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.
Exactly. The experiment was conducted to find out what would happen in those conditions. They found out. How is that a failure?
An experiment that was to try to see if amino acids could be produced chemically and specifically was not trying to create life is a failure because amino acids were produced chemically and life wasn't created? Pretty awesome reasoning there.
By that definition -- no experiment ever fails.
I think we are looking for more of the point of evolution in that experiment. .. and so where they.
There are those that instead of intelligent design for how we came to be believe that all living things came from chemicals that accidentally came together and formed the basic structure for life. I cannot wrap my mind around it. How could something so that is in such chaos turn into something so complex?
I don't believe in Intelligent Design.
I believe in creationism.
Intelligent Design is a cheap attempt to shoehorn creationism into the science arena, where it doesn't belong.
I agree.But they are not mutually exclusive. One can admit to art work that shows intelligence in the making of it - without also stating that it was "spoken into existence".
Yet even if spoken into existence - the ark work still shows "intelligence" in the design of it.
I don't see Intelligence Design anywhere in the Bible. And I don't believe those ancient nomadic tribes who's Creation myth story made it into the Bible thought along those lines either. All there is to those ancient people was a God Created world that took 6 days to complete. The idea of using the image of Intelligence Design came into being as a response to Evolution. It's of a more recent development. So, I don't see it (Intelligence Design) being used in a way that reflects how those ancient pre-Jewish people thought about Creation. I think using the image of Intelligent Design is in itself an evolution away from the original thoughts about the Biblical creation story that those ancients held.But they are not mutually exclusive. One can admit to art work that shows intelligence in the making of it - without also stating that it was "spoken into existence".
They do pretty well even with the "censorship" flight-or-fright model being used by many of the evolutionist groups.
http://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/
blind faith evolutionism survives by hiding from the light of day in the form of closed circles, censorship and judicial activism.
Because it cannot survive the light of day.
Othaniel Marsh proved that -- he proved it with the horse series still at the Smithsonian.
So also Ernst Haeckle- with some wood carving "proofs"
So also Osborn in his fright-or-flight exhibit of so-called "Nebraska man".
Blind faith evolutionism has a long standing tradition of hoax and fraud used for decade upon decade as 'the best evidence' in its favor.
And even on this thread we see the abiogenesis efforts of Eurey and Miller exposed for 60 years and still we have diehard "believers" in that mythology hoping against hope that someone will step up and pull the rabbit out of that hat.
Consider for a moment the mythical "Self-replicating molecule" - water. Wouldn't that be a handy thing to have in the desert ??!
Pretty simple molecule... stable... useful... wonder if we can make it "self-replicating"??
You seem to suppose that the majority of Christians are fine with going against the Bible in favor of belief in evolution. In that model you are right my post does not contradict your claim that for Christians to choose to side with evolution - they must go against the Bible.
in Christ,
Bob
Correction. They contradict your literalistic reading of the Bible.
I don't believe in Intelligent Design.
I believe in creationism.
Intelligent Design is a cheap attempt to shoehorn creationism into the science arena, where it doesn't belong.
I don't see Intelligence Design anywhere in the Bible.
Not if you're "arguing" to have the original term "creationism" reinstated.To argue against design and intelligence - in the work of God is to argue against God Himself.
Obviously the point of my post was not that they were trying to create life - rather they had hoped to create a viable starting point - one with the necessary amino acids in the right chiral orientation that would at least qualify as "a start". They failed to demonstrating the necessary starting point.
It's too bad it even had to go to trial in the first place.Absolutely correct AV.
And this is what the Dover trial exposed quite well.
It's too bad it even had to go to trial in the first place.
If creationists would just, as they say, LET GO AND LET GOD, then our history books wouldn't have junk in them in the first place.
(Like the Wedge Strategy.)
I disagree. It's an argument about a particular "belief" that a certain group of people have about God. I have to admit that I have issues when they raise their beliefs to the level of Godhood.To argue against design and intelligence - in the work of God is to argue against God Himself.
You have a low tolerance for those who don't think like you do, do you?I disagree. It's an argument about a particular "belief" that a certain group of people have about God. I have to admit that I have issues when they raise their beliefs to the level of Godhood.
Generally, I have a very high tolerance for those who think differently than I do. But not so much when they think their beliefs are at the level of Godhood.You have a low tolerance for those who don't think like you do, do you?
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?