Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    13,789
    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    I have never admitted evolution as a fact but as a bullshit. I have asked for proof of evolution but none was given.
    That's not true. I have given you much evidence, but you did not respond. For example, I told you that DNA evidence supports the idea of common descent, but you did not respond. And besides, you are being dishonest because we both know that you do not want any "proof" and you will not accept any evidence no matter how strong it is. This is obvious because if you really wanted evidence, you could find it yourself in a heartbeat on the internet. It's everywhere. All the creationist arguments have been refuted a thousand times, yet you repeat them over and over. This is why your posts look so very foolish. But for some strange reason, you don't seem to care if your write false and ignorant things that have been proven wrong a thousand times.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Evolution will continue as a theory and not a fact until proven and all doubts refuted.
    Once again you prove you don't know the scientific meaning of the word "theory." It is not opposed to "fact." A scientific theory is an attempt to explain a set of observed facts. For example, we all experience the fact of gravity every day. Therefore, scientists develop a theory of gravity to explain the facts about gravity that are observed all around us. Exactly the same logic applies to evolution. Scientists have developed the theory of evolution to explain the facts of evolution that are observed all around us. Your continuous assertion that "evolution is just a theory" indicates an absolute ignorance of the meaning of that word as used in science.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Brain does not evolve or our human brain will grow bigger and bigger until it cannot hold it's weight.
    Again, you fail to understand the most basic elements of the theory of evolution. Any child born could have a slightly larger or smaller brain. If too large, it doesn't survive well and is unable to reproduce and so the genes for it's larger brain would not be passed on. Likewise, if the brain is too small or defective in some other way, the same thing happens. The brain therefore naturally evolves to an optimal size. This stuff is trivial. Your arguments are absurd and any serious scientist would laugh at such ignorant "challenges" to the theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Brain size does not dictate intelligence; dolphins and elephants brain are bigger than human yet they are no more intelligent than humans.
    I never said that they "dictate" intelligence. There are many competing facts, most notably, the ratio between the size of the brain to that of the body. A larger brain is required just to run a larger body. Again, your point is based on gross ignorance. The correlation between the brain/body mass ratio and intelligence is common knowledge amongst anyone who has any understanding of science.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    I personally believe intelligence is related to the ability to know good and evil which no animals have except humans.
    That is absurd. Though intelligence can be defined in many ways, some of which are probably unique to humans (like abstract thought), there also are many aspects that are seen in animals, such as problem solving. So your assertion that animals do not have intelligence is false. And besides, Adam and Eve could talk before they ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge, so your theory fails on that count too. It is ridiculous to say that Adam and Eve had no "intelligence" before they ate of the tree.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    BTW, the debate between Evolution, Intelligent Design and Creation continues show that somethings are just not right with the theory of evolution.
    That's not true. There is no "debate" with creationists. The creationist are merely ignorant of science and oppose truth because because it contradicts their false religious beliefs.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    In fact, the concept of survival of the fittest can have negative impact. I suspect Hitler used such concept to propose his Germanic Super-race who he believed would ultimately dominate the world and thus his dream to conquer Europe and then the whole world.
    So what? That has nothing to do with the truth or falsehood of natural selection.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    I am sorry that this thread have been side-tracked into a debate for Evolution vs Creation vs Intelligent Design; it was supposed to be Fun and Light-hearted. Perhaps, RAM can put these discussion into a new thread as I do hope others beside me and RAM can participate in this debate.
    Yeah ... that's a good idea. I'll see if I can get to it later today.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    BTW, what is Truth? Obviously, not human science.

    Jesus said, "I am the Truth, the Way and the Life". Amen.
    That's a category mistake. The Pythagorean Theorem is true. Does that mean that Jesus is the Pythagorean theorem?
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    164

    Reinstatement is Good

    Cheow baby, I'm back.
    After no doubt, careful consideration, Richard showed me some grace and reinstated my membership.

    You know while I was in the wilderness of one way traffic, I'd occasionally pop into the BW forum to catch up and got frustrated by not being able to comment. After leaving the odd message at Richard's door, he gave me another chance and for that I'm grateful.

    Thanks RAM!

    Regarding the Tower of Babel, if it were a myth 1 thing most people agree with is that behind most myths there is an element of truth.

