What do you mean by 'radiating fruit flies' ? are you talking about irradiating fruit flies?Radiating fruit flies was supposed to prove evolution. It proved evolution doesn't happen.
Do you have a link or a reference to this?
Upvote
0
What do you mean by 'radiating fruit flies' ? are you talking about irradiating fruit flies?Radiating fruit flies was supposed to prove evolution. It proved evolution doesn't happen.
There are testable results in the examples mentioned in the paper, and in other references it uses.I know the theory. Show me the testable results. Increasing complexity is a pipe dream.
Science will change with new discoveries and will end in and with the truth in scripture, and that's also, in the midst of that, is where the Bible will pick up...How can you tell where science ends and the Bible picks up?
That belief is belied by the constant evidence that show the Bible to be terribly wrong in matters of science.Science will change with new discoveries and will end in and with the truth in scripture, and that's also, in the midst of that, is where the Bible will pick up...
God Bless!
Science will change and so will the commonly held for years interpretations of the scriptures and the two will meet, eventually, it is inevitable...That belief is belied by the constant evidence that show the Bible to be terribly wrong in matters of science.
No. Not really. We know that life, including human life is the product of evolution. That will simply not change. There is no evidence for any other idea and a literal interpretation of the Bible has been refuted. The same applies to the Noah's Ark story. It did not happen. Now you may run into a very small number of dishonest and incompetent scientists that try to claim otherwise, but they are easily refuted.Science will change and so will the commonly held for years interpretations of the scriptures and the two will meet, eventually, it is inevitable...
God Bless!
Changes like this: Genesis: Another Kind of Reality... Hebrew language...
Have you read Genesis in Hebrew and understood the meaning of the Hebrew words and see how'd you interpret it then? Did you even read and be open to trying to see my point of view in the posts in the link and what was said in it/them, or do you just automatically discount it, cause of your closed mind...No. Not really. We know that life, including human life is the product of evolution. That will simply not change. There is no evidence for any other idea and a literal interpretation of the Bible has been refuted. The same applies to the Noah's Ark story. It did not happen. Now you may run into a very small number of dishonest and incompetent scientists that try to claim otherwise, but they are easily refuted.
Are you denying that currently held scientific theories will be changed in the future, as will currently held interpretations of scripture? Or that one is more or less infallible than the other? When the real truth is that currently, both are fallible? It is impossible for them not to be fallible, cause man's idea's have always been fallible... both man's scientific ideas, (especially anything in science that can only be called a "theory" right now), and man's interpretations of scriptures, (which are also mostly theories), cause both cannot be accurately, especially with "infallible" reliability right now, can be infallibly known right now... to claim that either is right now, is very closed minded...No. Not really. We know that life, including human life is the product of evolution. That will simply not change. There is no evidence for any other idea and a literal interpretation of the Bible has been refuted. The same applies to the Noah's Ark story. It did not happen. Now you may run into a very small number of dishonest and incompetent scientists that try to claim otherwise, but they are easily refuted.
Is that claim falsifiable?When you don't have a way to falsify claims you have left the realm of science.
Why do they need two different kinds of math for the sub-atomic world and the non-subatomic world?What about the maths in science, or the logic, is math falsifiable? Can science add up without it?
Have you read Genesis in Hebrew and understood the meaning of the Hebrew words and see how'd you interpret it then? Did you even read and be open to trying to see my point of view in the posts in the link and what was said in it/them, or do you just automatically discount it, cause of your closed mind...
ToE cannot explain everything by the way, though it is taught by many that it can, but that's just wrong and a lie, some things in it are correct, but some other things are not, or at least cannot be proven but is treated like it can but is based on some pretty far-reaching assumptions, if they would be honest about it...
Ark in Hebrew is simply a vessel or more generally a container in which one takes refuge in or is held in for safety, or safe storage (from something) in the Hebrew... There is no difference or distinction between Noah's Ark and the Ark of the Covenant or the Ark that Moses was placed in as a Babe... In the Hebrew, there's no difference... And there are other "Ark's" as well... We say Chest, basket, boat, we make distinctions, the Original Hebrew does not, because they are the same, and in that way in which they are "all the same" lies the correct, intended interpretation by God...
Apply this to other Hebrew words and your understanding can become more enlightened...
Science can not prove the things you are claiming that it can easily refute either, Like Noah's story...
Even if it could, spiritually speaking is accurate, very real, and true... But, You have to look into the original Hebrew for that type of interpretation...
God Bless!
You should try to learn what a theory is before you attempt to belittle it. And don't accuse others of your sins.Are you denying that currently held scientific theories will be changed in the future, as will currently held interpretations of scripture? Or that one is more or less infallible than the other? When the real truth is that currently, both are fallible? It is impossible for them not to be fallible, cause man's idea's have always been fallible... both man's scientific ideas, (especially anything in science that can only be called a "theory" right now), and man's interpretations of scriptures, (which are also mostly theories), cause both cannot be accurately, especially with "infallible" reliability right now, can be infallibly known right now... to claim that either is right now, is very closed minded...
Where science doesn't directly detect it assumes via inference based on observation.Science ends when it comes to spiritual questions. Such things cannot be detected by instruments and so are beyond the realms of science.
How can you tell where science ends and the Bible picks up?
Why do they need two different kinds of math for the sub-atomic world and the non-subatomic world?
If math is in-falsifiable, why two different kinds? One or the other has to be right or wrong for it not to be...
Always wondered that...?
God Bless!