Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Unless you can give us a definition of "kind" then what you ask for is akin to me asking you how much does a male polka dot unicorn weigh!
Creationists have no idea what science is. They try to apply pseudo scientific methodology topped with a rich serving of superstitious beliefs in the hope of refuting the world's most sound scientific theory of all time; namely ToE.
"God said it, that settles it." - Christian Motto
"What can be said without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
Do you know the difference between -ing and -ed?Which goes back to the question I asked in the OP: Why aren't you interested in figuring out what's really happening?
Inquiry into what? nothing? I agree.That motto shuts out and stifles inquiry.
I am not talking about DNA. I am talking about how traits are gotten by the offspring.
While our DNA is different, tells us that we are not related biologically but we are related by species---homo sapian.
You do know that DNA is the chemical name and "genes" is the biological/genetics name for the same molecular chains*, don't you?
Do you know the difference between -ing and -ed?
God created the moon.
Inquiry into what? nothing? I agree.
It's certainly a time-saver, isn't it?
No muss, no fuss ... God did it, that settles it.
Spend our tax dollars elsewhere -- like on the poor.
Do you use that same criteria when evos speak?
The Holy Ghost.What led you to that conclusion?
Reality from nothing? I agree.Inquiry into reality.
In the sense that scientists worked hard to come up with six different ways to say, "I think this is how it happened," I'll agree that we would seem "lazy" by comparison.A time-save for the intellectually lazy perhaps.
Glad to hear it.I, for one, am not satisfied with lame, vacuous pseudo-explanations.
Any issue can be "addressed."If you're attitude prevailed throughout history and up to the present day, I wager there would be a lot more poor and sick and frail. Scientific advances, many of them funded by tax dollars, have enabled strategies that have directly addressed those issues.
The Holy Ghost.
Reality from nothing? I agree.
In the sense that scientists worked hard to come up with six different ways to say, "I think this is how it happened," I'll agree that we would seem "lazy" by comparison.
Any issue can be "addressed."
My autistic nephew can address an issue.
And he doesn't need to "enable strategies" with tax dollars to do so.
He is the Third Person of the Godhead, for starters.Care to elaborate on that?
"It" is a "He."What form does it take?
In this case, an Author.A voice? A figure?
My spirit bears witness.How do you know that its communication with you imparts truthful information?
Thank you for demonstrating what I've been saying here for years:What do you mean? You aren't being very clear.
Indeed I do.Do you understand why you would be deemed lazy in this regard?
Given that each issue has at least two theories behind it, I'd say you guys have a pretty impressive backlog of theories to work on.Any issue can be addressed. It's a matter of addressing the issue well. Scientific advances have allowed us to do that for many issues.
I told you wlhy,
I didn't count them but in your whale chart there was about 10 steps from hippo to whale.
You have yet to produce any BIOLOGICAL evidence to show how indohyus and pakicetus lost their legs.
They survived better without the legs. They were better swimmers without them. It's a simple concept. Not having legs was advantage underwater.Not only can you not explaain HOW, you have no eplanation as to WHY this should happen. The ones with legs were surviving quite well because they had legs.
Land, dog-like animals need their legs to survive
Another thing you can't explain is why did the hippo and the whale survive but everything inbetween did not?
No you are not making us things. You are accepting by faith alone what others have made up. It is necessary for evolution to survive to have an explanation as to how whales came into existence.
Of course some sea mammals might be able to drink sea water but I doubt that any of them that do not live in the water most of the time(sea turtles for example)would survive doing it for an extended time.
There is no evidence that pakicetus spent much time in the sea and it is very unlikely it would ever drink sea water and live.
You are right, but how an offspring receives the traits it has is not one of them.
For accuracy sake, a small change should be made to your statement:
"Man says that God said it, that settles it"
Nope.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
I don't agree.Both of those would be a (strange) version of theistic evolution rather than Old Earth Creationism. OEC can sometimes allow for evolution, but it explicitly rejects human descent from preexisting organisms, regardless of the mechanism. Once you cross that line, you join us in the realm of the theistic evolutionists.
Mutation.
The first man was formed from the dust of the earth because he was resurrected from the decomposed remains (dust) of an ape.
This idea is consistent with both the DNA evidence and Scripture.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?