I should certainly hope it isn't upheld as an icon of evolution as the origins of life have nothing to do with evolution in the first place...  It is however a great example of the scientific process.  Incidentally since that experiment ideas about the origins of life have been significantly improved (and we now know that the conditions of that experiement did not reflect those present at the time life originated).  We are able to synthesize replicating protein strands in the lab from basic building blocks found in nature, we just haven't figured out yet how those building blocks came together without our assistance.  As you can imagine, its pretty difficult to figure out what the earth was like 4 billion years ago..

Well unfortunately, it is in my daughter's 10th grade biology book and they say a picture is worth a thousands words.   I maintain that it is there to give the misleading impression to unwary and questioning students that scientists have demonstrated the first steps in the  origins of life. Why myth bandied as fact?

The earth is 4 billion years old....pffft. Why not 3 billion or 5 billion?  And this is another myth bandied as fact!

I don't use a moment of my time thinking about it as I believe in God and that He created the Universe and all that's in it according to Genesis. As far as new being old consider the miracle of the wedding at Cana that Christ performed...He changed the water into wine and it was so good, that all the wedding guests thought it was mature...old wine that the bride and groom had saved the best for last. 

I think scientists have drawn mistaken conclusions from the appearance of age in the universe. Why ignore the possibility that the Creator rapidly ( Genesis says that in the beginning God spoke and light was created) transformed matter created on Day 1 into galaxies on Day 4 and stretched out starlight instantaneously throughout the universe? Instantaneous Creation to me is also mature Creation.

Along this line of thinking... If one were to believe that the world was created by God, and he made Adam and Eve as fully matured adults, not children... it is logical to assume that the world and universe were created along the same lines.

There is a comment a couple pages in (my internet is too slow to go back and be able to quote it...) that suggests that other life forms would be seeing a version of earth as it was thousands/millions/billions years ago because of the time that it takes for lightwaves to travel.  Would this not be true of any planet outside our solar system that we would see?

Again, I personally can't get excited about the question of other life forms. And as far as time is concerned, it started in the beginning when God created the universe and Adam and Eve. For me, that was the year one of the world before Christ.

Time is not eternal...Just as it began with God, it will end as we know it at the end of the world and when that will happen, Scripture has it that only God knows.

SOLAM POSTS #158

As far as special, we in the human race are indeed very special in that we are made in image and likeness of God...that means along with our physical natural body, we have a spiritual, immortal soul. That means we will pass from time to eternity.

I think it could be in the next life when we will learn many of the questions we have today about the other dimensions of force, time and energy and space.  

Cuz it serves a clear ideologic premise; that's either faith or deductable from truths *exposed* by scientific means.

The thing with religion(s) is that THEY claim having truth for any facts.

The trick with science is that THEY turn some facts into truth.

Once you know (or believe) in such distinctions... then, and only then, can myths be defined (or interpreted, btw) in both perspectives.

Intelligence is a product of evolution while conscience allows perception. Neither are absolutely necessary for life outside Earth. Be it created or a consequence of localized conditions.

God was the source of all rational reality - possibly even more than we can imagine since we are gifted with the self-conscience, AFAIC.

Given the hypothesis that the Light we see in the sky at night is often the remnants from that of already "Dead" Stars, then sure, why not.

Another analogy, although a sci-fi based one, would be the Planets of the Apes movies premise where somehow a Earth ship gets catapulted through space/time only to arrive at some other timeframe in the Earth's evolutionary future/history.  

The first is probably at least reasonable, the second purely fanciful surely but it all comes back to the one thing we all know for sure.

No one really knows. Not just yet anyways. lol

I've heard that theory before, but had forgotten it.  That theory is kind of eeirie. 

Two actually dont leave out Mars. We know it had water.

Actually the experiment proved organic compounds can be made from inorganic ones, using natural electromagnetic forces.

The age of rocks can be determined by using radiological samples. It is very acurate. Dont ask me to explain it, im not a geologist

The Universe was created in the Big Bang. Now before the Big Bang there was no time or space. In the bible it says light was made before thestars. This is actually true there was light before gravity could pull matter together and make stars. look at it this way God made the laws the universe operates on and knows full well how it will all turn out, and it is Scientist who discover the laws.

God did not make a the Universe exactly like we see it today, and just made it look old. Thats rediculous. God created a rational Universe ment to be understood by rational beings.

The Church does not opppose the existance of alien life. If they did I would leave, becuase as I and others have shown in this post there HAS to be other Intelligent life out there.

Light speed can not be reach yet someone post on this site about a test that had atoms bound to each other doing what ever the opposite one did at least 10,000 times faster then the speed of light?

Oh it definetly seems to be possible.

