How to choose between creation and evolution.

[DogmaHunter]

Christian geneticists agree.

The overwhelming majority does not. For example, you can read what the christian Francis Collins had to say about it, in my signature.

But it is certainly true that those who do agree, are all theists.
That's your first clue.

 

[xianghua]

WHAt IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR CREATION? What is your evidence that nested hierarchies arent truly nested? What is your evidence that genetic similarities don’t mean anything? I’ve seen creationist pseudoscience for about a decade and they still don’t have any evidence for their claims

i can show you if you want.

 

[DogmaHunter]

i can show you if you want.

You're gonna start talking about cars again, aren't you?

 

[Speedwell]

Many do figure it out. I graduated from a major university. I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but I am not ignorant. The teachers are not hiding anything, and there is no conspiricy.they have been taught by evolutionist , who have been taught by evolutionist on in to infinity.

Do you never look at the evidence they present? I know you don't because the have not. They says it happens and you accept it by faith alone.

I have not gone beyond undergraduate genetics and a few peer-reviewed journal articles, but if those are fake then the conspiracy must be pretty deep.

The other thing, of course, is that what you think of as fake genetics is a lie, then the multi-million dollar ag genetics business would collapse, because it depends on genetics working just as the text explains.

As an example, if there was no heritable random variation as you claim, then selective breeding would be impossible.

 

[pitabread]

Many do figure it out. I graduated from a major university. I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but I am not ignorant. The teachers are not hiding anything, and there is no conspiricy.they have been taught by evolutionist , who have been taught by evolutionist on in to infinity.

I've asked this to others but have never received an adequate response:

Those in biology-related industries have a vested interest in the best understanding of biology possible. If evolution was as false as creationists claim it is, those in industry would have the most interest in coming up with something better. So why haven't they?

Why are the only people crying foul over evolution doing so because of religious beliefs?

 

[rjs330]

Sounds an awfull lot like a function within a larger system.

Also, teleological fallacy.

You may continue to reject the obvious purpose if you wish. It's your right. It's merely turning a blind eye, but again you may do so if you desire.

 

[rjs330]

Just like we "look and the data and interpret" that things fall to the earth because of the gravitational pull.



yes, creationists indeed have preconceived beliefs where they must fit all observations into.

Yes and that gravitational pull is observable, testable and verifiable. Evolution from common ancestry is not.

 

[rjs330]

I have not gone beyond undergraduate genetics and a few peer-reviewed journal articles, but if those are fake then the conspiracy must be pretty deep.

The other thing, of course, is that what you think of as fake genetics is a lie, then the multi-million dollar ag genetics business would collapse, because it depends on genetics working just as the text explains.

As an example, if there was no heritable random variation as you claim, then selective breeding would be impossible.

Its not a conspiracy. Generally speaking a conspiracy implies that people promote something they either know is not true or at least purposefully hide facts that may prove their ideas wrong. I think there is some of that in evolutionary teaching, but I think most of it is simply a deeply held belief. No alternative ideas are taught. Just the evolutionary ones because they believe to their core that it is correct. They utterly dismiss anything else. IF all you heard through out your scientific studies that evolution from a common ancestor is fact and that any other thought processes were simply nonsense or religious nuttery you would believe the same way.

 

[pitabread]

Generally speaking a conspiracy implies that people promote something they either know is not true or at least purposefully hide facts that may prove their ideas wrong. I think there is some of that in evolutionary teaching, but I think most of it is simply a deeply held belief. No alternative ideas are taught. Just the evolutionary ones because they believe to their core that it is correct.

Let me ask you the same question I'm asking others:

Those in biology related industries have a vested interest in the best understanding of biology possible. Why, if evolution is as false as creationists here think it is, would those in biology related industries not be the first to point this out? Why would they not be leading the effort to find a better understanding of biology?

IF all you heard through out your scientific studies that evolution from a common ancestor is fact and that any other thought processes were simply nonsense or religious nuttery you would believe the same way.

Have you ever actually read what your fellow creationists are posting here?

We've had everything from people claiming rocks are alive, that the universe operated by completely different physics in the recent past, that humanity is billions of years old, that penguins are robots, and that self-replicating watches somehow prove the existence of God. If not nonsense, then what else would you call this stuff?

(And I'll be honest, half the reason I come to this forum is just to see what bat-crap crazy thing they'll say next.)

 

[omega2xx]

They dont.

They do.

Also, if you use religion in science then you arent doing science anymore.

I am not using religion, I stick to real science. Science that can be proved. Why don't you try that?

 

[VirOptimus]

They do.



I am not using religion, I stick to real science. Science that can be proved. Why don't you try that?

No they dont, real scientist keep religion and science separeted.

I do know science, you obviously dont. You just state outlandish claims with no supporting facts, or anyting.

 

[omega2xx]

The overwhelming majority does not. For example, you can read what the christian Francis Collins had to say about it, in my signature.

Collins is a brilliant Christians scientists, but he is not the only Christians scientists, and most others disagree with him. How does he explain how the offspring can get a characteristic not in the gene pool of its parents? That is the key in genetics.

But it is certainly true that those who do agree, are all theists.
That's your first clue.

