I gave you the example of a broken vitanim c gene and you claim it is common design. The creator designed us with a broken vitamin c gene? That doesn't make sense.
Upvote
0
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.
It's evidence of common design not common descent. Similarities do not prove evolution from common ancestor.
I find this an incoherent reply to the arguments being made, but hey that is allright, we have come to expect this reply from those who dogmatically hold to the religion of Evolution.
Why is it not evidence of common manufacturer?You deny common descent? Have you seen all the evidence? It's amazing.
Without intelligence and skills?We gave a chicken embryo hands, dude!
No there is not.There's pretty clear evidence that all life came from a single, basic design. It uses the same logic that shows that you and your grandmother are related.
Its perfectly sensible. For you to call in incoherent means you don't understand it, it does call for a little abstract reasoning. It is my opinion that much of the opposition to evolution comes from people for whom the basic concepts are simply over their head. Can't help that.
It's very simple: what's more likely -- that you and your cousin are related, or that you and your cousin were specially designed by the same person?Why is it not evidence of common manufacturer?
Embryos don't normally have that. It's a lot easier to give something hands than to give it a human brain. You just insert one gene (the hedgehog gene, actually) into its DNA at the beginning of its growth, and it'll eventually start to grow hands! It's awesome.Without intelligence and skills?
Things with similar genes and traits and such tend to be related. Therefore, your hand and a chicken's wing having the same basic structures indicates a relationship, just as your uncle and you both having blue eyes. Common genes, even when used differently, indicate common ancestry. (You got those genes from somewhere.).No there is not.
Why even have a conversation about science if you're a conspiracy theorist? There is no evidence anyone can give where you won't just wave away by saying that the anti-christian evil people are covering it up.it's what 'they' decided is the truth and brainwash us with.
What makes you think that your theology should be taught in public school classes at all, much less given "equal time" with science?
I don't think so. I think only science should be taught in science class.
But since you mention it, the Roman Catholics are the largest Christian denomination in the country. How about teaching their theology in science class?
Good. Their theology allows for evolution and Catholic schools already teach it in science class. I'm glad you're OK with it.I think I already said, go for it, can't be any worse than evolution.
Yes, myth.
Definition:
1. A traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.
2. A widely held but false belief or idea
Big Bang cosmology doesn't deal with "nothing from nothing and then it happened by itself"
Evolutionary biology doesn't deal with "nothing from nothing and then it happened by itself"
So, I'm left wondering what it is exactly you're talking about?
I don't need to seriously question creationism, as it does not require serious attention. It is a nonsense, pushed by individuals that can't deal with reality as it is presented to them.
Again, neither Big Bang cosmology or evolutionary biology deals with "boom from nothing and eventually we are all here". If you've got an objection to either theory, it would help you if you actually argued against what they actually say.
Big Bang:
Please point me to the observation of evolution from a common ancestor. Please give me the link that shows that science has been able to test and reproduce evolution from a common ancestor. Don't point me to similarities testing or adaptation testing. I want actual observation and testing that actually shows evolution from a common ancestor. I will even accept an actual observation and testing and reproduction of something that clearly evolved into something that it wasn't from the beginning.
You're pushing a false equivalency. In the science class room, Christian creationism has exactly the same level of legitimacy as the creation stories of all other religions (i.e. zero).
Again, you're suggesting that a 150+ years worth of development of a biological theory of evolution by thousands upon thousands of scientists of various faiths, nationalities, generations, etc, publishing millions of papers of research, and taught in universities and used by industry, is for the purpose of disbelief in the Christian faith.
Which is just nonsense. Especially since there is nothing inherent to disbelief in God or Christianity specifically within the context of the theory of evolution, which is merely a theory to explain biological change in the natural world.
It's the high conceit of creationists/Biblical literalists to think this is about all them. It's not.
"A million/whatever people can't be wrong" is no answer, they have been before and they are on this.
Science is a discipline designed to eliminate all biases, subjectivity, and "unproven opinions" in the effort to uncover the nature of reality. If creation were verified through scientific tests and research, it would be taught the same way evolution is taught now.What makes you think the same?
Equal time with almighty science?...sounds so official when all it really means is equal time with unproven opinions, and theory. Y'all really need to stop presenting that as if it's some kind of impenetrable shield against creation. It's as if you need to sell your evolution, using the tools of commercial TV.
This wasn't about who is right or wrong. This was about the notion that a scientific theory like evolution was created for the purpose of denying god.
It's a silly notion that is demonstrably false given the number of theists including Christians who have no problem with biological evolution and modern science.
My favorite is: "961,000,000,000 smokers can't be wrong!""A million/whatever people can't be wrong" is no answer, they have been before and they are on this.
What good is your Genesis account if you have to adjust your interpretation every time new scientific discoveries come out? Why not just go with the science?False, since the Christian understanding of Genesis AGREES in every way with the discoveries of Science and History, IF you have the proper interpretation, which you obviously do NOT. It's probably not your fault though, since you were most likely brain washed by the teachers of the False ToE as a little child. Amen?
I would disagree. I believe most folks simply need to deny the evidence of evolution, because it threatens a tightly held belief and they create strawmen arguments to support their denial.
My cousin and i are both humans, so what's your point?It's very simple: what's more likely -- that you and your cousin are related, or that you and your cousin were specially designed by the same person?
Related works better.
Yeah, living nature is awesome, and so is science.Embryos don't normally have that. It's a lot easier to give something hands than to give it a human brain. You just insert one gene (the hedgehog gene, actually) into its DNA at the beginning of its growth, and it'll eventually start to grow hands! It's awesome.
It's naturalistic propaganda.(Note: I may be confusing the hedgehog gene with the sonic hedgehog gene.).
You should read Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin. It's quite awesome.
Only when it's the same species this is certain.Things with similar genes and traits and such tend to be related.
Apples and oranges.Therefore, your hand and a chicken's wing having the same basic structures indicates a relationship, just as your uncle and you both having blue eyes. Common genes, even when used differently, indicate common ancestry. (You got those genes from somewhere.).
What is a conspiracy theorist according to you?Why even have a conversation about science if you're a conspiracy theorist?
Have you ever seriously looked into what makes the powers that shouldn't be tick?There is no evidence anyone can give where you won't just wave away by saying that the anti-christian evil people are covering it up.
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?