    Coming from the book of Genesis (where all of us here have concluded that intelligent design is layered within) I would be more prone to believe that the message behind the event was more important.

    (Gen 11:6 The LORD said, 'If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.)

    If Babel was Atlantis and it sunk, then the scattering makes sense.
    It says they moved east, which could have been North America, Shina is similar to China, this plain could have very well been the sunken region in Bermuda.

    As you may recall I strongly advocate that periods of history periodically keep repeating. This is strewn throughout the Bible. It's like we as a race are so stupid and stubborn, it takes multiple occurrences for us to eventually learn anything.

    What is interesting is it finishes with verse 11: 9 That is why it was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

    Ring a bell? Same continent, towers falling down, same numbers in reverse 9,11. Yeah you could say there is some coincidence, but as 1 of todays most renowned agnostic scientists Prof Paul Davies quoted:

    "Yes God plays dice . . . . . But, they're loaded!"

    What we do notice is that the first half of the bible has symmetry with the last, which is most predominant with Genesis and Revelation.

    Mick
    So were you worth it?
    Seriously think about it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . were you worth dying on the cross for?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Not from this world...from the other side
    Posts
    2,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Mad Mick View Post
    Cheow baby, I'm back.
    After no doubt, careful consideration, Richard showed me some grace and reinstated my membership.

    You know while I was in the wilderness of one way traffic, I'd occasionally pop into the BW forum to catch up and got frustrated by not being able to comment. After leaving the odd message at Richard's door, he gave me another chance and for that I'm grateful.

    Thanks RAM!

    Regarding the Tower of Babel, if it were a myth 1 thing most people agree with is that behind most myths there is an element of truth.

    Coming from the book of Genesis (where all of us here have concluded that intelligent design is layered within) I would be more prone to believe that the message behind the event was more important.

    (Gen 11:6 The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.)

    If Babel was Atlantis and it sunk, then the scattering makes sense.
    It says they moved east, which could have been North America, Shina is similar to China, this plain could have very well been the sunken region in Bermuda.

    As you may recall I strongly advocate that periods of history periodically keep repeating. This is strewn throughout the Bible. It's like we as a race are so stupid and stubborn, it takes multiple occurrences for us to eventually learn anything.

    What is interesting is it finishes with verse 11: 9 That is why it was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

    Ring a bell? Same continent, towers falling down, same numbers in reverse 9,11. Yeah you could say there is some coincidence, but as 1 of todays most renowned agnostic scientists Prof Paul Davies quoted:

    "Yes God plays dice . . . . . But, they're loaded!"

    What we do notice is that the first half of the bible has symmetry with the last, which is most predominant with Genesis and Revelation.

    Mick
    Welcome back, our prodigal brother. But what took you so long?

    Yes, I agree with you that intelligence is found everywhere in nature. Man have to learn form nature to understand its principle....fusion energy, aerodynamics, magnetism etc.

    BTW. good discovery especially with the 11:9 coincidence with the Tower of Babel. I have missed that. In fact, I see the modern Tower of Babel as the United Nations building in which people of all languages and nations around the world gather together to discuss and co-operate and they could understand one another well through electronic interpreters as if using a single world language. And the United Nations is on the same continent and city as the Twin Tower! Will the United Nations one day fell just like the Tower of Babel?

    What we do notice is that the first half of the bible has symmetry with the last, which is most predominant with Genesis and Revelation.
    Yes, I have noticed that and written a post on it but I can't find this post now.


    May the Grace and Love of God be with you and forevermore. Amen.
    Last edited by CWH; 08-04-2011 at 02:38 PM.
    Ask and You shall receive,
    Seek and You shall find,
    Knock and the door will be open unto You.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    164
    What took me so long?
    I was banned.
    It's only by grace that I'm here and for that I'm grateful.
    Yeah at that time I was infuriated with some of the comments here,
    which sealed my demise,
    but to tell you the truth I really missed the interaction and inspiration I would get from answering posts.
    There's a heap of great talent at this site and I really missed you guys and gals.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,969
    I think over time people's tongue changes. The American English is different than the British.

