Creation vs. Evolution

[Jacob]

Perhaps then I need to talk to the organ grinder, not his monkey? :think:

I actually don't know what you are saying here.

I am simply pointing out that knowledge of the Bible and the book of Genesis and the creation account found therein, such as in good Theology, is different from the findings that might be a part of the History of Geology, though not incompatible. This has to do with good diligent study, in both areas, and this man has degrees in both. I do not see the Biblical component breaking down in what he said, and I think the correspondence or relationship to that which he has found in the History of Geology is fascinating and agreeable with what I know of the Biblical record and scientific studies of God's creation. I am also impressed with his math degree though I only minored in math.

 

[Stuu]

Here is something different but related to my previous posts also in some way. You (anyone here) may be interested.

Creation Conversion: The Turning Point

"I pursued other classes with renewed vision—I now saw creation everywhere."

You will see what you are primed to see.

Please watch from 6'28" to 11'30" (the whole thing is worthwhile):

Michael Shermer Ted Talk

Stuart

 

[Jacob]

"I pursued other classes with renewed vision—I now saw creation everywhere."

You will see what you are primed to see.

Please watch from 6'28" to 11'30" (the whole thing is worthwhile):

Michael Shermer Ted Talk

Stuart

When you look at God's creation do you think it is just nature that is not His but happened without God? How can God's creation happen without God?

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Yeah, Plus Mutation only Causes Genetic Disorders, it does not Reorder DNA to make New Anatomy, or Cause New Forms of Animals to Appear.

I would Love, for one you Evols, to please Explain;

How Could, Animals Being More Fit, Killing other Animals that are Less Fit, ever Lead to New Species of Animals?


Doesn't Stronger Species, Killing off Weaker Species, Only Lead to Less Species?

Lemme Guess, Does it take a Long Time, and Did "Nature" do it?

=M=

================================

MUSIC!!!

Float On - Modest Mouse

Yes, Isaac Brock is a Genius, holding both Lyrical and Musical Excellence.

 

[Stuu]

When you look at God's creation do you think it is just nature that is not His but happened without God? How can God's creation happen without God?

Why are you asking an atheist why he can't see "God's creation"? There are no such things as gods! If your question is "How did the universe come to be like this", then perhaps you have the start of a critical approach to the question. But you are begging the question of the existence of the god.

Did you watch the TED talk?

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

Mutation only Causes Genetic Disorders

Wrong.

How Could, Animals Being More Fit, Killing other Animals that are Less Fit, ever Lead to New Species of Animals?

Mutation doesn't only cause genetic disorders.

Stuart

 

[resurrected]

Wrong.

Next?

Stuart

errors in dna replication aren't a form of disorder? :freak:




lemmee guess - yer mother and father were first cousins, right?

 

[Stuu]

errors in dna replication aren't a form of disorder?

According to what standard?

Stuart

 

[resurrected]

is dna replication configured to make errors or to prevent errors from being made?

 

[6days]

"I pursued other classes with renewed vision—I now saw creation everywhere."

You will see what you are primed to see.

Mostly... And that is why evolutionists are afraid to allow intellectual freedom in classrooms. They don't want students exposed to the weeknesses of Darwinian theory, or to hear from scientists who disagree.
However... even though some are only exposed to evolutionism, they eventually see that it is just a belief system. Biologists such as Gary Parker were committed totally to atheism and evolutionism...now is firmly committed to Biblical creation.
Or world renowned geneticist Dr John Sanford says...
‘I was totally sold on evolution. It was my religion; it defined how I saw everything, it was my value system and my reason for being. Later, I came to believe in “God”, but this still did not significantly change my intellectual outlook regarding origins. However, still later, as I began to personally know and submit to Jesus, I started to be fundamentally changed—in every respect. This included my mind, and how I viewed science and history. I would not say that science led me to the Lord (which is the experience of some). Rather I would say Jesus opened my eyes to His creation—I was blind, and gradually I could see. It sounds simple, but it was a slow and painful process. I still only see “as through a glass, darkly”

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Wrong.

Mutation doesn't only cause genetic disorders.

Stuart

You are Wrong Sue.

Stronger Animal species, Killing off Weaker ones, Only Leads to Less Species of Animals, not More.

Also, Mutation only Causes Disorders.

See, that is because DNA is in a Specific Order, (Which is Something that Creationists Have Believed all Along), that DNA when Altered at any time, counts as A Genetic Disorder. A new, less potent Order, from what the Animal was Originally Supposed to be, when it was First Created.

If DNA is going to be Placed in Order, or Reordered to a Better State of Order, it takes Someone to place it in order; Someone, who Understands Design, and How to Manipulate the DNA to Create that New Order.

Evolutionists believe that the DNA is a Product of Millions of years of Mutation. How can DNA appear in Order, to the Point where we can actually see mutations Effect on that order, which is Junk DNA Material, on the Human Genome.

=M=

My Song - The Moody Blues

Now, have any of you Little Girls, including that big old Girl Barbie, figured out a Personal Definition for the Word, "Nature", Yet?

