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.
Given the choice between a million happy coincidences and one intelligent agent at work, the latter requires less assumptions.
By what I have experienced during such discussions, the atheists always suddenly shift the subject from a purely ID perspective to that of deities, a deity, goddesses, a god, or God. In fact, they even enthusiastically bring in Spaghetti Monsters, Unicorns, fairies, Santa Clause and all sorts of mystical creatures. Then they act all surprised when the ID proponent responds relevantly to the deviation?
Good thread. No great thread.
Evolutionary goo does not create DNA.
Thanks for the encouraging feedback. Yes I agree 100%. There is definitely a designing mind revealed and easily detectable in our DNA among many other things in nature.
From our standpoint it takes a enormous stretch of the imagination to deny it and sometimes we might wonder whether the denials are really as sincere as they claim to be. But when we consider that this denial has been infused educationally and propagated by the media in a concerted effort over the stretch of decades, then it is no wonder that it seems is so easily adopted and so prominent today.
Most Christians do not try to disguise anything. We are straight out saying it is wrong. Science disguises science as being truth which is why science teaches evolution is true, but it has not been proven true to the point that there is proof of no God.
It would be great if you could PROVE GOD DOES NOT EXIST.
Good thread. No great thread.
Evolutionary goo does not create DNA.
Everyone thinks their 'opinion' is evidence. I've heard more opinion than evidence.Yet another post with an assertion devoid of any evidence.
Well why don't you give me the 100 word synopsis on the 'evidence of where DNA comes from? I do like it when people support their claims.Sadly Radrook, like most creationists, does not understand the nature of evidence. A dishonest video is never evidence. And your education seems to be a bit lacking too. If you are talking about the initial forming of DNA that is not a problem for the theory of evolution. That is part of abiogenesis, a separate but related probem. And it is rather well understood where new DNA comes from. You should know that you never go to creationist videos if you want real answers to science questions.
Everyone thinks their 'opinion' is evidence. I've heard more opinion than evidence.
Well why don't you give me the 100 word synopsis on the 'evidence of where DNA comes from? I do like it when people support their claims.
Not really; when the 'million happy coincidences' are the demonstrable consequences of a single assumed principle, they are a million happy confirmations of that principle. If that single principle is a natural consequence of the world and does not require the assumption of an unexplained additional entity, it is more parsimonious.Given the choice between a million happy coincidences and one intelligent agent at work, the latter requires less assumptions.
It's not that long - new DNA comes from gene, chromosome, and genome duplication, and subsequent mutations.Well why don't you give me the 100 word synopsis on the 'evidence of where DNA comes from? I do like it when people support their claims.
Well why don't you give me the 100 word synopsis on the 'evidence of where DNA comes from? I do like it when people support their claims.
It's not that long - new DNA comes from gene, chromosome, and genome duplication, and subsequent mutations.
"Evolution by gene duplication is understood to be an important source of novelty in evolution, providing for an expanded repertoire of molecular activities. The underlying mutational event of duplication may be a conventional gene duplication mutation within a chromosome, or a larger-scale event involving whole chromosomes (aneuploidy) or whole genomes (polyploidy). A classic view ... is that duplication creates redundancy, and redundancy provides fuel for innovation. Knowledge of evolution by gene duplication has advanced more rapidly in the past 15 years due to new genomic data, more powerful computational methods of comparative inference, and new evolutionary models."[wikipedia]
You don't know is not the same as "God did not do it" either.We don't know where the first life came from. More importantly, we don't need to know where the first life came from in order to understand how life changed once it was here.
To help you understand this further, "I don't know" is not the same as "God did it". It isn't as if "God did it" is the go to answer when we have no other answers. God isn't a synonym for ignorance.
You don't know is not the same as "God did not do it" either.
That is my point.
Being anti-God is not a synonym for ignorance either.
Then a brief synopsis will be all the more easy for you. If DNA isn't a problem for evolution.You made a rather bad error. You seemed to think that DNA was a problem for evolution. It isn't. That shows a lack of understanding on your part. If you can own up to your error I will gladly meet your request. If you can't then no amount of evidence will convince you and I would be wasting my time.
You are arguing with me. Agree with me and you have to do nothing.I don't have to disprove a claim in order to not believe in it.
Can you please stop talking about it if you don't know already. I'll let you off the hook.I don't have to disprove a claim in order to not believe in it.
Do you automatically believe everything that people claim if there is no evidence at hand to disprove it??
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?