    Even in the bible, in Judges the Ephraimites couldn't pronounce sh so instead of saying Shibboleth they said Sibboleth:
    Judges 12:6 Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce [it] right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.
    Even from one city to another, one village to another the accent changes, the pronunciation changes.

    The New York English, the Texan English, the Alabama English (I actually met a Greek Pastor from Alabama. I couldn't tell he was Greek)...

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lake district U.K
    Posts
    314

    Darwen's donkey derby

    Once again the donkey Darwen theory has raised its ugly head. Richard said that scientific theory is not opposed to facts. It most certainly is.' Scientists'' proclaim that all animals evolved gradually and by increments and accident. The fossil record clearly shows that it is not the case. When this subject was debated once before , Richard said that there were many transitional forms but could not name one That is ,because they do not exist. The pseudo scientists have made herculean efforts and spent astronomical amounts of money in their vain attempts to find a missing link.We won't start with the precambrian or cambrian periods because they might prove a little bit vague. Let's start with the ordovician. It lasted about 50 million years. In all that time , the livestock remained the same . At the end of that period Most of the recognisable life forms disappeared and vast numbers of new species were created. The Silurian period also lasted about 50 million years without any notable change in the animal or plant kingdom .At the end of that time , millions of animals were extinguished and a whole new raft of animals were created specifically designed to suit the new environment. Each of the nine or ten periods are instantly recognisable by the fossil remains in them . They did not change in fifty million years. It must be close on fifty million years since the beginning of the present era. We must be due another change . There is no logical reason to assume that the sequence has ended. The last time we trod this path ,Richard threw D.N.A in as a red herring . He did it again just now. It won't work. Last time it was clearly demonstrated that D.N.A and R.N.A have very definite numerical structures. . They both posses the qualities of determination,direction ,deliberation and purpose. It is totally inconceivable that any chemical could by any means attain obtain or aspire to such heights of intelligent behaviour. The God (Jehovah) of the bible created them . These are two of the tools which he uses to fulfil his purpose. It is no surprise to me that the marks of his tools can be clearly seen in the bodies of animals. This god is in control of every atom in the universe. The folly in this forum can be clearly seen in that there are those who claim that this god is incapable of having his thoughts ,words commands and instructions committed to paper and preserved precisely as he wishes. This God identified himself in the masculine. Who is man to differ and refer to the spirit as 'she' or 'it'? The two juxtaposed sound like 'shit 'and that about sums up the insult. Many seem to think of God as a big man up in the sky with a bag of goodies in one hand and a club in the other. That is not my concept of the master of the universe. Some : through prayer , seek to guide the hand of God . He is not my servant : I am his. Richard just said' The Pythagorean theory is true . Does that mean that Jesus is the Pythagorean theorem?' Such a statement and question are only worthy of a slime ball and a scoffer. The short answer is 'yes' . Because he created the world in which it exists and the mind which conceived it.
    Alec

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    13,789
    Quote Originally Posted by alec cotton View Post
    Once again the donkey Darwen theory has raised its ugly head. Richard said that scientific theory is not opposed to facts. It most certainly is.” Scientists”” proclaim that all animals evolved gradually and by increments and accident. The fossil record clearly shows that it is not the case. When this subject was debated once before , Richard said that there were many transitional forms but could not name one That is ,because they do not exist.
    Alec,

    I'm glad you came by for a visit, but I am dismayed by the falsehood of your comments. I never said there were no "transitional forms." That is absurd and false. There are endless transitional forms. You would know this if you took the time to do the slightest amount of research.

    If you want the Bible to live by the sword of science, you run the risk that it also will die by it. You admit the fossil record shows that more complex organisms appeared as time progressed, you only deny the scientific explanation of how it happened. So welcome to the party - those facts are the fodder of evolutionary theory. You are trying to explain the fossil record which is exactly what the evolutionary scientists do. They debate how evolution happened. They have developed a "theory of evolution" to explain the FACT OF EVOLUTION.

    I don't understand how you could fail to see that the details do not matter. The Bible does not say that God evolved organisms over millions of years. Therefore, the Bible does not explain the fossil record, no matter if there are or are not "transitional forms" or periods of rapid vs. gradual evolution. The fact of the fossil record itself contradict the Bible no matter how you cut it, so as soon as you admit the "fossil record" you have denied the Bible (assuming of course you are using a "literal" interpretation).

