betsy

An anchor yesterday at CTV or CBC had among her guest, the editor of Daily Mail. She criticized TRump for the CNBC comment against the woman reporter, and was giving a leading commentary about how Trump targets women. The editor didn't follow the lead. Instead, he pointed out that a CNN producer was heard saying that, "Kellyanne looks like she got hit by a shovel." So what did the flabbergasted anchor woman say? It's not the same because we "know" Trump has been disparaging women - and she brought up the tape with Billy Bush! The Daily Mail editor fired back, "if there's a cockroach, you can be sure that usually there are more!" This stupid anchor woman relies on the publicity on Trump as her evidence, and she refused to entertain the notion that the CNN producer exhibited the same offense that Trump is being criticized with.........because there's no publicity about the CNN producer! The nitwit! She didn't even blink!

No, not hermaphroditic. Some hermaphroditics require a partner. http://animals.mom.me/list-hermaphrodite-animals-2829.html Some insects are asexual. http://sciencing.com/insects-reproduce-asexually-10015868.html Various animals are asexual. http://sciencing.com/list-asexually-reproducing-organisms-8758003.html

You're trying to change the channel. Not after you explain this: On 6/30/2017 at 8:08 PM, betsy said: "If the primordial hydrogen and hellium are synthesized inside the star..." How can it be inside the star, if the star isn't there?

I'm not claiming or pretending to be a scientist, DOP.

Go to the other thread and read the article I gave.

Genesis 1 says, "darkness covers the surface of the deep." So there was "darkness" on the surface of the earth. How dark it was - we don't know. The usage of darkness might be another figure of speech to indicate simply it wasn't bright as it was today. Here's one scientific explanation for that: There are scientific theories that say the atmospheric gases were thick during infant earth, and solar output and brightness wasn't as intense compared to the sun we have today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faint_young_Sun_paradox#cite_note-Pavlov-8 God must've removed much of the dark cover (atmospheric gases), when He said, "Let there be light." He must've been referring to the light of the sun (which was already created at the beginning). Genesis 1:14 indicate that God removed the thick layers of gases that covers the earth so that the sun, moon and stars shone through. Take note that Genesis 1:14 is more detailed than Genesis 1:3-5. Genesis 1:14 - 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God created night and day, and seasons. --------------------------------------- Another scientific explanation for the "let there be light...." comes from the book "The Genesis Enigma." It's eyes. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1200486/The-Genesis-enigma-How-DID-Bible-evolution-life-3-000-years-Darwin.html#ixzz4lZv1cABL -------------------------------------------------------------- One thing that's obvious, the Bible has given us a glimpse of creation - but it isn't a blow-by-blow detailed account.

Well, the first law of thermodynamics had already explained about that! No new energy being created! It's just being transformed. Look at the list in the next thread! You're the one who isn't accepting what science finds. Instead, you're turning this convoluted message about metallicity - which I doubt you and James really understand - into something that isn't! The article about it says that it's nothing but a hypothesis! For scientists to say that they "BELIEVE" it to be so.......isn't a fact! They're making conjectures! They sound like religious people! You may not belong to a Christian religion.....but the way you - and certain posters - try to fit your square pegs into round holes, makes you seem more religious than I am in your zealotry to uphold your belief! At least, I entered your comfort zones and had not merely gave you blind faith for an argument! I'm using science! Yet you guys, quite so easily throw science out the window, whenever it does not agree with you!

I mean, "asexual!" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexual_reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis_in_squamata

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, another evidence is given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later. Earth was covered with water Genesis 1 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. From that passage, the Bible clearly describes earth as being covered by a global sea. That description is supported by science. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126882-600-ancient-earth-was-a-barren-waterworld/

You can give your spin anyway you want, but It doesn't explain "it," James. What I'm posting - along with compatibility or consistency with scientific discoveries/explanation - clearly contradict your given view.

