Lines of Evidence

[AV1611VET]

Francis Collins: The evidence is overwhelming. And it is becoming more and more robust down to the details almost by the day, especially because we have this ability now to use the study of DNA as a digital record of the way Darwin’s theory has played out over the course of long periods of time.

Francis Collins can take a hike.

He's apparently sold his soul to deep time.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Francis Collins can take a hike.

He's apparently sold his soul to deep time.

Better deep time than shallow literalism.

 

[AV1611VET]

Better deep time than shallow literalism.

I'm sure he has your blessing.

 

[bhsmte]

I'm sure he has your blessing.

And plenty of evidence to support his position.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Kinda -- At first I thought the photographs were from Planet of the Apes

Here's a little science from Berkley:

'Speciation is a lineage-splitting event that produces two or more separate species. ....'
Evolution 101: Speciation

So what's wrong with the fruit-fly example?

Nothing.

It demonstrates evolution.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Nothing at all. The different species of fruit flies can no longer breed with one another, which is precisely what makes them different species.

Now, before someone says "But they're still flies! Call me when they turn into dogs or cats!" the point is that they're still the same genus, just different species. We'd have to go a lot further back to see where they split from one genus to another... and further still to see.... well, you get the idea.

Thank you for your response, I'm glad I asked.
It's amazing how some things come back to haunt me every time, I learn something new. (esp. Kent Hovind's arguments)
I found something pretty good to read on Biologos, which explains the difference between "species" and "kind" From the Archives: Speciation and Macroevolution | The BioLogos Forum

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

And plenty of evidence to support his position.

I don't know Francis, but I have chatted with Karl. Karl's story is very close to my own struggles with Scientific Creationism, but more so the stuff that Kent Hovind was saying. 'I was afraid, I was petrified ....'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBR2G-iI3-I

 

[bhsmte]

I don't know Francis, but I have chatted with Karl. Karl's story is very close to my own struggles with Scientific Creationism, but more so the stuff that Kent Hovind was saying. 'I was afraid, I was petrified ....'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBR2G-iI3-I

Hovind is one of several of his type that know their audience and preach to it, because they know what they want to hear.

It comes down to; comforting lies, or uncomfortable well evidenced truths.

Depending on one's psychological needs, guess which path Hovind's fan base picks?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm sure he has your blessing.

Only as long as his findings match up with the facts.

 

[AV1611VET]

And plenty of evidence to support his position.

So did Thalidomide.

 

[AV1611VET]

Only as long as his findings match up with the facts.

Which doesn't guarantee truth.

 

[bhsmte]

So did Thalidomide.

How so?

 

[TLK Valentine]

So did Thalidomide.

...which did exactly what it was supposed to do.

meanwhile, how many lepers have you cured?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Which doesn't guarantee truth.

Truth is never guaranteed so long as man is fallible. Best anyone can do is look for what works, and see if it works twice.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Hovind is one of several of his type that know their audience and preach to it, because they know what they want to hear.

It comes down to; comforting lies, or uncomfortable well evidenced truths.

Depending on one's psychological needs, guess which path Hovind's fan base picks?

All I can remember is his laughter, each time he felt he'd rubbed his imaginary oppositions' nose in it. (I used to watch his video series) He'd try to combat any of the sciences which challenge his views on the age of the earth and of course EVOLUTION.
One day I'm going to write about this, but for now I'm going to keep on learning as much as I can about what I missed. Go on.

 

[JacksBratt]

I'm a recovering KJO-YEC

I got very poor marks for Grade 12 Biology (in 1982), but am very keen to learn all I can about these lines of evidence for E V O L U T I O N


So, let's chat.

I'm a bit slow today and I'm not sure I understand. What is a recovering KJO-YEC actually mean?

Does it mean you are not a YEC anymore, don't believe the KJV anymore?

 

[Shemjaza]

I'm a bit slow today and I'm not sure I understand. What is a recovering KJO-YEC actually mean?

Does it mean you are not a YEC anymore, don't believe the KJV anymore?