We have found numerous geological records (rocks) dating back as far as 4.5 billion years.  As with your argument about the age of the universe, an all powerful god could deceive us in any we he deemed necessary and as such this evidence is probably meaningless to you.  Read the following link for an analysis and breakdown of scientific vs so called "young-earther" arguments.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

Its a possibility that is ignored by science because science deals only with the observable and reproducible.  By studying the observable and reproducible, science identifies patterns in the way the universe works (patterns like gravity, electromagnetics, redshifting, relativity, etc).  Since these patterns are reproducible, we can make use of them to better our lives in whatever way we see fit.  While you could certainly be correct that God created the universe as we see it in 7 days, he did such a good job of it that there is no observable or reproducible evidence to support this.  This doesn't mean you're wrong, only that your conclusion has no possibility of providing meaningful, actionable information whereas studying the universe scientifically may.

The universe is as it is.. we can observe it in many ways and draw reproducible conclusions about our observations of its current state.  Anything that is unobservable or unable to be reproduced is of little concern since such things cannot provide a meaningful basis for making informed decisions. 

To put it another way, religion and science only disagree when religion suggests the universe is different than what we can observe scientifically.  The fallacy in the religious argument at this point is that it becomes impossible to know what is real and what isn't.  If you argue that what the bible says is real, then you'd have to take it literally or else you'd be deciding on your own what is real and what isn't.  Either the bible is right and the bible must be taken literally, or science is right and the bible must give way when observation and religion disagree.  If the bible isn't completely right, then it is up to the individual to decide in what circumstances the observable world is the real world and in what circumstances the observable world is false.  This is, in short, a state of lunacy. You'll find that most religious people will follow their teachings up until their common knowledge of the world says otherwise.  This is a highly pragmatic view that combines religious and observation in an effective manner, but it does so by limiting religion to areas that science hasn't addressed yet.  Science is merely an extension of so called common observations, and thus it doesn't make any sense at all to follow religion up until the limits of one's common knowledge but not up to the limits of the collective observable knowledge provided by scientific study.

And to drive that last post home, you have to remember that if religion is correct but you aren't willing to follow the bible completely, than you can't be certain that anything you experience or think is real.  Anything might be an illusion or a test of your beliefs.  You'd have absolutely no way to determine appropriate action to take because the world for you would no longer be based on rational processes or on documented beliefs and value systems.  You'd literally be a lunatic.  Now, I'm not saying that following the bible literally would be much better, but, since you'd be acknowledging it as God's sole instructions to man (along with any other religious material you want to include here), you'd be following a canonical set of rules and at least have some order to your life.  Unfortunately its this kind of thinking that leads to things like witch hunts, the inquisition, blood letting as a medical cure, etc etc etc ad infinitum. 

The entire reason that there are religious individuals who are able to function in the modern world is because they are pragmatic and are willing to set aside most religious tenets that disagree with the reality of their daily lives. 

*disclaimer:  I believe that religious is absolutely necessary now and was essential to the formation of early human societies.  While humans have the capacity to live without religion, early man existed in a world consisting entirely of tradition.  Religion was an essential part of that tradition because it provided guidance and explanation about all sorts of things that were outside the realm of rational understanding and did it in a way that improved survival and reproductive chances.

I have a hard time believing in something that offers no proof whatsoever. There is no proof. Everything that comes from relegion is forwarded by Man. All writings comes from Man. Nothing directly from god. Moreover everything we know about religion is thousands of years old. And when I ask why does He not show us some proof I get the answer you have to have faith. Faith is overated­.

If there is a god he made me with a concience and a mind to think for myself. Therefore I have to question a God that would ask for my faith without providing any proof whatsoever.

If god created the earth he did not do it 6000 years ago. Get real. Stop insulting my intelligence with such bull.

Sorry but when we have undeniable proof of the earth age and I hear people say it was created 6000 years ago I find that very insulting. Some civilisation are older than 6000 years and to state that the earth was not there when they were is an abominition.  God would not like to know that his children are deluding themselves. Use the sense and intelligence He gave you to THINK, not to accept anything that is obviously false.

The life cycle is: Dinos, if they die humans, if they die birds, and if they die insects.

So there is a good chance that we will se somekind of "humans" or others. And I dont think we will se aliens before we "colonized" outside our solar system ( Other would be a culture shock which would end in disasters ;(

There is no evidence to suggest the earth and it's inhabitants have been here longer than 50 years. It was put there when I arrived, and will disappear when I'm gone. Anything else is just nonsense

The state of the Human condition as it is perceived today is such that we can in fact have those who believe and also those who just cannot fathom such a juxtiposition.

What if what we are, along with the whole of our known Universe, nothing more than a single solitary piece in the play set of some Alien culture, and what we perceive to be infinite space, is nothing more than the limited dimensions of a simple colorful marble that we are forever encased in?

Hehe! Saw that in one of the Men in Black movies. Makes one think right?