Homosapiensim

[AECellini]

Creationism is testable and subject to observation.

can't laugh any harder. do you honestly believe this?

http://atheism.about.com/od/creationismcreationists/p/scientific.htm

 

[loktai]

You do not know what a miracle is. A miracle does not break the law. The law has already been broken. A miracle establishes or restores the law. Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill the law.

mat 5 18 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Creationism does not in anyway deny that God works though natural laws. Creationism is testable and subject to observation.
[/FONT]

So if you don't know what a miracle is, how do you know that they happen?

 

[Jamin4422]

can't laugh any harder. do you honestly believe this?

Yes, I believe there is NO direct conflict between Science and the Bible. You have NO science that can contradict the Bible in anyway. If any conflict exists it is found in the hidden knowledge of shadows and types. Science can not very well test something that is hidden from them. IN order to be science you have to be able to observe, test and confirm.

There are many areas of evolution that can not be tested and confirmed, so that means those area are NOT valid science. For example according to Collins: "Dispite substantial effort by multiple investigators, formation of the basic building blocks of RNA has NOT been achievable in a Miller-Urey type of experiment, nor has a fully self-replicating RNA been possible to design." These profound difficulties leads some scientists to propose that life forms must have arrived on Earth from outer space. Which of course resolves NOTHING, this only forces that event to another time and another place further back. So science does nothing to resolve the ultimate question of life's origin.

 

[Jamin4422]

So if you don't know what a miracle is, how do you know that they happen?

A miracle is a restoration. You have to understand the fallen state of mankind. Of course science does not accept that mankind is in a fallen state so that is why you have confusion trying to understand what a miracle is. If you look at entropy then a miracle is the energy that restores order to a system. I am trying to use scientific terms as an example so you can understand.

 

[serge546]

Yes, I believe there is NO direct conflict between Science and the Bible. You have NO science that can contradict the Bible in anyway. If any conflict exists it is found in the hidden knowledge of shadows and types. Science can not very well test something that is hidden from them. IN order to be science you have to be able to observe, test and confirm.

Bats are not fowl! Cough, science contradicting the bible.

There are many areas of evolution that can not be tested and confirmed, so that means those area are NOT valid science. For example according to Collins: "Dispite substantial effort by multiple investigators, formation of the basic building blocks of RNA has NOT been achievable in a Miller-Urey type of experiment, nor has a fully self-replicating RNA been possible to design." These profound difficulties leads some scientists to propose that life forms must have arrived on Earth from outer space. Which of course resolves NOTHING, this only forces that event to another time and another place further back. So science does nothing to resolve the ultimate question of life's origin.

Wrong. Biologists create self-replicating RNA molecule

Also wrong. RNA made in the lab!

"Like other would-be nucleotide synthesizers, Sutherland’s team included phosphate in their mix, but rather than adding it to sugars and nucleobases, they started with an array of even simpler molecules that were probably also in Earth’s primordial ooze.

They mixed the molecules in water, heated the solution, then allowed it to evaporate, leaving behind a residue of hybrid, half-sugar, half-nucleobase molecules. To this residue they again added water, heated it, allowed it evaporate, and then irradiated it.

At each stage of the cycle, the resulting molecules were more complex. At the final stage, Sutherland’s team added phosphate. “Remarkably, it transformed into the ribonucleotide!” said Sutherland."




Again, Jamin, you are wrong. You still have not, despite countless arguments, learned how to look for sources which actually back up your statements. Seriously, these things take me like 10 minutes to find...

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Bats are not fowl! Cough, science contradicting the bible.



Wrong. Biologists create self-replicating RNA molecule

Also wrong. RNA made in the lab!

"Like other would-be nucleotide synthesizers, Sutherland’s team included phosphate in their mix, but rather than adding it to sugars and nucleobases, they started with an array of even simpler molecules that were probably also in Earth’s primordial ooze.

They mixed the molecules in water, heated the solution, then allowed it to evaporate, leaving behind a residue of hybrid, half-sugar, half-nucleobase molecules. To this residue they again added water, heated it, allowed it evaporate, and then irradiated it.

