Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Fish finger fossils show the beginnings of hands
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Subduction Zone" data-source="post: 74849726" data-attributes="member: 321072"><p>It took a while to find this article. And you should know better. Without even seeing it you should have heard alarm bells ringing. I am betting that your creationist sources did not provide a link to the original article. That tells you that your sources probably lied through quote mining. You did not lie yourself, but you are a party to it since you passed it on.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/352485a0.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.nature.com/articles/352485a0.pdf</a></p><p></p><p>Though this was in Nature it is not a peer reviewed article. It is a book review of a creationist book that did not like the fact of evolution. The review points out the endless flaws in the book. The quote lifted from it is merely how the fact of evolution is extremely worrisome to some Christians that accept evolution. You appear to be trying to tell God how he had to get life to its current state. Does that not smack more than just a little of blasphemy on your part?</p><p></p><p>At any rate here is the conclusion of the article:</p><p></p><p>"The questions that Johnson asks have been asked over and over again. Most have received very straight answers. Others are still moot. If any scientists have tried to keep these questions from being asked, they have failed miserably. Johnson's problem is that he does not like the answers that he hears. He wants evolutionary biologists to include reference to God in their professional writings in the way that he, I presume, does in his. If Johnson had written a religiously motivated criticism of thermodynamics, quantum theory or plate tectonics, it might have been worth reading, but I cannot imagine why anyone would want to read yet another rehash of creationist objections to evolutionary theory."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Subduction Zone, post: 74849726, member: 321072"] It took a while to find this article. And you should know better. Without even seeing it you should have heard alarm bells ringing. I am betting that your creationist sources did not provide a link to the original article. That tells you that your sources probably lied through quote mining. You did not lie yourself, but you are a party to it since you passed it on. [URL]https://www.nature.com/articles/352485a0.pdf[/URL] Though this was in Nature it is not a peer reviewed article. It is a book review of a creationist book that did not like the fact of evolution. The review points out the endless flaws in the book. The quote lifted from it is merely how the fact of evolution is extremely worrisome to some Christians that accept evolution. You appear to be trying to tell God how he had to get life to its current state. Does that not smack more than just a little of blasphemy on your part? At any rate here is the conclusion of the article: "The questions that Johnson asks have been asked over and over again. Most have received very straight answers. Others are still moot. If any scientists have tried to keep these questions from being asked, they have failed miserably. Johnson's problem is that he does not like the answers that he hears. He wants evolutionary biologists to include reference to God in their professional writings in the way that he, I presume, does in his. If Johnson had written a religiously motivated criticism of thermodynamics, quantum theory or plate tectonics, it might have been worth reading, but I cannot imagine why anyone would want to read yet another rehash of creationist objections to evolutionary theory." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Fish finger fossils show the beginnings of hands
Top
Bottom