to all Christians-darwin refuted by science (moved)

[cross bearer]

as an evangelical, the most annoying thing someone could say to you is darwin.

Since i haven't studied science that much, sometimes i get stopped.

I am sure most of you had the same experience!

No MORE-DARWIN REFUTED BY SCIENTISTS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4z0IVivslc

watch, remember something called bacterial flagellum and irreversible complexity, which PROVES Darwin is wrong.

next time someone says darwin, just slap them with this fact

 

[Bellicus]

watch, remember something called bacterial flagellum and irreversible complexity, which PROVES Darwin is wrong.

Actually the theory of irreducible complexity is not a fact at all. The author of the theory has: "conceded that there are no peer-reviewed papers supporting his claims that complex molecular systems, like the bacterial flagellum, the blood-clotting cascade, and the immune system, were intelligently designed nor are there any peer-reviewed articles supporting his argument that certain complex molecular structures are "irreducibly complex." (LINK)

So it is not something that proves that Darwin was wrong. But there is lots of things that prove that Darwin was right.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#cite_note-Kitzmiller_ruling_ID_science-69

If you think science is annoying, maybe science is not for you.

Anyway science and Christianity is two different things. We believe in Jesus and believe in a eternal life etc. but nothing of this is something physical that the scientific method can be used at. God can't be examined, so we can't say for sure if He is real or not, we can just believe in it. If other people don't believe in God, then I'm pretty sure that they won't believe any more in him by Christians that tries to fight against simple facts.

 

[CIAagent11]

as an evangelical, the most annoying thing someone could say to you is darwin.

Since i haven't studied science that much, sometimes i get stopped.

I am sure most of you had the same experience!

No MORE-DARWIN REFUTED BY SCIENTISTS

watch, remember something called bacterial flagellum and irreversible complexity, which PROVES Darwin is wrong.

next time someone says darwin, just slap them with this fact

I think religion and darvinism can fit together perfectly well.
It was a tactic of the atheists to put us in this corner and defend inteligent design.
God created the earth in seven days, but those seven days are symbolic.
It was a much longer time. All of evolution is Gods work.

 

[Sketcher]

We need to be careful about going headlong into scientific explanations when we're not science people. Science changes. What God did does not. Let's stick to what we know from Scripture. If the Catholics had, Galileo would not have gotten into trouble. Their problem was they made doctrine out of what they thought was science, but Scripture didn't teach it. A devout Christian made a discovery, and the rest is history. Let's not make the same mistake with either evolution or the laws of thermodynamics or any of that.

 

[Nilla]

Mod Hat On

This has been moved from For New Christians
to Origins Theology

Please remember the Theology guidelines and CF rules.

Mod Hat Off​

 

[The Barbarian]

Something important to remember from one of the most esteemed Christian theologians:

"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances,... and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, lest the unbeliever see only ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn."
- St. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim (The Literal Meaning of Genesis)

Good advice. Listen to him.

 

[vossler]

Instead of holding fast to any knowledge or facts derived from reason and experience, we should hold fast to the Word of God. Man's theories are constantly evolving to adapt to the latest 'scientific' finding, yet the Word of God never changes. Bottom line, don't let your interpretation of Scripture be swayed by any man derived theory.

 

[Melethiel]

Since i haven't studied science that much, sometimes i get stopped.

Then you should avoid trying to make "scientific" arguments for your viewpoint. It takes a lot of training to be able to understand all the ins and outs of scientific arguments, and silly youtube "refutations" like this one only make you look silly. Stick to your beliefs instead, since science can't touch those.

 

[philadiddle]

These scientists and philosophers began to formulate an alternative to the central theory of modern biology

I wonder when they'll get their nobel prize.

 

[CIAagent11]

I wonder when they'll get their nobel prize.

The 'liberal of the year'-award usually goes to communists and terrorists.

 

[The Barbarian]

Instead of holding fast to any knowledge or facts derived from reason and experience, we should hold fast to the Word of God. Man's theories are constantly evolving to adapt to the latest 'scientific' finding, yet the Word of God never changes. Bottom line, don't let your interpretation of Scripture be swayed by any man derived theory.

Truth cannot contradict truth. If reality and Scripture seem to conflict, it is because we have misunderstood one or both of them. And it is equally possible to be mistaken about reality or Scripture.

It's very important to remember that what our personal take on Scripture is not necessarily the Word of God.

 

[herev]

as an evangelical, the most annoying thing someone could say to you is darwin.

hmm, ok, I don't know where my quote went the first time, so here it is again.
I guess I'm going to blow your mind away! Will I annoy myself?
I AM an evangelical AND an evolutionist!
Don't assume that everyone is the same just because we are Christians

 

[Dojima]

Actually cross bearer could be right.
The bacterial flagellum might be hard to explain by natural selection, which leaves design.
Which would pretty much refute Darwinism.
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case."
- Charles Darwin
And this seems to be the case with the bacterial flagellum.

I am not allowed to post links yet, due to postcount, but search "Free Global Energy P-10" on youtube.

 

[suzmot]

Actually cross bearer could be right.
The bacterial flagellum might be hard to explain by natural selection, which leaves design.
Which would pretty much refute Darwinism.
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case."
- Charles Darwin
And this seems to be the case with the bacterial flagellum.

I am not allowed to post links yet, due to postcount, but search "Free Global Energy P-10" on youtube.

Come on man.

I can't post links either, but a quick google search shows hundreds of links that show how the evolution of the bacterial flagellum is possible.

This is a tired old PRATT that has almost literally been Refuted A Thousand Times.

 

[Dojima]

Come on man.

I can't post links either, but a quick google search shows hundreds of links that show how the evolution of the bacterial flagellum is possible.

This is a tired old PRATT that has almost literally been Refuted A Thousand Times.

I am actually curious. Would you show me one?
I see you have 50 posts now, so you can post links.

 

[suzmot]

I am actually curious. Would you show me one?
I see you have 50 posts now, so you can post links.

Evolution of the bacterial flagellum

 

[OldManAnon]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdwTwNPyR9w[/youtube]