I mean, you know, as it is used in this Sentence; "Nature", caused Inorganic Material, to Become Living Organisms, 3 Billion Years Ago, Naturally.

===================================

If all you Evols Run away like a Bunch of Teenage Girls that Just found out they don't know the Facts of Life, how can I ever be sure you Understand Why You are Wrong.

You Take the Good, you Take the Bad, and there you Have, The Facts of Life.

When the World Never Seems, to be Living up to your Atheist Dreams, it's then you Find, the Facts of Life are all About You.

 

[6days]

Why are you asking an atheist why he can't see "God's creation"? There are no such things as gods!

Atheism is a biased worldview. They are unwilling to consider a Creator, because that would mean they aren't really an atheist. They are stuck defending their religion, even when evidence points in a different direction.

 

[Stuu]

You are Wrong Stuu.

No, it was you who was wrong.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

Atheism is a biased worldview. They are unwilling to consider a Creator, because that would mean they aren't really an atheist. They are stuck defending their religion, even when evidence points in a different direction.

I am perfectly happy to consider a creator. Are you perfectly happy to consider there not being one?

I will require unambiguous evidence, as I do with anything else. Have you got any?

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

Mostly... And that is why evolutionists are afraid to allow intellectual freedom in classrooms. They don't want students exposed to the weeknesses of Darwinian theory, or to hear from scientists who disagree.

Four percent of professional scientists "disagree" with Darwin. Pretty much none of them are biologists.

So, do you think science classes should teach "what scientists think"? If that was done on a proportionate basis by time, each hour of lessons on evolutionary biology would involve 57 minutes and 36 seconds on evolution and 2 minutes and 24 seconds on creationism; or 0 minutes and 0 seconds on creationism if we thought biology should be about what biologists think.

I might even be in favour of that: why not have hard-working biology students take a couple of minutes break each hour to have a good laugh at the absurdity and self-parodies of creationism?

Biologists such as Gary Parker were committed totally to atheism and evolutionism...now is firmly committed to Biblical creation.

Well what an idiot he is then.

Stuart

 

[6days]

I am perfectly happy to consider a creator. Are you perfectly happy to consider there not being one?

So, you are really more of an agnostic then? Can you acknowledge that thousands of scientists are comvinced that evidence points to the Creator?
And no of course I'm not willing consider there not being a Creator. I'm totally biased!! We have the eye witness account and the evidence.

I will require unambiguous evidence, as I do with anything else. Have you got any?

Its too bad you don't insist on unambiguous evidence for your evolutionary beliefs. You believe in whimsical mythical psuedoscience things such as life can come from non life.....Where is your unambiguous evidence?

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

No, you are Now Even More Wrong, because you can't tell me Why I Am.

=M=

It's all About you, JD.

Where is that Girl Anyway?

Here is another Fact of Life, for you Evols;

When Two animals, of the Same Species, are Able to Reproduce, they only Produce Offspring of the Same Species.
Given the Definition of Species is; A Group of Animals, with Like Characteristics, which are Capable of Interbreeding. Speciation is Impossible, and therefore Evolution if for Little Girls, just like other Fairy Tales.

Order in the Known Universe, Declares an All Powerful Creator.

 

[resurrected]

why you am what?

 

[6days]

Four percent of professional scientists "disagree" with Darwin. Pretty much none of them are biologists.

Funny you say that when hard core atheist and evolutionist is concerned about opposition to Darwinism coming from biologists.

I wrote / posted this here before.

It starts with a trickle. Jerry Coyne, well known evolutionist and science wtiter is concerned about 'the increasingly unmanageable problem of high-level academic defectors from evolutionary theory'
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress...ther-new-anti-evolution-book-by-thomas-nagel/

One of the " defecters" Coyne mentions is Thomas Nagel.


Nagel wrote:
I believe the defenders of intelligent design deserve our gratitude for challenging a scientific world view that owes some of the passion displayed by its adherents precisely to the fact that it is thought to liberate us from religion. That world view is ripe for displacement....


A funny line from Coyne is that the secular opposition to the ToE is coming from molecular biologists. He suggests they perhaps don't have a good enough education in evolution!
Perhaps these scientists have superior knowledge than Coyne does about life at the most elemental levels. Perhaps they understand the ToE is a house of cards about to tumble.
( watch for supernatural alternative explanations that exclude a Creator God. Aliens?)

 

[Stuu]

Funny you say that when hard core atheist and evolutionist is concerned about opposition to Darwinism coming from biologists.

Well, one biologist mouthing off publicly without reason against Darwin might be concerning because that undoes so much of the work that biology teachers are compelled to do as part of their jobs. A few kids come along to school parroting like you, and that is disruptive to dealing with reality, as science classes should. But equally there are high-profile biologists who are profoundly religious who champion the teaching of evolution. So which religious nutcases do you think the education boards should be consulting?

Is this some attempt to hide something? No! It is just that the arguments have already been made and creationism has already lost.

There is no actual debate here, because there is no theory of creation to consider. What actually would a creationist teach if given open an opportunity? There is nothing to teach! A fantasy story spelled "Poof!" That's it!

Stuart