Creationism VS Public schools

[Aceofspades77]

Human Chromosome #2. Please explain how this is not the result of genetic mutation from an ancestor common to humans and chimps.

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T. I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God. Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features. Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned. The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures. God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

 

[Skaloop]

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T. I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God. Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features. Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned. The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures. God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

Cars are not replicating organisms.

Also, define "kind." If you can, you'd be the first.

 

[mpok1519]

God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

Perfection includes the ability to change and 'grow' and nurture one's own destiny, imo.

 

[Danyc]

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T. I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God. Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features. Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned. The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures. God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

I'll let the others tear through this (especially the faulty car analogy that has been refuted a million times and is thus a PRAMT) and just say that if animals were perfect, then there wouldn't be so many extinct animals (99% of all species to have ever walked this earth are extinct).

 

[Vene]

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T. I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God. Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features. Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned. The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures. God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

Then why does human chromosome 2 have telomeres in the middle of it along with 2 centromeres? And why do we find that half of it has the same genes as one chromosome of a chimpanzee and the other half contains genes found on another chimpanzee chromosome? This is more than them being similar, this is using have the exact genes in the exact order, along with it looking exactly like our chromosome is two chimpanzee chromosomes fused together. There is no reason why the genes have to be in the exact same order (let alone the same genes) and there is even less reason why one of our chromosomes has all the signs that it was once 2 chromosomes.
link

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Evolution is a losing cause in which those who belief in the idea have to succumb to the piles of twisted facts that try to keep it afloat. I feel that with time, especially in our "age of knowledge", the evolution lie will continue to lose ground and believability. It's too easy to find any number of loopholes in the "evolution machine" with simple research and common sense.

Creationists love to tell themselves that evolution is "losing ground", adherents are falling by the wayside, and that one day the "evolution machine" as you put it, will grind to a halt.

Unfortunately, reality dictates the complete opposite as evolution has gained considerable relevance in contemporary biology. As I keep pointing--and conversely, creationists continue to ignore--evolutionary biology has numerous real world applications in various fields.

Time is not on your side.

 

[Split Rock]

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T. I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God.

In that case, you should be able to show us a chimera that evolution cannot explain.

Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features.

But according to you, there aren't any "families." Just "kinds," made by God ex nihilo

Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned. The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures.

Mutation isn't "magic," since we can see it happen and even cause them in the lab. Ex nihilo creation, on the other hand, is magic... since it means "from nothing." As you creationists like to ask, how does something come from nothing? Isn't that the very definition of "magic?"

God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

Yes... please do give us a definition of a "kind," and tell us how to determine if two organisms are members of the same "kind," or different "kinds." Also, give us a few examples of "kinds." It should not be hard to do, since they wer created only about 6,000 years ago.

 

[MoonLancer]

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T. I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God. Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features. Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned. The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures. God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

At the very least your argument directly supports theistic evolution. The two cars you mention could not have arisen if the model t had not come about first.

Your argument does not refute that we are or related to apes, Just as you could not refute that the model T was not a stepping block to the next model of car. even code advances by previous code, along with technology, If you want to use technology as an example, show me something man made that did not came about through advancement and is not related to something similar. Show me that it just appeared from nothing as you claim god created life.

Now if cars reproduced and only the cars that are able to be sold pass on its mechanical blue prints and these blue prints combine with another similar yet not identical car blue prints and when they combine they add some copy errors, You don't need god to explain the newer improved models. they will be selected because they where the better model.

 

[MasterOfKrikkit]

In the same way that a Chevy and a Ford have similar parts does mean that they "evolved" from a common ancestor - the model T.

Huh? So you agree that HC#2 is evidence of common descent -- both humans (Chevy) and chimps (Ford) evolved from a proto-ape (model T). So...? You accept common descent but not evolution? Whut?

If this analogy is supposed to undermine the ToE, it fails on about 15 levels.

I liken genetics and chromosomes to the programming software of God.

Then God is a crappy programmer. You haven't addressed the actual point of HC#2 (QV Vene's excellent re-summary, above). According to you, then, God programmed chimps, reused the code with some modifications for the other non-human apes (plausible so far...), then reused the code for humans... ok, so now please explain why God took two bits of chimp code and joined them together, given that this rendered some lines redundant but They left them in anyway, and there was no reason to do so. The same code is all there, just pointlessly rearranged. That's bad programming. I'd expect better from a human, let alone an omniscient deity.

Now how about you actually educate yourself about what HC#2 actually is and implies, rather than just throwing out trite analogies about the generics of genetics.

Most creatures in the same family WILL carry many of the same features. Evolutionists will tie these similarities to a common descent where creationist will say God created and designed them exactly the way he planned.

But again, this would make sense only if God was a human designer. I thought God was supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent. Human designers reuse components because they have been demonstrated to work, so the engineer can refine parts of a complex system without having to redesign the whole system (in which case they are likely to make critical design errors) -- the Space Shuttle "evolved" from the Wright Flyer incrementally because the SS is too complicated for humans to have designed correctly from scratch. But why would an omniscient designer have to go through that process? It doesn't make sense. A omniscient designer could get humans right without having to use any features from any other organisms (let alone doing it badly -- see above, re HC#2). It is no extra effort for an omnipotent being to make humans with completely different genetics to chimps. Why would such a clever God come up with a design that They know will appear to be the result of common descent? With that foreknowledge, God has acted deceptively. Why did God make Tiktaalik? And why didn't God make Randomus Buggersuptaxonomyii, an inverterbrate with opposable thumbs and no lungs (or something of that nature)?

The only problem is that evolutionists have to rely on the magic of mutation to be responsible for everything changing into more complex creatures. God has created all creatures perfect and within their "kind" since the beginning.

Define. Kind. Please.

And mutation has been observed and induced. It's less magical than gravity and electrons. God, by the way, has not been (reliably) observed nor recreated in a lab; neither has ex nihilo creation. So who's relying on magic, exactly?

 

[Danyc]

Sorry Ace, you're going to have to try a little harder.

 

[mpok1519]

maic, hocus pocus, demons, angels, dragons, satyrs, pooka, changelings, trolls, orcs, wizards, elves, vampires, werewolves, the MAtrix.....

all these things are REAL, and they need to teach these alternative zoological concepts in biology class.

=P

 

[mpok1519]

magic, hocus pocus, demons, angels, dragons, satyrs, pooka, changelings, trolls, orcs, wizards, elves, vampires, werewolves, the MAtrix.....

all these things are REAL, and they need to teach these alternative zoological concepts in biology class.

=P