Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
By the way Pater, you started out being acting dishonestly, being rude, and of course wrong so why do you think that I would be afraid of you? Are you the sort that threatens people with violence when your flaws are made obvious? I don't debate with people that I do not trust. You lost out on that almost immediately. I have seen far too many dishonest creationists over my time spent debating them. Why would I go debate one in a site where they would feel no qualms about breaking the Ninth Commandment, where I actually follow that rule of the Bible.
When a term such as "information" is used colloquially, as it was in your quotes, that does not support your use of the term "information", Paterfamilia.
Again, you are making an equivocation error. If you want to claim that it is "information" in the sense that it had to be written by an intelligence you are going to need a lot more evidence than that.
Again I don't see the slightest shred of dishonesty. Not one shred. If you are talking about my missing one of your posts, that is not dishonesty and I apologized for missing it. An honest mistake.
I have not threatened violence, and none of my flaws have been made obvious.
And again, I am not a "creationist". Any rudeness on my part was tit for tat; not my normal mode of operation but I take your rudeness and disrespect seriously. You don't even know what my claims are yet or what I believe, other than that I don't believe that the accepted causal mechanisms of Neo-Darwinism (mutation and natural selection) are NOT sufficient to account for the diversity of life that we see on planet earth.
If you can prove any of your accusations, go ahead. I haven't edited anything.
The people that wrote the articles that you quoted were not using the word "information" in the same sense that you are. You are trying to use "information" to mean something made by an intelligence, they weren't.Why would you say I was using "information" colloquially? What do you even mean by that?
There was a reason that your side lost the Dover Trial where they tried to rely on ID>
My favorite part of that trial is when one of the ID witnesses tries to claim that evolution can't explain the immune system and then had multiple books and papers piled up in front of him addressing the immune system. Also, when Kenneth Miller wore a mouse trap as a tie clip.
I didnt say they have no idea, i only said their understanding is not complete.
What do they have then as far as evidence?
Human's and other apes share some DNA.
God made Humans and other apes similar.
They found a couple fossils which are hardly conclusive.
[...]
These are just a few of the hundreds of available resources. I found it impossible to find any that didn't mention "information" or "instructions" in their definition of DNA.
Maybe you could cite your differing sources?
I said you wouldn't treat me disrespectfully if I was in the same room with you because of my past experience with cowards. I'm not calling you a coward. I am saying that your reasons that you gave for not debating are logically incoherent. I could list the syllogism, but why would I want to do your homework, right?
So, if you are a good person and you have a good reason, you wouldn't be disrespectful in person. If you're a coward, again, you would keep your mouth shut.
The last reason, which I suspect is the real reason, is that you have no idea who I am yet. I am not someone to be cowed by the insults of an elitist naturalist - I have probably heard hundreds of them over the years. That's why it was so easy for me to emulate the speech patterns.
And you have no idea of my education, history or passion for the subject material.
Most of all, you hate the idea (however unlikely) of getting schooled by someone who hasn't earned your respect yet.
Humans and chimp DNA is 98% similar. I wouldn't consider that "some".
Would you like to talk about endogenous retroviruses?
Is that noncoding DNA?
How is that even relevant? .Humans and mice share 90% DNA.
It looks to me like science has absolutely no idea how to understand DNA properly, and they are like neanderthals trying to understand binary code. However i'll reserve judgment for a bit and maybe learn more about DNA first. This seems to be interesting actually.
And humans and reptiles share a bit less, and humans and fish share less yet, please note that we are getting into larger and large clades with less and less of a degree of relationship. It is exactly what the theory of evolution predicts and creationism has no explanation.
Thank you for pointing out the errors of those that read Genesis literally.
The only errors i see are with ToE. Toe science seems to be based on assumptions rather than actual scientific understanding. They claim to have DNA evidence, yet they dont even understand what 80% of DNA is even used for. It seems unlikely that they can, at this time, use DNA to build theory on mans origin. I think perhaps it might be wishful thinking rather than actual science.
Then you simply don't understand the nature of evidence.The only errors i see are with ToE. Toe science seems to be based on assumptions rather than actual scientific understanding. They claim to have DNA evidence, yet they dont even understand what 80% of DNA is even used for. It seems unlikely that they can, at this time, use DNA to build theory on mans origin. I think perhaps it might be wishful thinking rather than actual science.
Stop thinking and start studying! You are only showing your ignorance with posts like this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?