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I'd consider "devout Christian who prefers the KJV" and "KJV is a supernaturally perfect version of the bible... and possibly the original version from heaven" to be very different things.

Then again I've never understood KJO, it seems to take special pleading to whole different level.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Hi JB,

Thank you for asking. (read below for my reply)

I'm a bit slow today and I'm not sure I understand. What is a recovering KJO-YEC actually mean?

Does it mean you are not a YEC anymore, don't believe the KJV anymore?

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I'd consider "devout Christian who prefers the KJV" and "KJV is a supernaturally perfect version of the bible... and possibly the original version from heaven" to be very different things.

Then again I've never understood KJO, it seems to take special pleading to whole different level.

Shemjaza is correct.

If you've read anything by (Prof) Gail Riplinger, you'll understand that those who believe "KJV is a supernaturally perfect version of the bible... and possibly the original version from heaven" (Shemjaza) -- tend to also believe that any other translations are dangerous New Age Bibles. New Age Bible Versions: An Exhaustive Documentation of the Message, Men & Manuscripts Moving Mankind to the Antichrist's One World Religion: G. A. Riplinger

The arguments for the King James Only position, is actually quite dense. My neighbor (a sweet old Dutch lady) lent me some books by David Otis Fuller (i.e. True Or False, Which Bible, Counterfeit or Genuine) & I went on to study a chart by Jack Moorman, and a book by Samuel Gipp entitled 'An Understandable History of the Bible' as well as another called 'The King James Defended' by Edward F. Hill (quite a good study of the difficult passages in the NT. - but not a very deep one!) -- as well as a tape set of the audio version of the KING JAMES BIBLE read by Alexander Scourby (an enchanting and mesmerizing voice) , coupled with a lot of reading and study of Dr. DA Waite's site BIBLE FOR TODAY, and hours spent reading from DEAN BURGON SOCIETY -- I was very impressed by all I read, and when I started reading Gail Riplinger's site AV PUBLICATIONS, I realized there must be something very, very wrong with the translations after the King James 1611. She presented very convincing arguments.

Fortunately, I was studying the work of Gordon H. Clark (Dr. Christian Philosophy) and after reading 'Logical Criticisms of Textual Criticism' -- I saw that he was very impressed with the translation work (other than the King James)

Eventually in July 2007, while I was driving out to collect my glass copies of my new CD and listening to a four part set of lectures by Dr. DA Carson : SACRED AND SURE, the penny dropped. (refer BETHINKING - A 4 part series)

A friend (a real scholar of the Bible) sent me a copy of D.A Carson's book entitled 'THE KING JAMES DEBATE' A Plea For Realism (1979) -- I had been blind for too long, and suddenly it were as if the whole world, the Bible and Science now became an open door I could go through and grown and learn.

My break from Young Earth Creationism, took a lot longer -- and involved two years between 2010 and 2012 -- and questions back and forth in a Natural Science forum. Eventually with the kind words and helpful guidance of Christians who were called Theistic Evolutionists and scores of helpful ATHEISTS TOO! -- I was able to let go of the indoctrination afforded me by Jack Chick comics, Kent Hovind and Henry Morris -- that's another story for another time, but it was great to just find I could enjoy a subject I'd been afraid of -- You know Evolution is evil and Darwin is the devil etc. Well, I hope that has cleared this up.

I'm hoping to write about this, but I think that if earnest seekers are looking for a good read -- I'd highly recommend Karl Giberson's little book Saving Darwin



NB. While I was looking up the various links, I discovered what looks to me like a worthwhile website addressing in far more detail the sort of arguments that are presented by some of the authors I've referred to above. http://kjvonlydebate.com/

If you are a King James Only-person and would like to talk to be about this, please feel free to p.m me.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you are a King James Only-person and would like to talk to be about this, please feel free to p.m me.

I'll pass.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I'll pass.

No harm, I've presented enough to enable you to start a counter-thread elsewhere -- and leave us science types to do what we enjoy doing. Unless you have an alternate theory to the theory of Evolution, you'd like to discuss?