    You deny that "all animals evolved gradually and by increments and accident" - that's fine! Maybe there were times it happened "quickly" or maybe God just went "ZAP" and periodically created new organisms once every million years or so. What are you claiming? Please share your theory of evolution. As far as I can tell, you deny the theories produced by thousands of professional peer-reviewed scientists but have not suggested any other theory that would explain the facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by alec cotton View Post
    The pseudo scientists have made herculean efforts and spent astronomical amounts of money in their vain attempts to find a missing link.
    That's ridiculous. There is no single "missing link." There are billions of links connecting all living creatures to each other. The whole phylogenetic tree of life is nothing but a testimony to the truth of evolution.

    And this brings up the issue of common descent. Have you never read any scientific works on this issue? DNA gives strong evidence for this fact. I've asked you about this before, but I don't think you answered. What do you do with the DNA evidence that shows common descent?

    And why are you so "anti-evolution" any way? You know that the Bible doesn't say a word about how animals evolved, and you know that animals of greater complexity appear over time "as if" they evolved. So why do you pit the Bible against these facts? I just don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by alec cotton View Post
    The last time we trod this path ,Richard threw D.N.A in as a red herring . He did it again just now. It won't work. Last time it was clearly demonstrated that D.N.A and R.N.A have very definite numerical structures. . They both posses the qualities of determination,direction ,deliberation and purpose.
    The DNA evidence is not a "red herring" and you still have failed to answer my question. What do you do with the DNA EVIDENCE that shows common descent?

    As for the "numerical design" in the DNA, that has not been established. Folks are studying it but it is much too early to make any grand proclamations that it "proves" anything. You simply do not know that. And this shows that you are willing to admit only that which confirms your own prejudices. That is very sad. It shows that your mind is closed to truth. Is that not ironic? Christians claim to worship Christ as the Truth but then deny the Truth if it doesn't fit their own little prejudices? Remember, we are all ignorant of most things. Your opposition to truth and science is the worst aspect of religion.

    Quote Originally Posted by alec cotton View Post
    It is totally inconceivable that any chemical could by any means attain obtain or aspire to such heights of intelligent behaviour. The God (Jehovah) of the bible created them . These are two of the tools which he uses to fulfil his purpose. It is no surprise to me that the marks of his tools can be clearly seen in the bodies of animals. This god is in control of every atom in the universe.
    Many people would agree with you about the limitations of "chemicals." But I don't know of a single scientist who would say that a chemical "aspires" to anything, so your comment is a straw-man. It doesn't relate to any claims made by science.

    As for Jehovah creating the chemicals ... that's GREAT! No problem, except ... uhhh ... except that the Bible says nothing about Jehovah creating ever more complex life forms over a period of millions of years. On the contrary, the Bible says God created all the animals in two days.

    Quote Originally Posted by alec cotton View Post
    The folly in this forum can be clearly seen in that there are those who claim that this god is incapable of having his thoughts ,words commands and instructions committed to paper and preserved precisely as he wishes.
    Dude - you are the one who declared that the book of Acts is WRONG because it contradicts your own personal doctrine relating to the Jews. Think about that for a while. You are the one who says "god is incapable of having his thoughts ,words commands and instructions committed to paper and preserved precisely as he wishes."

    Quote Originally Posted by alec cotton View Post
    This God identified himself in the masculine. Who is man to differ and refer to the spirit as “she” or “it”? The two juxtaposed sound like “shit “and that about sums up the insult. Many seem to think of God as a big man up in the sky with a bag of goodies in one hand and a club in the other. That is not my concept of the master of the universe. Some : through prayer , seek to guide the hand of God . He is not my servant : I am his. Richard just said” The Pythagorean theory is true . Does that mean that Jesus is the Pythagorean theorem?” Such a statement and question are only worthy of a slime ball and a scoffer. The short answer is “yes” . Because he created the world in which it exists and the mind which conceived it.
    Alec
    So Jesus is the Pythagorean theorem! Brilliant! But I don't understand why you answered if my question is "only worthy of a slime ball and a scoffer."

