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.
In any case, Darkeonz, I have now spent six posts in justifying my SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE custom user title -- even amid ridicule.
If you don't understand yet that I don't mean all of science -- like you thought it meant -- I don't know what else to say.
Considering the fact that your tagline gets misunderstood so often, have you considered changing it?
I do understand it. You believe in science up till the point it conflicts with your religion. When it reaches that point, you'll deny it till the end of days
I disagree -- you didn't say one word about 'science'.
All you did was ridicule my faith in the Scriptures.
Don't ask him questions. He's already gone away -- do you want to give him an excuse to come back?
I guess I failed it then Ha :-D
I guess I failed it then Ha :-D
The correct phrasing of this question is "what would falsify the ToE?". The way you worded it assumes that such a fact exists. So far, it doesn't.-- Huh?
In any event, what falsifies the theory of evolution?
Right, and if we wind up an alarm clock, we can predict when it will run out and stop...so?Pluto orbits the sun about every 250 years. We have known about Pluto for about 80 years, yet we can predict that it will. It has not been observed.
You want the entire timeline of evolution on earth to be observed, or the evidence is invalid to you. But that's not how it works. It would obviously be impossible due to the 2 billion years you'd have to observe, and the fact that you're not able to travel back in time.
But we can determine that evolution has, and is, happening
Your idea of god creating Adam and Eve has not been observed, tested, demonstrated or predicted.
Right, and if we wind up an alarm clock, we can predict when it will run out and stop...so?
The issue is not 14 hours or 250 years nor within the scope and range of man's power to observe.
The 2 billion years is strictly non existent, imaginary time, based on same state extrapolations. Truly meaningless.
Specifically how is it happening as you predict??
How would it be any different if it was a created trait, and started from created creatures mere thousands of years ago??
Says you, because you wave away the God that observed it. One would not expect creation to be 'predicted' since that was the beginning of our universe!
Because we have actually observed how it has happened. The evidence is overwhelming. One example is these lizards who showed rapid progress in evolution when moved to a new home.
Lizards Undergo Rapid Evolution After Introduction To A New Home
where is the evidence for these limits?This isn't evidence for Darwinism.
News to Note, June 6, 2009 - Answers in Genesis
And where is the molecular data? What we do observe happening is adaptation with limits (in some cases, quite severe constraints).
His hyper imagination, or as I like to call it, The HI TheoryImaginary time you say? What do you base that on?
This isn't evidence for Darwinism.
News to Note, June 6, 2009 - Answers in Genesis
And where is the molecular data? What we do observe happening is adaptation with limits (in some cases, quite severe constraints).
"Answer in Genesis
believing it, defending it, proclaiming it. "
What a great place to get an objective opinion about the topic
Anyways... Adaptation with limits?? Elaborate please
Debasement came to naught. The data stands."Answer in Genesis
believing it, defending it, proclaiming it. "
What a great place to get an objective opinion about the topic
http://www.christianforums.com/t7541198-16/#post56978429Anyways... Adaptation with limits?? Elaborate please
Debasement came to naught. The data stands.
I walk by faith, not by sight.
Weird. Didn't you have to read or have the Bible read to you first to believe it?
I find it incredibly funny that he'd mention "imaginary time", seeing as it's one of the few concepts even more outlandish than dad-cosmology. Nope, those several billion years are definitely not imaginary timeImaginary time you say? What do you base that on? It's pretty common knowledge that the earth is 4.6 billions years old. So what is it that makes you reject the 2 billion years?
If you didn't have a long history of demonstrating zero understanding of that term, you might have a point...This isn't evidence for Darwinism.
Just a few picks:News to Note, June 6, 2009 - Answers in Genesis
AiG said:Apparently the researchers aren’t even sure about the genetic basis for the change, another suggestion that the “evolution” did not involve any new genetic information in the lizards.
AiG said:McGill University biologist Andrew Hendry noted, “All of this might be evolution. The logical next step would be to confirm the genetic basis for these changes” (emphasis added). Hendry wonders, as Menton suggests, if the change was simply the lizards’ “plastic response to the environment.”
AiG said:Thus, once again, this so-called “evolution” is possibly just natural selection acting on pre-existing genetic information, helping a population adapt to its surroundings. However, without knowing the exact genetic or epigenetic mechanism(s) underlying the change, we can’t determine exactly what is going on, biologically speaking.
AiG said:More important (as Irschick said) is the speed of the changes, which reminds us of how quickly the original created kinds could have varied into the biodiversity we see today (interrupted by the Noachian Flood event).
You know what? Go and collect it. Get a grant, get a lab, do some mapping, sequencing, functional genetics, or whatever you're interested in.And where is the molecular data?
You know what? Go and collect it. Get a grant, get a lab, do some mapping, sequencing, functional genetics, or whatever you're interested in.
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?