Search results

I too am looking forward to his work – though divisive as it may be. The variation is there but evolution does depend heavily on the ridiculously large amounts of time that makes it seem almost possible – no matter how small that window of hope may be. What creationists can be...

For a man who could walk talk and get married within the same week after being created - I would say not too long.

Seems to me youv'e taken the verses out of context, why not try reading it in context, starting with 1st verse of chapter 2 - and if your are still confused we can continue the discussion.

The main difference being one depends on an impotent process which requires eons of time and the other - an omnipotent creator in no time at all!

philadiddle said: crusader, you said there is no evidence for the first DNA, but what about the age of the earth or universe? also, there should be some signs in the fossil record that all "kinds" of animals existed for the last 6000 years. do you have even just 1, teeny tiny piece of scientific...

Chaoschristian said: Here's a question that I asked in a thread a while back, and I'll ask it of you: God reveals himself directly to you and says, "Crusader, I intended for life to arise out of self-organizing material millions of years ago and after that to eventually evolve into a great...

chaoschristian said: Do you understand that any given scientific theory, if it is well formulated, is going to have limits, a set of parameters that states what it deals with and then by definition what it does not deal with? Actually from what I understandscientific methodology exists only...

shernren said: Prove that if life can only be generated by dependence upon supernatural phenomena, natural selection cannot therefore alter the relative proportion of alleles in a population to increase the proportion of beneficial (relative to the current environment) traits and reduce the...

It depends what one means by "science" reproducing life, would it include intelligenct guidance in every step or just simply stochastic chemical processes?

No matter how evolutionists want to seperate the theory of abiogenesis and its bunk sister theory evolution the fact remains, naturalistic evolution (which is no different from TE) is dependent on abiogenesis after all without the first life there is no evolution of any kind. What do you mutate...

Neither is hype and wishful thinking. I would agree though, that I have neither, that is a shred of evidence for the natural arrival of DNA or the first life - because there is no natural evidence whatsoever. Until that has been addressed I will sleep very comfortably indeed knowing that God's...

Sure just like dust to dame, particles to people, atoms to apes, sand to sally and so on. And your point being?

Or how about this, if there is so much evidence for mud to man evolution than why are there YECs? Obviously someone's wrong - but I won't say who it is.

The Lady Kate said: Well, if one were to zealously insist that 2+2=5, despite all lessons to the contrary, it would be safe to assume a stunning ignorance of mathematics... and I wouldn't trust anyone who honestly believed 2+2=5 to do any advanced calculus... would you? I don't know whether to...

Double post.

Dannager said: Sure...if you're completely ignorant of what biological evolution is and how it works. Just exactly how one can tell of anyone's ignorance of anything by a single statement is beyond me. Regardless it has been said therefore a showing of this ignorance is in order.

The Lady Kate said: ...and sometimes junk is just plain junk. Agreed - evolution fits the term "junk" quite well - don't you think. ;)

shernren said: With this sort of rubbish, does AiG really expect to get any credibility? And your point being? It really depends on what one means by rubbish and credible - after all one man's junk might be another man's treasure and one man's credibility may be another one's shame.

Late_Cretaceous said: Lets find out if there is a leading cause for people to oppose evolutionary thoery Or it could be that there is such a category as "absolute truth" in which the ToE is no where to be found that I subscribe to - the Word of God (aka the Bible).

tetrasonicwave said: I believe the universe could very well have been created in a manner such as this. Jesus is Lord! Its just too bad scripture doesn't support this outragious extrapolation of creation - but I did enjoy your play with such colorful words.