Search results

So with that in mind would it not have been more logical for God to just advise Noah to build a small boat, large enough only for his family then he could just wipe out everything else and rebuild as you suggest? Why did he make Noah and his family go to all the effort of creating a large enough...

I'm a pro-choice atheist. In general I don't agree with abortions but I believe they have their place in numerous circumstances. For example, tests can be done to determine the risk of genetic disorders such as down's syndrome. My fiance and I agreed that if the results came back showing very...

Are you serious? Can you please provide us with a definition of "animal" that an insect deos not fit into. Could you please also tell us whether you consider Chelicerates or Crustaceans to be animals? What about sponges and corals? Where exactly do you draw the line?

Man up Dovea, why weren't the sea creatures affected? You conveniently ignored all my questions that followed those about the bass kind and snapper kind. Which bass did and which did not exist at the time of the flood? It appears to me that these generic names like "bass" seem to have some sort...

So all the fish had to stay in the water? I'm guessing the water would have been mildly brackish, current volume (or very close to it) of salt water plus enough rainwater to cover the Himalayas. This would have been entirely unacceptable for almost all fish species. Too salty for the freshwater...

Well, that makes sense in one way since "bass" is a generic term that Americans throw at any fish that needs a name. Most bass do not belong to the same family, let alone genus. On the other hand, if all tuna belong to the tuna kind, why then does each species of bass belong to its own kind...

Doveaman, This is a smallmouth bass. Does this belong to the "bass kind"? This is a red bass. Does it belong to the "bass kind"? This is a schoolmaster snapper. Does it belong to the "snapper kind"? This is a snapper. Does it belong to the "snapper kind"? Those should be...

Have you ever heard of a vaccuum? It is void of everything. Light may pass through a vaccuum but there is not necessarily light in a vaccuum therefore nothing most certainly can exist. I have a friend who is a church minister and a YEC. When I told him about the fact that you believe all this...

You have precisely proven my point. The evidence has been put forward for the evolution of the complex organs, most specifically the human eye but it is rejected by creationists simply because it goes against your preconceived ideas of the world through the bible.

The problem for creationists is that evidence is meaningless. For someone who accepts evolution to see that the theory is incorrect would take evidence such as rabbits in the Precambrian. Unfortunately the only "evidence" creationists will accept is the bible and they already have that. I think...

I think he would have built them himself and passed on the family business to his son. After all, Jesus did end up being a carpenter.

Certainly. I am guessing you also do not subscribe to the idea that mutations necessarily lead to a loss of "information"? The obvious difference between fundamentalists and most other christians is that the former are willing to find any radical reason why science may be wrong or at least...

However, creationists consider this first mutation a loss of information. Had the gene originally been h(G') then mutated to h(G) then it must follow that this is an increase in information. If h(G')=h(G)-1, then h(G'')=h(G')-1, not h(G'')=h(G')+1 as you have stated. In this case your logic...

Well, can you please provide us with a non-biblical example of parthenigenesis of a human AND a non-biblical example of parthenogenesis that resulted in male offspring? The churches have been trying to cover up plenty of evidence for hundreds of years.

You mean, no evidence of either has been posted on any of the creationist websites you frequent? I'm sure the nylon-eating bacteria example is not something creationists like to discuss but it is a clear cut example of your second definition. Have you come across the E. coli experiment?

Yes but you have to remember this is in the context of marine turtles only. Those that are the first to escape from the birds are most likely to be eaten by the fish. Those that are somewhere in the middle of the pack have safety in number, this pushes to an advantage for the most average...

If information is defined as an increase in the number of alleles then insertions and duplications would be increases in information. The problem is creationists refuse to give a specific definition of information so that any evidence for increases in information can be disregarded as not...

Agonances, what do you have to say about parthenogenesis always producing female offspring? Was Jesus really a woman? Was this covered up by the people writing the bible?

The big advantage in species that produce high numbers of offspring is they will inevitably have a higher chance of producing beneficial mutations. Given the circumstances surrounding the hatching events I believe marine turtles have a significantly lower chance than most species of retaining...

The problem is, with just about any mutation you can think of, the feeding frenzy that occurs during hatching, there is nothing that gives a substantially better survival chance. Greater speed may be detrimantal as the awaiting masses will pick off those at the extremities (front, back or sides)...