At each stage of the cycle, the resulting molecules were more complex. At the final stage, Sutherland’s team added phosphate. “Remarkably, it transformed into the ribonucleotide!” said Sutherland."




Again, Jamin, you are wrong. You still have not, despite countless arguments, learned how to look for sources which actually back up your statements. Seriously, these things take me like 10 minutes to find...

Another lie from the creationism machine spotted and taken down. Good work.

I'm amazed they don't spot the pattern.

 

[Jamin4422]

Bats are not fowl! Cough, science contradicting the bible.

Oh here we go with the infidel prats. I have been waiting for someone to come up with birds are not bats argument. I think we need to determine if SCIENCE knows what a fowl is. Last I heard they said dino are birds. Is that true? Are you here to defend science or are you here to argue for the infidel web sites?

 

[Jamin4422]

10 minutes to find...

I will look into your attempt to take on Francis Collins tomorrow. Right now my wife is working on trying to invite everyone over for dinner and I got to try and get her under control.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Oh here we go with the infidel prats. I have been waiting for someone to come up with birds are not bats argument. I think we need to determine if SCIENCE knows what a fowl is. Last I heard they said dino are birds. Is that true? Are you here to defend science or are you here to argue for the infidel web sites?

No. Birds are dinosaurs. You have it the wrong way around. All birds are dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs are birds, in the same way that all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

We know what birds are, thank you very much. We know what bats are. Mammals. A crocodile is closer to being a bird than a bat is.

This doesn't matter really - if the people who wrote the bible thought of bats as "flying furry or feathery things" and we translate "flying furry or feather things" as "fowl" or "bird" it's really no biggie, but it does rather imply that the Bible's not hot on scientific accuracy. It also rather points to the human origin of the Bible. I have a suspicion that when they found that book that had fallen down the back of the altar doing the spring cleaning in Hezekiah's time the ink was suspiciously wet.

 

[serge546]

Karl already answered satisfactorily about dinos and birds, nice try, though. And infidel website? I didn't know that biblegateway.com was an anti Christian website... For someone who uses "if you call me names you lose" logic this is interesting.

I'll be waiting for more lies in your rebuttal

 

[AV1611VET]

I have a suspicion that when they found that book that had fallen down the back of the altar doing the spring cleaning in Hezekiah's time the ink was suspiciously wet.

Don't you mean Josiah?

2 Kings 22:1 Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned thirty and one years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Jedidah, the daughter of Adaiah of Boscath.

 

[cricket0206]

They're extinct. . .

And why are you, like, afraid to say Homo Erectus? It's not a dirty word, that's its name. Grow up please, you're embarrassing yourself.

 

[AV1611VET]

They're extinct. . .

And why are you, like, afraid to say Homo Erectus? It's not a dirty word, that's its name. Grow up please, you're embarrassing yourself.

Aren't there missing links between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens?

 

[Guy1]

Aren't there a missing links between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens?

There wouldn't be a real problem even if there was. As to whether there actually is- I'm not sure.

 

[AV1611VET]

There wouldn't be a real problem even if there was. As to whether there actually is- I'm not sure.

Then 'Homo [whatever]' is appropriate?

 

[cricket0206]

Then 'Homo [whatever]' is appropriate?

Seriously why are you afraid to say erectus?

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Aren't there missing links between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens?

Homo Heidelburgensis.

 

[AV1611VET]

Homo Heidelburgensis.

Then why isn't Homo heidelburgensis still around?

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Then why isn't Homo heidelburgensis still around?

H. Heidelburgensis is not all that well-known outside anthropological circles - but at the moment it's currently thought the species diverged into the Neaderthals in Europe and Homo Sapiens in Africa.

 

[AV1611VET]

H. Heidelburgensis is not all that well-known outside anthropological circles - but at the moment it's currently thought the species diverged into the Neaderthals in Europe and Homo Sapiens in Africa.

So, just by coincidence, our parents don't seem to be around anymore?