    And yes, I am a scoffer! I scoff at the bullshit religions invented by raving wolves so that they can weaken your mind while they feed on you! I scoff at the abject absurdity of "Christian apologetics" which does nothing but worship falsehood in the name of religion. I scoff at the "sacred institutions" designed to enslave the minds of humanity. I SCOFF! I SCOFF! I SCOFF!
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Not from this world...from the other side
    Posts
    2,877
    Sorry to interject for Alec. I am doing so in support of Alec.

    [QUOTE=RAM;33862]
    I don't understand how you could fail to see that the details do not matter. The Bible does not say that God evolved organisms over millions of years. Therefore, the Bible does not explain the fossil record, no matter if there are or are not "transitional forms" or periods of rapid vs. gradual evolution. The fact of the fossil record itself contradict the Bible no matter how you cut it, so as soon as you admit the "fossil record" you have denied the Bible (assuming of course you are using a "literal" interpretation).
    There is nothing about evolution in the Bible is because there is no such thing as evolution.

    As far as I can tell, you deny the theories produced by thousands of professional peer-reviewed scientists but have not suggested any other theory that would explain the facts.
    Even the professionals were fallible and were hookwinked by the Piltdown man. And there are also thousands of professionals who reject the theory of evolution.

    And this brings up the issue of common descent. Have you never read any scientific works on this issue? DNA gives strong evidence for this fact. I've asked you about this before, but I don't think you answered. What do you do with the DNA evidence that shows common descent?
    How was DNA created in the first place? Is it easy to modify DNA to create a new species as easily as changing a few computer codes to create a new virus?

    http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/junk.html

    And why are you so "anti-evolution" any way? You know that the Bible doesn't say a word about how animals evolved, and you know that animals of greater complexity appear over time "as if" they evolved. So why do you pit the Bible against these facts? I just don't get it.
    Because there is no evolution. Even Charles Darwin seems to admit creationism during his deathbed. Based on the theory of evolution, which comes first the egg or the chicken?

    The DNA evidence is not a "red herring" and you still have failed to answer my question. What do you do with the DNA EVIDENCE that shows common descent?
    DNA shows chimpanzee are 98% human and Gorillas are 97% human doesn't shows common descent but shows that DNA can be manipulated to create a new species. So far no human have ever manipulate DNA to create a new species, I wonder why? If a car is 98% identical, can I say they are evolved from a common descent i.e. made from the same manufacturer?

    As for the "numerical design" in the DNA, that has not been established. Folks are studying it but it is much too early to make any grand proclamations that it "proves" anything. You simply do not know that. And this shows that you are willing to admit only that which confirms your own prejudices. That is very sad. It shows that your mind is closed to truth. Is that not ironic? Christians claim to worship Christ as the Truth but then deny the Truth if it doesn't fit their own little prejudices? Remember, we are all ignorant of most things. Your opposition to truth and science is the worst aspect of religion.
    Without the Creator, will there be Science? Science is everywhere in nature and human must study nature, aerodynamixs, fusion, magnetism, gravity etc. in order to understand science. In other words, science is actually the study of creation. That's exactly what Job said about wisdom and understanding in nature:

    Job 28:20 Where then does wisdom come from?
    Where does understanding dwell?
    21 It is hidden from the eyes of every living thing,
    concealed even from the birds in the sky.
    22 Destruction[b] and Death say,
    “Only a rumor of it has reached our ears.”
    23 God understands the way to it
    and he alone knows where it dwells,
    24 for he views the ends of the earth
    and sees everything under the heavens.
    25 When he established the force of the wind
    and measured out the waters,
    26 when he made a decree for the rain
    and a path for the thunderstorm,
    27 then he looked at wisdom and appraised it;
    he confirmed it and tested it.
    28 And he said to the human race,
    “The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom,
    and to shun evil is understanding.”


    As for Jehovah creating the chemicals ... that's GREAT! No problem, except ... uhhh ... except that the Bible says nothing about Jehovah creating ever more complex life forms over a period of millions of years. On the contrary, the Bible says God created all the animals in two days.
    If God can create the earth, planets, stars and moon in a day, what is creating animals in 2 days. Creation of all animals is not something impossible. DNA is so small that all the world's animals and plants DNA can be stored in a size no bigger than the hand.