Whatever, DOP. The entire creation process is not revealed by the Scriptures. It does not give a blow-by-blow detailed creation. However.....practically all of Genesis, is uncannily consistent, if not compatible with science explanations or findings. To dismiss that as nothing more but coincidence, would defy logic.

Check out the explanation to DOP. Post #101.

There is no contradiction, DOP. Read the first sentence from Genesis 1: Genesis 1 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Heavens - plural form- is defined as the universe. Therefore, the sun, the solar system, etc, were created along with the earth before the first day. Genesis 1 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. So, according to the Bible, earth was covered with water! Here's what science says: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126882-600-ancient-earth-was-a-barren-waterworld/ UH. I gotta add this nextdoor.

"If the primordial hydrogen and hellium are synthesized inside the star..." How can it be inside the star, if the star isn't there?

I'll say, "Socrates, you're the one making a claim. Furthermore, you're in Philosophy! You should know how to answer in a logical manner."

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation - evidences given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later. Chicken Came First Genesis 1 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. https://www.icr.org/article/3 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1294341/Chicken-really-DID-come-egg-say-scientists.html#ixzz4lVyYBYhE

Well, you don't understand what you read! I said: If the primordial hydrogen and hellium are synthesized inside the star.....that means the stars already existed. Where did those stars come from? You said, "synthesized." I merely repeated what you said. Why are you passing that on to me? You're the one who's making a claim here!

I edited. Read it again.

We're talking the "beginning," as in Big Bang! If the primordial hydrogen and hellium are synthesized inside the star.....that means the stars already existed. Where did those stars come from?

What about them? Explain.

You're grabbing at everything - from metallicity to hydrogen bombs..... DOP, don't shift the conversation! You made a claim - explain.

The first law of thermodynamics answered your question about new stars, DOP. Stellar evolution doesn't answer, or address the question about the beginning.

The other one was the SECOND LAW of THERMODYNAMICS. I forgot to add the first law. But thanks to DOP's post in the other thread (and thanks to you too, for getting me to revisit that thread).....I was reminded of my neglect. Here let's put up the recap page again: The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation - evidences given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later. Refer to post #57 for some detailed explanations. All from the Book of Genesis 1 and 2: *In the beginning (consistent with science's discovery that the universe had a beginning) *All waters gather to one place, and land appear (consistent with science's claim that in the early times there was only one super ocean and only one super continent - Pangaea and Panthalassa) *The waters bringing forth creatures that has life (compatible with evolutionist claim that life started in the water). *"After their kind" in relation to reproduction - without any mention of genders, except to humans - male and female - (consistent with science discovery that some species don't require a mate in order to reproduce. Some creatures are asexual) *God formed man from dust (consistent with science finding that the human body is made up of elements that comes from dirt/dust). *God's curse towards the snake that it would from henceforth crawl on its belly and eat dust (compatible with science's discovery that snakes used to have limbs or legs) *Man's dominion of animals (consistent with reality - as can be observed, even today) ------------------------ *Stretches the Heavens (consistent with science discovery that the universe is stretching). Take note that most of the verses uses the present tense "stretches." How appropriate! The universe is still stretching. Job 9:8 He alone stretches out the heavens _ and treads on the waves of the sea. Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 48:13; Isaiah 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12 Jeremiah 51:15; Zechariah 12:1 ----------------------------------------------------------- *Psalm 102:25-26, Isaiah 51:6, Hebrews 1:10-11 indicate the universe is wearing out (consistent with the Second Law of Thermodynamics) Hydrological Cycle (post #454) Atoms (post #478) Springs in the Oceans (post #493) PATHS OF THE SEAS (post #495) THE EARTH IS ROUND (post #526) AXIAL TILT (post #526) AIR HAS WEIGHT (post #551) THE SINGING STARS (post #561) THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS (POST #566) Oh boy, the list is surely getting long!

That's not what is said in the article, DOP. The article is giving speculations. Therefore, nothing is really understood. Well? You're not explaining your version, DOP. All you do is make declarations without any further explanations. Explain.