How an Evangelical Creationist Accepted Evolution

[pat34lee]

Ummmm...there is a gene that determines your hair color. A change in that gene, making a hair color different is a mutation.

So, which hair colors are caused by mutations, and which is
the original color?

 

[pat34lee]

The scientists would well know what being in the ground for that time could do to it, Patlee34.

To know that, they would have to study everything that happens to it
over that 5000 years.

 

[pat34lee]

Mutations take their toll in living nature.
It will degrade, because it's a system without maintenance.

Actually, DNA is self-repairing to a great degree. Cells too far gone
to be repaired will even self-destruct. Otherwise we would have
gone extinct long ago.

 

[pat34lee]

In the family trio studies, they sequenced the entire genomes of the parents and the child. If there is a DNA difference found in the child but in neither of the parents, then that is a mutation.

It could also be natural variation. Some traits skip generations.
They must be accounted for somewhere in the unknown parts
of the DNA.

 

[Hoghead1]

No, Patlee, they wouldn't. That is not how science works. Maybe that's what you think they would have to do to come up with everything. But you are no scientist, believe me. I'm not trying to put you down. I'm just getting tired of the way people get on here and lay their judgments on science, when they have absolutely no scientific qualifications or credentials themselves.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

So, which hair colors are caused by mutations, and which is
the original color?

This is a nonsensical question. Please clarify it. I don't think you understand what a mutation is.

 

[Hieronymus]

Your side of the story is never able to produce the probabilities you claim to have. That is what I am aware of.

No, that's what you want to think.

Like the others, you are making stuff up.

Like evolution you mean?

sigh... it's no use, is it?
Here i join a christian forum, to battle atheïsts....
O well....

 

[Hieronymus]

The reason why God enters the picture here is that science dos not answer all questing.

That's putting it very mildly...

Science does a very poor job of answering questions about values and the meaningfulness of life. granted we evolve,

Why do you grant something that is not proven, but is refuted?
Don't you Christans here even bother to listen to the arguments presented by creationists?
I mean, they're not stupi people, and they have the same scientific data to work with as naturalists do.
It's baffling (to me) how POPULAR materialistic science is the new religion, even for christians...

 

[AV1611VET]

Here i join a christian forum, to battle atheïsts....

DON'T GO!

 

[Hieronymus]

Do you really think evolution is false simply because you close your eyes to the evidence?

Do you really think i close my eyes?
Well, apparently you do, but i know i don't.
It just does not explain what we see in reality.
But, within the scientific paradigm, there is no God to create, so they choose to make up a scenario with just dead dumb things, to perform what mankind can not even dream of performing.

 

[Hieronymus]

DON'T GO!

Well, allright then, i'll stick around some more...

 

[Hieronymus]

Creationism is in fact a religion, largely because it is based almost exclusively on conservative Christian dogmas.

No, you have no idea, and you're apparently not interested either.
It's based on reality.
Intelligent Design is also creationism.
Christians believe the Bible (well, some do...) so they use that as a guide too, but the Bible is not a science book.

Evolution is just as much a religion.
The idea was launched in our culture by theosophist elites, just like all of the new age ideas.
Darwin liked it.

A lot of theosophist 'wisdom' is based on 'channeled revelations'.
Evolution is the backbone of theosophy and new age a.k.a Luciferianism.

It's the same old false promise: You will be like god(s).

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, allright then, i'll stick around some more...

 

[bhsmte]

No, that's what you want to think.Like evolution you mean?

sigh... it's no use, is it?
Here i join a christian forum, to battle atheïsts....
O well....

You may feel safer, in the "Christian only" section of CF.

 

[drr1531]

To the logical mind there is no conflict between creation theory and evolution. That assumes that one sticks to the scientific record and consideration of statistics and does not simply take Mr.Darwin's leap of faith to connect the first living cell to the myriad flora and fauna that now exist. The "holy grail" of engineering design is to develop machines, software, etc. that can learn/adapt to changing conditions. If humans recognize that need why would an omniscient creator/world designer do otherwise? In Genesis God commands "go forth and fill the earth", not simply go forth and procreate.

 

[pat34lee]

This is a nonsensical question. Please clarify it. I don't think you understand what a mutation is.

I agree that it's nonsense, but you are the one who said hair
color comes from mutations. I'm trying to get more information
to see how that could be true.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

I agree that it's nonsense, but you are the one who said hair
color comes from mutations. I'm trying to get more information
to see how that could be true.

Are you saying that there isn't a gene that determines hair color? My parents both have brown hair and my brother has blonde. That's a genetic mutation. Care to explain what you think determines hair color?

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

It's based on reality.

Not even close. It starts at an assumed conclusion and works backwards. That is not an efficient way to gain knowledge.

Intelligent Design is also creationism.

Then why do ID proponents try to disguise it as something else when they try to sneak it into science classrooms?

Evolution is just as much a religion.

It's based on observed facts and mountains of overwhelming evidence. It's not a religion. Evolutionary biology is a science.

Evolution is the backbone of theosophy and new age a.k.a Luciferianism.

What an incredibly erroneous claim. Bravo.

 

[46AND2]

That's putting it very mildly...Why do you grant something that is not proven, but is refuted?
Don't you Christans here even bother to listen to the arguments presented by creationists?
I mean, they're not stupi people, and they have the same scientific data to work with as naturalists do.
It's baffling (to me) how POPULAR materialistic science is the new religion, even for christians...

I listen to the creationist arguments, just as I did when I was a creationist. The extent that apologists would go to misrepresent, and even outright lie about, that "same scientific data," was appalling to me as a Christian. And if you honestly researched their claims to see if what they said is actually true, you should be appalled, too.

 

[Hieronymus]

Not even close.

You don't even know.

It starts at an assumed conclusion and works backwards.

That's what evolutionists also do.
They set out to prove what Darwin made up.

That is not an efficient way to gain knowledge.

You mean it may hamper integrity.
Yes, it can, this the case for both creationists and evolutionists.
But, we have the same scientific raw data to interpret.
And even though creationism doesn't have the funding and platforms naturalism / materialism does, creation is clearly a matter of 'Occams razor'.
It's complex and genius beyond human comprehension, despite the numerous doctoral degrees in numerous scientific disciplines, trying to figure it out.
We (mankind) have discovered a whole lot, but there seems to be much more to be discovered about our common reality.