    So Jesus is the Pythagorean theorem! Brilliant! But I don't understand why you answered if my question is "only worthy of a slime ball and a scoffer."
    I wonder who created Pythagorus theorem? Obviously not Pythagorus who discovered it. There are many designs in nature based on mathematical formulas, I wonder how it came about...by magic? or by intelligence?

    And yes, I am a scoffer! I scoff at the bullshit religions invented by raving wolves so that they can weaken your mind while they feed on you! I scoff at the abject absurdity of "Christian apologetics" which does nothing but worship falsehood in the name of religion. I scoff at the "sacred institutions" designed to enslave the minds of humanity. I SCOFF! I SCOFF! I SCOFF!
    I hope you scoff at Preterism also since you hate Christianity so much.....unless of course if you are biased or if you don't see Preterism as Christian. The fool says in his heart, "there is no God"....I hope someone is not a fool.

    Glory to God and His wisdom. Amen.
    Last edited by CWH; 08-15-2011 at 07:57 PM.
    Ask and You shall receive,
    Seek and You shall find,
    Knock and the door will be open unto You.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    13,789
    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Sorry to interject for Alec. I am doing so in support of Alec.
    I don't think there is any need to apologize. The conversation is open to all who would desire to contribute, and since you support Alec's point of view, I'm sure he would be happy to have your help.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    There is nothing about evolution in the Bible is because there is no such thing as evolution.
    Right! I should have known that! That's why there aren't any TVs or computers or cars or airplanes. They aren't mentioned in the Bible so they don't exist.

    And now that I think about it, the Bible doesn't mention the CWH has brain ... and that explains everything!

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM
    As far as I can tell, you deny the theories produced by thousands of professional peer-reviewed scientists but have not suggested any other theory that would explain the facts.
    Even the professionals were fallible and were hookwinked by the Piltdown man. And there are also thousands of professionals who reject the theory of evolution.
    All people are "fallible" so that means nothing and is entirely irrelevant. If evolution depended on a single forgery like the Piltdown man, then you might have a case. But the reality is nothing like that, and you suggestion is absurd and ignorant. There are many independent lines of evidence supporting the fact of evolution. The two strongest are the DNA evidence that shows common descent and the phylogenetic tree of life.

    And as for the "thousands of professionals" who reject evolution, I offer you Project Steve.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM
    And this brings up the issue of common descent. Have you never read any scientific works on this issue? DNA gives strong evidence for this fact. I've asked you about this before, but I don't think you answered. What do you do with the DNA evidence that shows common descent?
    How was DNA created in the first place? Is it easy to modify DNA to create a new species as easily as changing a few computer codes to create a new virus?

    http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/junk.html
    The origin of DNA is a mystery, but that is irrelevant because the Bible doesn't say that God created DNA and then let it evolve over millions of years. So even if we could prove that God created DNA, it wouldn't prove that the Bible and Christianity is true. That's what you fail to understand.

    As for your link challenging the DNA evidence, here is a refutation:

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/molgen/plaisted.html

    The article you cited is pretty typical of most Christian apologetics. He doesn't challenge only evolution and biology, but astronomy, cosmology, and geology. This is the problem with folks who think they can reject science. All the different branches are integrated because the universe is an integrated whole. Thus, if they attack one part of science, they inevitably must attack all science, and so they reveal themselves as cranks who ignore truth and reality. It's really pathetic. The same science that produced the computer you use to post on this forum is integrated with the science that produced evolution. If you irrationally deny one part because of nothing but your religious beliefs, you end up make a colossal fool of yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Because there is no evolution. Even Charles Darwin seems to admit creationism during his deathbed. Based on the theory of evolution, which comes first the egg or the chicken?
    Ha! You can't tell a hoax? You can't take 10 seconds on Google to learn the truth before you make you absurd claims? The "Darwin's deathbed" story has been debunked for decades. Even the ultra-moronic creationist site "Answers in Genesis" has an article debunking this ridiculous lie that was propagated by, you guessed it, "Christians" -

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...version-legend

    Will you never choose truth? I thought you were supposedly a "Christian." Are all Christians as gullible as you?

