If common appearance = common DNA

[USincognito]

Free speech is dead here.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I reject your description in favor of my own.

It's not "my" description.

What you actually just said was "I reject the findings of the experts of biology and I prefer my own laymen way of labeling things"

 

[AV1611VET]

Why does the designer have both of us sharing 203,000 ERVs ...?

Kinda like sharing the alphabet with numbers in algebra, isn't it?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Kinda like sharing the alphabet with numbers in algebra, isn't it?

No. More like your biological dad having a specific genetic trait and passing it on to you through the mechanisms of biological reproduction.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why does the designer have both of us sharing 203,000 ERVs ... ?

Kinda like sharing the alphabet with numbers in algebra, isn't it?

No. More like your biological dad having a specific genetic trait and passing it on to you through the mechanisms of biological reproduction.

Well, I'm not sure what Cog meant by "sharing."

I don't know if he meant sharing as in: "passing on;" or sharing as in "having identical parts put in."

Probably the former, since that's more in line with the philosophy of common ancestry.

I vote the latter, since that's more in line with the truth of common designer.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well, I'm not sure what Cog meant by "sharing."

I don't know if he meant sharing as in: "passing on;" or sharing as in "having identical parts put in."

Probably the former, since that's more in line with the philosophy of common ancestry.

The former, because it's more in line with reality.

I vote the latter, since that's more in line with the truth of common designer.

You vote the latter, because it's more in line with what you want to believe.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Evidence does not have a voice. Evidence cannot speak for itself, nor does evidence speak on the behalf of you or me. Evidence must be interpreted. It is the interpretation of the evidence that forms the theory and not the evidence itself.

We creationists simply reject your interpretation of the evidence in favor of our own interpretation of the evidence.

The evidence for evolution has been used to make accurate predictions about the natural world. It's backed up by experimentation along with several other disciplines that all arrive at the same conclusion. It's not that you interpret the evidence differently, it's that creationists don't know how science works.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

They understood enough:

"Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name." -- (Genesis 2:19).

Adam named the animals according to their biological appearance.

This is your claim. What is your evidence?

I think you messed up a few things along the way.

Are you smarter than biologists that have spent their entire life in their field of expertise? Predictions evolution makes are confirmed by taxonomy.

Except for humans. Humans are Mankind.

It's been explained to you that this is incorrect. You keep repeating it though. It will still be wrong no matter how many times you want to say this.

Actually, it's an elegantly simple definition.

What you call Felidae, I call Kind.

What you call Felinae, Pantherinae and Acinonychinae, I call Sub-kinds.

It's not complicated compared to your definitions.

Except that it makes no sense. You seem to accept the taxonomy of felines but when it comes to humans then taxonomy is wrong? That is intellectually dishonest.

Using only creationism, create a tree for felines and explain how you came to that conclusion.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Of course it is. A lot of biology is involved with telling us what a "kind" is. This is why we have biological diversity. There are 32 verses in genesis chapter one and hundreds of thousands of science books that explain those 32 verses.

Hey Joshua, it's been a while. We've already done this song and dance before. We'll go back and forth and in the end you won't provide any scientific references that use the bible.

 

[Jordan Mays]

Hey Joshua, it's been a while. We've already done this song and dance before. We'll go back and forth and in the end you won't provide any scientific references that use the bible.

Creationists don't have evidence that's why they need faith.

 

[AV1611VET]

Creationists don't have evidence that's why they need faith.

Creationism must be taken on faith, not evidence.

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Those who claim they know how the earth was [formed] are spitting on faith.

It's as if they're saying to God:

"I know what You said in the Bible, but don't tell me to take Your creation on faith, then give me a brain and expect me to use it ... or I'll use it to tell You that You're deceptive. Don't tell me to walk by faith, then give me a pair of eyes to walk by sight, or I'll put You in Your place. And if You want to play games with me and give me a pastor that can't answer basic questions about how to reconcile Your creation with science, then I'll drop You like a hot potato and claim I'm an atheist for the rest of my life. Your faith that You claim Abraham, Moses, et.al. walked by is nothing more than people knowing that what they died for was a lie, and I'm not having any part of it. Go fool creationists, I'm above You."

 

[AV1611VET]

Creationists don't have evidence that's why they need faith.

Creationists don't call an animal they've never heard of before (ex., coney) something else (ex., hyrax), then claim the Bible speaks of rabbits that chew cud.

Some people will do anything to walk by sight: even calling animals they've never heard of before by current names.

This is how coneys become hyraxes, unicorns become rhinoceroses, behemoths become brontosauruses, and satyrs become God-knows-what.

Some people can't stand to have to walk by faith, and they'll even change God's word to do so -- and then blame it on the Hebrews.

Then they've got the gall to say they're men and women of faith.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Some people can't stand to have to walk by faith, and they'll even change God's word to do so -- and then blame it on the Hebrews.

Because faith is unreliable.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because faith is unreliable.

Because it pleases God?

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

 

[Shemjaza]

Because it pleases God?

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Because there's no way to distinguish faith in something true from faith in something false without some corroborating evidence.

You have faith in the precise, literal truth and sacredness of the 1611 King James version of the Christian Bible... but "AV says, 'God says so'" isn't any more convincing then any other individual asserting their faith in their personal accepted truth.

 

[Jordan Mays]

Because faith is unreliable.

Every believer of every religion uses faith so that alone should tell every religious person that faith is completely unreliable.

 

[AV1611VET]

Every believer of every religion uses faith so that alone should tell every religious person that faith is completely unreliable.

Really?

Is this yet another new philosophy being taught in higher academia now?

I was always under the impression that it's the object of one's faith ... not the faith itself ... that's unreliable?

 

[Jordan Mays]

I was always under the impression that it's the object of one's faith ... not the faith itself ... that's unreliable?

It is and they have all been led to different beliefs by the same faith every believer in the world uses.

 

[AV1611VET]

It is and they have all been led to different beliefs by the same faith every believer in the world uses.

Are you consol ?

 

[Jordan Mays]

Are you consol ?

What has who I am or not got to do with what I said? is the same faith used by every believer in the world or not?