How pagans influenced religion of Jesus...

Of course it is not just the Pagans that influenced the religion of Jesus. Even for me it was a surprise about how far this all goes back.

Please do your own research. Nowadays "truth" is at the click of a mouse...So to speak!

A very old tree

Below is a post by a Christian from his own blog, but refuses to post my reply. This inspired me to start my own Blog.


"The Wollemi Pine, once thought to be long extinct has made a bit of a come back since it was discovered a few years back in 1994. What made me want to blog about this was when I noticed an advertisement in the local newspaper here on the Central Coast, NSW. You can buy one for use as a Christmas tree - and a fine Christmas tree it would make.
This is what is called a "living fossil." It was rediscovered in 1994 just 200km west of downtown Sydney, Australia in a rainforest gorge within the 500,000 hectare Wollemi National Park in the Blue Mountains. The Blue Mountains is a popular sight-seeing park for tourists who usually come to look at the Three Sisters. The oldest fossil of the Wollemi Pine is believed to be 90 million years old, as shown below, placing it in the mid-Cretaceous period. On the evolutionary timeline, Wollemi Pine trees and dinosaurs lived together. On the biblical creationist timeline, Wollemi Pine trees and dinosaurs also lived together.
Only a handful of Wollemi Pine were found in the wild but now conservationist clubs have been encouraging more Aussies to buy and plant them at home to encourage their survival - which of course is a good move.
However, the startling thing about the Wollemi Pine, and all the other living fossils, is that it hasn't changed in all that time. Its a curious thing that a tree which has apparently been around for 90 million years hasn't changed - even significantly. I suppose one would be forgiven for thinking that perhaps 90 million years haven't elapsed as evolutionary natural historians would suggest - more like around 4500 years since water from Noah's flood receded, carving out the Blue Mountains' topography. Later as forests began to grow back from water-bourne vegatation the Wollemi also grew and has survived the relatively short period until now."

Here is my reply:

Interesting discussion. As you might expect, I have a few difficulties with what you said.

"However, the startling thing about the Wollemi Pine, and all the other living fossils, is that it hasn't changed in all that time. Its a curious thing that a tree which has apparently been around for 90 million years hasn't changed - even significantly."

After some research I found that it was not so curious at all.

Unless the environment in which the living thing is surviving changes, there are no evolutionary pressures to allow any significantly different divergent phenotypes to emerge. Evolution isn't 'change for changes sake', it allows living things to adapt to new environments - provided that replication rates are faster than the environmental change.

"I suppose one would be forgiven for thinking that perhaps 90 million years haven't elapsed as evolutionary natural historians would suggest - more like around 4500 years since water from Noah's flood receded, carving out the Blue Mountains' topography. Later as forests began to grow back from water-bourne vegetation the Wollemi also grew and has survived the relatively short period until now."

That's quite another assertion you have created there. So what you are saying is Evolutionary Scientists are wrong and also all the overwhelming evidence for evolution? Yet a myth wrote in an ancient text with so supporting evidence from Science backed by Creationists is scientifically correct. This text being subject to peer review of course. It could be argued that the evidence is overwhelming, that it was indeed the ice age that carved out the Blue mountains topography and not water sent as a punishment from an angry sky God. It's interesting to note that the Noah's flood hypothesis is "NOT" accepted by the majority of scientists. Instead let's talk about what is widely accepted by Science and what further undermines your previous theory.
If the DNA of 'living fossils' is examined there most certainly will be some changes from their ancestors, but it won't be reflected in the phenotype unless the change confers a significant survival and/or reproduction benefit. In static environments, what was good in the past is still good today.

In other words no change!

The existence of lots of things which "HAVE" changed significantly, combined with DNA-based, carbon-based, dendrochronology-based dating methods show that 4,500 years is simply not a rational estimate of the timescales involved.

If you want to act like a scientist then I believe that one must behave like a scientist. In that you "Must" examine "ALL" the evidence and "NOT" start from a fixed position - Creationism.
Secondly it is obvious that you don't understand evolution. Or are you studying Evolution from only a clouded Creationist perspective?