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM
    The DNA evidence is not a "red herring" and you still have failed to answer my question. What do you do with the DNA EVIDENCE that shows common descent?
    DNA shows chimpanzee are 98% human and Gorillas are 97% human doesn't shows common descent but shows that DNA can be manipulated to create a new species. So far no human have ever manipulate DNA to create a new species, I wonder why? If a car is 98% identical, can I say they are evolved from a common descent i.e. made from the same manufacturer?
    In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about, and you don't even know how DNA supports the idea of common descent. The argument is not merely about how much DNA we have in common. It has to do with non-functional genes we SHARE with other primates. There is no explanation for those common non-functional genes unless we inherited them from a common ancestor.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Without the Creator, will there be Science? Science is everywhere in nature and human must study nature, aerodynamixs, fusion, magnetism, gravity etc. in order to understand science. In other words, science is actually the study of creation.
    Yes, there will still be Science. And no, science is not the study of "creation" - it is the study of the natural world. And you have not said anything that shows why God is necessary for science, and all science has been created by either implicitly or explicitly excluding the idea of God. Scientists are free to believe in God of course, but their beliefs are never a part of their science because the methods of science assume that they can explain things in terms of natural laws that do not involve any supernatural gods or demons or witchcraft or any such nonsense.

    This is why you can't argue against science. It used to be that people believed God and angels or demons were responsible for everything from getting pregnant to getting sick and earthquakes and weather and everything. But now science explains all those things, so Christians and Muslims have to look for little "gaps" in our knowledge so they can say "See! You don't know how DNA formed, so God did it!" But that's just bad logic. It's called the "God of the gaps" argument, and the thing is, the gaps keep getting smaller and smaller so the "god" that lives only in those gaps keeps getting pushed further and further away from any relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    If God can create the earth, planets, stars and moon in a day, what is creating animals in 2 days. Creation of all animals is not something impossible. DNA is so small that all the world's animals and plants DNA can be stored in a size no bigger than the hand.
    Dude, you just are not following the logic. I didn't say God could not create the animals in two days. I said that we have solid evidence that he did not do it in two days. Everyone knows this because we have a very long fossil record that shows the creatures currently alive were not here a million years ago. Whether they evolved or if God created them doesn't matter for this point. The POINT is that they were not all created during "two days."

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    I wonder who created Pythagorus theorem? Obviously not Pythagorus who discovered it. There are many designs in nature based on mathematical formulas, I wonder how it came about...by magic?
    So you think that God "created" the idea that 3x3 + 4x4 = 5x5 (the simplest whole number example of a Pythagorean triangle). I don't think you understand mathematics if you think God is free to make 1 + 2 = 7.4.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    I hope you scoff at Preterism also since you hate Christianity so much.....unless of course if you are biased or if you don't see Preterism as Christian. The fool says in his heart, "there is no God"....I hope someone is not a fool.
    Have I ever said I have Christianity? Nope. There isn't even a single religion known as "Christianity" so there's no one thing for me to "hate." But I do hate what people have done in the name of Christianity, and that's what I was talking about. And I hate the way it destroys peoples minds, like it has done to yours. You are not rational in these discussion. You say things that are ridiculous as if you don't care about truth at all. I find your hatred of truth very disturbing.

    Finally, as for Preterism - I continue to be utterly amazed by your attack against what the Bible plainly states. You destroy any testimony the Bible could have. I've told you before and I'll tell you again: Preterism is one of the strongest proofs of the Bible that there is. The fact that Futurists attack it justifies the atheists who rejects it as the Word of God because you prove that the words it contains mean nothing when you deny things as plain and obvious and fundamental as the fact that John the Baptist fulfilled the Elijah prophecy.

    Please listen CWH. Your posts are degenerating into absurdity. It's on fun answering you. I started this forum for intelligent discussion, but you write things that are really crazy. And then when you are refuted, you don't admit the truth and just make up more crazy things. Don't you want to support Christianity with good arguments? Aren't you embarrassed to write so many things that are so obviously false and foolish? It doesn't have to be like this. I really hope you will choose to seek REAL TRUTH. You don't have to agree with me! I'm as fallible as anyone. But how will I ever be able to learn anything from you if you keep writing things that just aren't true?

