Prove it or remove it challenge

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Then what?

It's against subforum rules.

 

[justcoolforyou]

It's against subforum rules.

What is against the rules?

 

[MerlinJ]

The main points of the theory of evolution revolve around micro changes, or mutations to our genetic code. Resulting in gradual change over time. The evolutionary argument is that this can create new information. Where as a creationist says that mutations can only alter existing code resulting in loss of genetic information.

The gradual change over time is the result of mutations and natural selection (among other things). This is a key point. I think the simple overview given on the introduction to evolution Wikipedia page puts it quite nicely:

• Life forms reproduce and therefore have a tendency to become more numerous.
• Factors such as predation and competition work against the survival of individuals.
• Each offspring differs from their parent(s) in minor, random ways.
• If these differences are beneficial, the offspring is more likely to survive and reproduce.
• This makes it likely that more offspring in the next generation will have beneficial differences and fewer will have detrimental differences.
• These differences accumulate over generations, resulting in changes within the population.
• Over time, populations can split or branch off into new species.
• These processes, collectively known as evolution, are responsible for the many diverse life forms seen in the world.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What is against the rules?

"General Apologetics: This is not a forum where Christians are asked to defend their faith against objections and criticism from non-believers. Non-Christian members who would like to challenge Christian theology, beliefs and practices, should start a thread in the Christian Apologetics forum."
In a nut-shell: using quotes from the Bible to say that any scientific theory is wrong is not allowed.
If you have a criticism of a scientific theory, use science, no matter how much or how little you know, to criticize it.

 

[Queller]

Hi dogma hunter you misunderstand my challenge. I mean I want you to show me from the cellular level to modern day beast the continual change that occurred over time.

Like I said I have no interest in DNA creation scientist can give counter arguments to yours. I am interested in one area alone fossils. You must prove your belief. You can't run off to the DNA argument. One dinosaur with feathers hardly proves evolution. One, not even two, maybe I could believe if you had two.

You want evidence at the cellular level but don't have any interest in DNA? What kind of cellular evidence do you want if not DNA?

 

[justcoolforyou]

"General Apologetics: This is not a forum where Christians are asked to defend their faith against objections and criticism from non-believers. Non-Christian members who would like to challenge Christian theology, beliefs and practices, should start a thread in the Christian Apologetics forum."
In a nut-shell: using quotes from the Bible to say that any scientific theory is wrong is not allowed.
If you have a criticism of a scientific theory, use science, no matter how much or how little you know, to criticize it.

I'm not against evolution, and the bible is not just apologetics. Its also a historical record of scientific ideas of ancient people. The Septuagint can be seen as having influence from greek science of the time and could even be used as prove of the theory of evolution before Darwin....

 

[Queller]

Out of all those millions of fossils the best examples were on that page .... I am far from convinced ... You give me three skulls only vaguely related and expect me to bow to you will. When I have prayed for the sick and seen them healed, had God in very clear ways communicate to me, seen many signs. You want me to become a sinner. So can burn in hell. Forget it you are but man not my god. I am trying to save this world from hell and all you give me is three unrelated skulls.

Where did you get the idea that accepting the evidence for evolution makes you a sinner?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Hi I was asked to prove the story I promoted ... What sort of proof do you need. I will try to get it for you.

 

[Nithavela]

Hi I was asked to prove the story I promoted ... What sort of proof do you need. I will try to get it for you.

I see that you are trying to make this thread about your miracle story now?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Why does accepting evolution make a person a sinner ... For me personally it would be sin, because I believe that death did not enter gods world until Adam and Eve sinned. I believe the bible.

 

[Queller]

I am not an expert on dna so will not pretend to know it all. like I said I know the basics.

I will ask you a question, if I was able to prove to you that a person in my wife's family was proclaimed dead by doctors. With degrees in medicine. And through the prayer of her biological father was instantly raised back to life would you believe? Because it happened in my wife's family. 100% provable and testable. See http://www.everybodymattersministry.com for the story.

You say this is a "provable and testable". Please describe a test that could be done to prove or disprove your claim that "through the prayer of her biological father [she] was instantly raised back to life".

 

[The Cadet]

Hi I was asked to prove the story I promoted ... What sort of proof do you need. I will try to get it for you.

Medical records, reliable testimony from the doctors who were present, or maybe a case study published in a peer-reviewed journal (you'd think this would make the news...).

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I see that you are trying to make this thread about your miracle story now?

Should I not share my life experiences with you? Pretend God never does anything when in reality he is active around me.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Why does accepting evolution make a person a sinner ... For me personally it would be sin, because I believe that death did not enter gods world until Adam and Eve sinned. I believe the bible.

So this challenge is, in the end, completely disingenuous? Nothing we present would ever be enough to convince you because you are not open to be convinced? Is that right or have I misunderstood something?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

O

Medical records, reliable testimony from the doctors who were present, or maybe a case study published in a peer-reviewed journal (you'd think this would make the news...).

ok I will attempt to get it for you.....

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm not against evolution, and the bible is not just apologetics. Its also a historical record of scientific ideas of ancient people. The Septuagint can be seen as having influence from greek science of the time and could even be used as prove of the theory of evolution before Darwin....

Okay, I will be honest: you're post was a little bit unclear about what you wanted. But the point still stands: using religious texts as an argument is against the rules for the Physical & Life Science forum.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Why does accepting evolution make a person a sinner ... For me personally it would be sin, because I believe that death did not enter gods world until Adam and Eve sinned. I believe the bible.

#DANGER! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON! APOLOGETICS INCOMING! APOLOGETICS INCOMING!#

 

[FutureAndAHope]

L

So this challenge is, in the end, completely disingenuous? Nothing we present would ever be , enough to convince you because you are not open to be convinced? Is that right or have I misunderstood something?

Are you truely open... You guys gave me splendid pictures of whale fossils ... I researched and found they were for the most part made up falsified pictures. We not you rather deceived and deceiving me. You put trust in something thAt was not true. At least I am researching the fossils you give me.

 

[Nithavela]

Should I not share my life experiences with you? Pretend God never does anything when in reality he is active around me.

Not on this sub-forum, you shouldn't.

 

[justcoolforyou]

Okay, I will be honest: you're post was a little bit unclear about what you wanted. But the point still stands: using religious texts as an argument is against the rules for the Physical & Life Science forum.

Understood, but i will add the rules should be a little more flexible when it comes to the history of the development of the theories of Physical and of life sciences. For in ancient times many scientific ideas will be mix with some type of religion...