Are you really suggesting that a Christian scientist is not as qualified as Collins. That is judging from ignorance. The ICR includes Lane P. Lester who has a PHD in genetics from Purdue and has written several books on creationist biology. He would disagree with Colins.

 

[VirOptimus]

Collins is a brilliant Christians scientists, but he is not the only Christians scientists, and most others disagree with him. How does he explain how the offspring can get a characteristic not in the gene pool of its parents? That is the key in genetics.



Are you really suggesting that a Christian scientist is not as qualified as Collins. That is judging from ignorance. The ICR includes Lane P. Lester who has a PHD in genetics from Purdue and has written several books on creationist biology. He would disagree with Colins.

Creationst biology? That is just religion, not science.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

When evolutionists come up with an actual evidence of something evolving from the common ancestor and can show that's actually possible then they might have a point. Until then they are blowing hot air and making a lot of assumptions.

Lol! This is the point where we all get to appreciate the irony of Matthew 13:13, Jeremiah 5:21, and even Isaiah 6:9...

 

[omega2xx]

No they dont, real scientist keep religion and science separeted.

What an absurd statement. Christian scientist do not use religion in their evaluations of science. That statement shows not only you ignorance ,but alsos your bias.

I do know science, you obviously dont.

Right. Anyone who disagrees with the omniscient one doens't know science. The truth is all you know is what evolution preaches, which is not based on science. I actually know more science than you do.

You just state outlandish claims with no supporting facts, or anyting.

Not true, which point to your lack of scientific knowledge, which makes it impossible for you to understand.

I challenge you to post something outlandish I have said, Don't forget to include the proof that makes it outlandish.

Then i challenge you to post the evidence for one thing the ToE preaches, Want to start with the evidence for natural selection. I predict you will parrot the usual evo talking points and not include any verifiable evidence.

Have a + day.

I have not gone beyond undergraduate genetics and a few peer-reviewed journal articles, but if those are fake then the conspiracy must be pretty deep.

I have not claimed they are faked or that there is a conspiracy. The teaching of all science disciplines has been controlled by evolutionists for years. That is the only message students ever hear. Since it is presented as proved by science, it is no longer questioned, except by many Christian scientist, but they are not allowed to teach in public schools.

The other thing, of course, is that what you think of as fake genetics is a lie, then the multi-million dollar ag genetics business would collapse, because it depends on genetics working just as the text explains.

That statement shows your lack of understanding of genetics. A proper understanding of genetics would reinforce what these businesses tell their cliants.

As an example, if there was no heritable random variation as you claim, then selective breeding would be impossible.

There is heritable random variation base on the gene pool of the parents and which gene are dominant. There can be no characteristic in he offspring that is not in the gene pool of the parents. The kid can't have fins unless it parents have the gene for fins and land animals do not have a gene for fins, They have the gene for legs. That is very basic genetics.

 

[omega2xx]

I've asked this to others but have never received an adequate response:

Those in biology-related industries have a vested interest in the best understanding of biology possible. If evolution was as false as creationists claim it is, those in industry would have the most interest in coming up with something better. So why haven't they?

Biology related industries use proved biology to do what they do. They do not use anything in the TOE.

Why are the only people crying foul over evolution doing so because of religious beliefs?

They aren't. Institutions like ICR and Answers in Genesis, use real science to refute evolution, and they use PhD's in various discipline of science to do it.

 

[omega2xx]

Creationst biology? That is just religion, not science.

Have you read any of his books? No, you are just judging from your ignorance.

 

[omega2xx]

Lol! This is the point where we all get to appreciate the irony of Matthew 13:13, Jeremiah 5:21, and even Isaiah 6:9...

Those verses are not irony. They all point to the accuracy of I Cor 2:14. which you also just reinforced.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Have you read any of his books? No, you are just judging from your ignorance.

No, he's right. It is just religion painted as science.

 

[VirOptimus]

What an absurd statement. Christian scientist do not use religion in their evaluations of science. That statement shows not only you ignorance ,but alsos your bias.



Right. Anyone who disagrees with the omniscient one doens't know science. The truth is all you know is what evolution preaches, which is not based on science. I actually know more science than you do.



Not true, which point to your lack of scientific knowledge, which makes it impossible for you to understand.

I challenge you to post something outlandish I have said, Don't forget to include the proof that makes it outlandish.

Then i challenge you to post the evidence for one thing the ToE preaches, Want to start with the evidence for natural selection. I predict you will parrot the usual evo talking points and not include any verifiable evidence.

Have a + day.


I have not claimed they are faked or that there is a conspiracy. The teaching of all science disciplines has been controlled by evolutionists for years. That is the only message students ever hear. Since it is presented as proved by science, it is no longer questioned, except by many Christian scientist, but they are not allowed to teach in public schools.



That statement shows your lack of understanding of genetics. A proper understanding of genetics would reinforce what these businesses tell their cliants.



There is heritable random variation base on the gene pool of the parents and which gene are dominant. There can be no characteristic in he offspring that is not in the gene pool of the parents. The kid can't have fins unless it parents have the gene for fins and land animals do not have a gene for fins, They have the gene for legs. That is very basic genetics.

Im not interested in games.