STILL no actual evidence FOR creation

[AV1611VET]

What came first the Universe or the Bible?

The Bible.

Psalm 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

 

[AV1611VET]

They have no clue as to what happened in 4004 BC. I really do not think they are even interested in knowing.

Satan won't let them.

 

[AwakeInTheMatrix]

Salt crystallization is a trivial example of how order spontaneously arise from chaos. Proteins folding is a quite complicated example. It has been written quite extensive in the literature about this subject for about 50 years now, and there exists theories that deals with what been observed. It is generally know as self-organization, and have implication in unsupervised machine learning and AI.

The subject of evolving was first treated extensively by Darwin in The Origin of Species, and subsequently been refined in detail by biologist for the past 150 years. What consider "devolving", in the sense to revert to a ancestral stage, the theory, as far as I understand it, forbids that to happen.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond, but my little Google quick study of protein folding and salt crystallization just now actually strengthens my belief in intelligent design. Granted, I'm not versed in those studies, but the general definitions sound designed, not random. And regarding the proteins, extremely so. I can certainly see how studying those patterns would aid humans with our own creations (machines and AI).

As far as Darwin, after 150 years, it still remains a theory, actually lacks full scientific consensus, and is in need of refinement it seems, as the field of epigenetics is revealing.

 

[joshua 1 9]

As far as Darwin, after 150 years, it still remains a theory,

The funny thing is that Mendel's book (Father of Genetics) was in Darwin's library and Darwin never even read it. Sort of makes me wonder how interested Darwin really was in the truth because so much of evolution today is based on what we know about DNA.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The Bible.

Psalm 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

John
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

 

[AV1611VET]

The funny thing is that Mendel's book (Father of Genetics) was in Darwin's library and Darwin never even read it. Sort of makes me wonder how interested Darwin really was in the truth because so much of evolution today is based on what we know about DNA.

Ya, but Darwin got his picture on a £10 note and a city named after him in Australia.

What have you got?

 

[AwakeInTheMatrix]

The funny thing is that Mendel's book (Father of Genetics) was in Darwin's library and Darwin never even read it. Sort of makes me wonder how interested Darwin really was in the truth because so much of evolution today is based on what we know about DNA.

That's interesting. Makes one wonder what the world of science would be today if he had...

 

[MennoSota]

The title of this thread just makes me laugh. People would rather believe that the universe magically appeared from nothing into something, rather than believe that an all knowing God created by His Sovereign ordinance. smh

 

[AV1611VET]

The title of this thread just makes me laugh. People would rather believe that the universe magically appeared ...

I don't mean to steal your laughter, but others believe that the universe miraculously appeared.

 

[AwakeInTheMatrix]

The title of this thread just makes me laugh. People would rather believe that the universe magically appeared from nothing into something, rather than believe that an all knowing God created by His Sovereign ordinance. smh

What I find the most interesting is that they don't see that belief in evolution is actually more faith based than creation.

 

[MennoSota]

What I find the most interesting is that they don't see that belief in evolution is actually more faith based than creation.

It's a belief in magic.

 

[lesliedellow]

Why is evolution not more demonstrable? In an era where doctors can grow noses on foreheads, why can't scientists evolve or devolve anything?

Because Evolution is dependent upon reproduction, and it takes many generations to effect achange - even if that change is needful, which it may not be if the organism is well adapted to their environment.

 

[AwakeInTheMatrix]

Because Evolution is dependent upon reproduction, and it takes many generations to effect achange - even if that change is needful, which it may not be if the organism is well adapted to their environment.

It has been 150 years since Darwinism was introduced, and yet...nothing.

Look up epigenetics. It actually does not take "many generations" for effects and affects to become apparent.

 

[lesliedellow]

It has been 150 years since Darwinism was introduced, and yet...nothing.

Look up epigenetics. It actually does not take "many generations" for effects and affects to become apparent.

Depending upon the organism concerned 150 years would not be much time. In the case of humans it is maybe six or seven generations.

 

[AwakeInTheMatrix]

Depending upon the organism concerned 150 years would not be much time. In the case of humans it is maybe six or seven generations.

Actually, next generation in some studies.

And our advancements in technology lend itself to "reproduction" evidence on a more rapid scale. If one is going to insist on evidence based science, then produce some evidence.

 

[lesliedellow]

Actually, next generation in some studies.

And our advancements in technology lend itself to "reproduction" evidence on a more rapid scale. If one is going to insist on evidence based science, then produce some evidence.

You clearly do not understand how Evolution works. Since you are a creationist, I suppose there is nothing new there.

 

[AwakeInTheMatrix]

You clearly do not understand how Evolution works. Since you are a creationist, I suppose there is nothing new there.

Here's what I understand: You also have a belief, and your belief is less supported than mine.
Have a wonderful Saturday!

 

[TLK Valentine]

Daisy-chaining the genealogies throughout the Bible leads to APPROXIMATELY 4004 BC.

That's close enough to use as a blueprint for occurrences in Biblical history.

You've got it backwards, AV -- Bishop Ussher started with an event in Biblical history, dated via secular (actually Pagan) history, and worked from there to get 4004 BC.

In case you're wondering, the event he started with was the death of Nebuchadnezzar -- which he was able to lock down from Pagan sources -- 562 BC, if those Pagans can be trusted.

 

[AV1611VET]

You've got it backwards, AV -- Bishop Ussher started with an event in Biblical history, dated via secular (actually Pagan) history, and worked from there to get 4004 BC.

In case you're wondering, the event he started with was the death of Nebuchadnezzar -- which he was able to lock down from Pagan sources -- 562 BC, if those Pagans can be trusted.

Whatever.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Whatever.

Quite the big whatever -- since you would consider those pagan religions to be... what's that term you love so much? "diabolic mimicry" of the One True faith, would you not?