    All the best.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lake district U.K
    Posts
    314

    Duck dammit Darwen ,duck

    Hello Richard
    I am back again. As a rule, I try to use as few words as possible but you choose to brush them aside and demand meticulous explanation. When you are asked to do the same you refer the interrogator to some authority or other . Now I ask you to dot every i and cross every t in response to these comments and questions I said that dna and rna were two of the tools which God used , I thought the the metaphor would have been readily understood. When you write the word' EVOLUTION' : What you really mean or imply is , the Darwen theory of evolution by the (accidental) selection of the species.That is totally different from the general meaning of the word. Now let us consider the absurd notion that D.N.A arose spontaneously without the intervention of (dare I say it?) Almighty God. The dumb darwenists declare that life sprang spontaneously from the primordial ocean. .O K Let's have a closer look. In the primordial soup there just happened to be strands of phosphorous ( not unusual) Somewhere along the line some molecules of thymine just happened to be attracted to the phosphorous atoms in a peculiar way. So far : just barely possible . Now conveniently , there were four other sugar compounds dissolved in the water. Theses molecules then attached themselves to the uracil bases in a very special way . NO WAY. The absurdity now descends into farce. Somewhere ,possibly thousands of miles away in the same ocean the same thing was happening. After millions of years , the different strands met and merged. Now , by purest chance ,they happened to congeal in such a way as to form a letter of an infinitely complex code . Of course D.N.A on its own is useless. It needs a counterpart in order to function. Now it so happened that in another part. Of the world that a similar scene was being enacted except that uracil was the base instead of thymine. After a period of time , these two met and merged . Then a strange thing happened . They happily wrapped themselves round a suitable molecule of protein and the first bacterium had arrived. I can only think of one appropriate adjective , one suitable expletive . Bullshit. If you believe that ,then you believe in fairies at the bottom of your garden. And now for a quote from your post



    That's not true. I have given you much evidence, but you did not respond. For example, I told you that DNA evidence supports the idea of common descent, but you did not respond. And besides, you are being dishonest because we both know that you do not want any "proof" and you will not accept any evidence no matter how strong it is.
    That is an old trick and used all the time . . It is sometimes called misdirection. First you say that D.N.A supports the notion of common descent and then you use the word proof to imply that it was an established fact when in truth it was only conjecture in the first place. The conclusions are plainly wrong. To say that because a monkey has the same genetic markers as a man means that men were descended from monkeys is like saying that a man must be a potato because he has a jacket. The D.N.A of of monkeys must be more than 90% similar to that of man because of the similarity of structure. Millions of markers must be similar if not identical because they indicate the form , colour, structure and al the finest details. I have said this before and I will say it again : There is no conflict between the bible and true science. True science is Knowledge from inquiry . Modern science is Theory from speculation. I read the bible for myself and draw my own conclusions. I have never thought that Adam was the first human on earth ,not by a million yrs. Lets have a look at genesis for a minute. In the beginning the earth was without form and void. It was a mass of gas in the vastness of space. God projected a mental image into the formless mass and the mass assumed the shape of the image. That agrees roughly with the limited observations which are possible today. If God had used the technical language of 2050 A.D who could have understood it?. The geological record and the fossil record are in accord with the account. Life began in the sea and the plants on the land. . But before that it was so turbulent that it was impossible know sea from sky. Then the birds appeared . Next the animals After hundreds of millions of years ,mankind appeared. You insist that there are many transitional forms . You cannot name one . You cynically said that maybe there was a change every million years or so . NO ! The change occurred every fifty million years on average and the change was so sudden and dramatic that it left an indelible mark in the record set in stone. It is so definitive that the rocks are identifiable by the fossils which they contain. Now : You tell me of one definitive fossil which shows a transition from one specie to another in any fifty million year geological period. It exists only in the imagination of fools. The dinosaurs could not exist without the worms beneath their feet. The worms could not exist without the protozoa to support then and the protozoa are dependant on bacteria. God is in control of every atom in the universe. Do you deny that fact?. This same spirit is perfectly capable of directing events and having his ideas recorded on paper. Can you give me one reason to suppose that the sequence of destruction and regeneration has ended?.
    To those who do not believe , no explanation is possible. To those who believe no explanation is needed.
    Alec

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •