote: I'm glad that you are now accepting the fact that ancient fossils does exist and that the Earth is millions and millions of years old.

No, I didn’t say I accepted it? During Darwin time, there were very few fossils that DOESN’T even support his theory. They were all rejected by Paleontologist because these fossils were fully formed. Second, the earth Is NOT millions and millions of years old. No. You accept “million of years” becuase you are stuck with this evolution thinking.

You wrote: I guess this is your 1 step closer to realizing the facts.

Nope. Still far from facts. Not even close. We have revelation from God who was there from the very beginning since Creation on forward who preserve his Words for us today that can be trust. Why would you or anybody else put their faith and trust in men who never was there from the very beginning, who make mistakes all the time etc? You should really consider this:

Evolutonist talk about missing links. What do they find? Nothing... So, what do they label them as: Missing! LOL! Honest evolutionist admits there is no evidence for the theory son. So what is missing? And why havent found yet? Obviously, becuase nothing is missing durrrrrrrrr.... think about this: are they missing the evidence OR is their theories are wrong to start with? Goodluck. Will be back to refute more of your argument.

I responded with the simplest thing and you fail to see it LOL! You made an ape out of yourself for not seeing the things around you. Now one evidence i am convinced of is a global flood which supports Creationism. First, i have the assurance from God's word that the flood was a real historical event. I believe it really did happen becuase not only did i read about it in the scriptures, but God also gives me physical evidence as well. There are still alot of flood Geologist who supports the flood theory!

Now when we look at the rock ages, we see many line of evidence that point to rapid process and catestrophe events. In other words, it happen very quickly with alot great damages. The global flood explains the millions of fossil that were found. That is what Creationist would predicts anyway. Just that today it is rare for an animal to died and leave fossils behind becuase it requires special condition - catasrophe, and require sudden burry inorder to prevent from decomposing and from bacteria or eaten by predators etc...

According to the teachings of evolution which (i suppose you accepts) would tell you differently based on the geologic column they exist (Mesozoic, Paleozoic, Cenozoic). We're taught that each layers are millions of years apart assuming that its very old. This is not true. We know the geologic column does not exist anywhere in the world. If it did, how would you know? Through Carbon dating? You would have to explain the steps use to the date the rocks plus many of the assumption use. If you dont, you already fail. So I have no problem when scientist or evolutionary geologist interpret an age. But to know the exact age of a rock or anything is just impossible. They cant measure an age, they can only interpret.

I would then conclude that they were all formed at one time shortly after the flood with ALOT of water within a short amount of time. So for me, i have no problem interpreting the facts. Now from your point, you have to explain how did the Colorado River carved that Giant canyon? That's what you were taught in Biology class remember? HaHaha! That is a big crack on the ground you know? And rivers do not flow up hill. How in the world could that be and why does it need million of years when a global flood can do that in a few seconds? LOL!!! So goodluck.

Sure, i will get back at you on this one. But for now, that is enough for you to ponder about.

God calls Adam by his name - Gen 3:9. The reason why he was called Adam becuase God formed him from the earth. His name resembles this idea according to scriptures. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew so we have to find the original meaning of the word Adam - which means earth. But Adam literally means man because he was the first man that God created. There are names in the bible that mean something. God uses these names to illustrate spiritual truths.

For example: Abram was called Abraham because he will be a father to many nations - Gen 17:5. God gives and he changes people's name for a purpose and that purpose serves its name. Same way with Adam.

Creation days is important because the Jews were commanded to follow the same pattern. Take Deut 5:13-14. This passage is relevant with the creation days in Genesis as we will see below.

Deuteronomy 5:13 Six days thou shalt labor, and do all thy work:

Deuteronomy 5:14 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son,
nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant,
nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.

What God is telling the Jews was that they were to work 6th days and rest on the 7th day according to the same pattern that God had set. Its obvious that the Jews were to work 6 ordinary days, NOT 6 millions of years! The bible makes it plain for us to understand that these creation days were ordinary days. They were not a long period of time. Why would God use a long period of time by means of his creation? Why cant God just do it in 6 days? Explain this.

Well that is a common argument. The bible gives you that answer in Genesis 1:3-5.

Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Genesis 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Here it clearly states that God created the light during the first day - associated with evening and morning, day/night cycle. God is that source of light and he does not need a secondary source. this light is not the same light that the sun was created on the fourth day. It is the glory of God that manesfest this light. Jesus also says he is the light of the world. So the fact that the sun was created on the 4th day does not contradict this. God provided the light from day 1 to day 3 supernaturally while on day 4 he created the sun. If God didn’t make the sun until the fourth day, then where did the light come from? I'd say it came from him.

Another point is that God made the vegetation on the 3rd day - Genesis 1:9-13. He did not made the sun, moon, and stars until the fourth day. The fact is you can have vegetation survive in a 24 hour without the sun but you CANNOT have it survive for 6 million years. So if the creation days were a long period of time then you got a problem.

A person who study science already has a presuppositional worldview about God and the bible. That is because of what they've been trained to do or taught at public schools. There are those that are honest with their science that led them to God. Science is just
human reasons and ideas that has its own flaws too. Science is just a tool that we can use to better understand the known universe base on observations etc (Christians and non Christians alike). We live in the same universe but we interpret differently depending on our starting point. The bible is the word of God that is based on prophecy that we could confirmed throughout history. If we put on the biblical glasses and look through that worldview, we'll have better understanding of the world we live in.

The bible is the inspiration word of God. It contain his promises and revelation to those that believe in Jesus Christ dieing for their sins. It offers salvation by his grace through faith in Jesus Christ and so on....