Reason why evolution can not happen

[Nathan Poe]

There's a Christian Forums cricket match? Cool. Who's batting first?

I don't know, but we better play quickly before soysauce tears down the wickets and declares a hockey match...

 

[Data]

the antifreeze blood is a variation. does it change the fact that the fish is still a fish?

Hahaha, this is the classic responce. The beneficial mutation isn't good enough now. Now, a mutation must make a fish into a bird!

It was to be expected

 

[LorentzHA]

Mutations do not add new information but just scrambles the orginal DNA. Also, it is not productive towards an organism. Fruit flies were mutated thousands of times and they had offsprings w/ no wings, curled wings, no legs...same as mutated cows. Cows sometimes have an extra leg but thats not new information, but just a copy of the original cow information. Information means Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction. The DNA gives instuctions to the amino acids to be able to produce proteins. These proteins help create our body.

You may find these interesting.

http://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...2&dopt=Abstract
http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/12/12/1854
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/inf...ipoprotein.html
http://mbe.oupjournals.org/cgi/reprint/15/8/931.pdf
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/94/8/3485

 

[Mac6yver]

Thats a VARAIATION. Its still a bacteria after it is resistnat toanitbiotics. It doesnt change into a monkey.

Give it a few billion years worth of mutations and it just might.

 

[Cantuar]

OK, so as far as I can gather, what we're really being told here is that there are no natural processes that can increase genetic information because genetic information can't be increased by natural processes (which is a wonderful example of a circular argument) and that this should somehow make atheists realise that Christ is Lord.

Welcome to the Twilight Zone. I can see why some people have given up and gone to play cricket.

 

[stray bullet]

How do you define 'new information'? If my parents chromosomes all produced enzyme A, but due to a mutation, my gametes passed on a mutation that caused my child's chromosomes to sequence the production of enzyme A on one chromosome and enzyme A+ (mutated variant from me) on the other.

There is now information for coding two different enzymes. That's 'new information', there is a code for new enzyme, A+.

 

[Melior]

But perhaps God made the mutations himself. If God made the world, he must have made science as well. So perhaps God made sure His animals could survive in the changing conditions.

 

[Jet Black]

Indeed he could have done. This does not however detract from the fact that it is mutations that cause variations within the population. Whether it if God changing an adenine base to a thymine, inverting a stretch of DNA, adding a base or whatever seems somewhat pointless. It also has theological problems that need to be addressed, sich as the fact that God made it look like these things happened spontaneously and at predictable rates.

 

[Melior]

Maybe the 7 day creation happened, and then God changed the animals in some way afterwards. I don't know. I don't really have my own opinion on this; I was just offering a base for someone to argue with.

 

[Data]

Maybe the 7 day creation happened, and then God changed the animals in some way afterwards. I don't know. I don't really have my own opinion on this; I was just offering a base for someone to argue with.

Changed them to look exactly like they were evolved? Then changed the earth to make it look old, and like everything evolved?

That isn't a very good argument, but it's unrefutable. He could have made us last tuesday too.

 

[Jet Black]

Maybe the 7 day creation happened, and then God changed the animals in some way afterwards. I don't know. I don't really have my own opinion on this; I was just offering a base for someone to argue with.

The problem then becomes a theological one, since iggy the magic elf could have made everything last tuesday, and we would never know.

 

[LorentzHA]

That reminds me of last Tuesday when....

 

[FEZZILLA]

#1.) Second, Darwin's "guess work" as you call it, was at least the result of hisown observation. When exactly did God "reveal" his little creation story to Moses?
The burning bush? In between plagues of Egypt?

#2.) Was God even speaking to Moses at this point? Every other book of the Pentaleuch swats us over the head with their conversations: "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying..." appears everywhere else in the Pentaleuch, but nowhere in Genesis.

So let's not drop a name like Moses unless it's relevent.


#3.) It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. --Isaiah 40:22

the problem here is that the curtain and tent similes simply would not work on a 3-D object such as a sphere. The passage clearly says that the Earth is a circle, and it is on a circle, a flat circle, that crtains and tents are more apt to fit.

So, you can admit that a circle is not a sphere, (although both are indeed round) or admit that "The Word of God" uses symbolic language (in this case tents and curtains) poorly.


#4.) As you yourself said, Moses was taught by the Egyptians, who were, bar none, the best astronomers of their time. Nothing in the passages mentioned would be particularly shocking to any such educated civilization, even an ancient one.QUOTE]
________________________________________________________________
Talking Points:
#1.) Darwin saw finches mix-breeding and called it macro-evolution

#2.) Thats because Genesis was not written about Moses! [note: No ad hominem] Exodus on the other hand is where we get to the account of Moses.

#3.) The word "circle" had a broad meaning (i don't think you would know that since you didn't seem to know that Moses wasn't in the book of Genesis). The word "sphere" is only found in our modern english diction. But if you look round up in the dictionary you will find:Ball, sphere, circle. All these words describe a "round" object. Now, once you've learned that, all you need to do know is add-the 2+2 of common sense, read the verse listed, and WOW!! you just might learn something. But..since you're an atheist you're probably forcing yourself right now to think slower and comprehend less so that you can still justify your meaningless life.

#4.) The Egyptians wern't astronomers; they were astrologers, there is a difference. Moses knew about the true God and creator and eventually led the Hebrew nation out of Egypt. These Israelites were not into Egyptian myths, but they knew everything the Egyptians knew and more about origins.
I guess you can count-out the evolution alien theory out know You just proved aliens are not responsible for life on earth. Thats will hurt evolutions last resort tactics (hahahaha!!!).

Im right, you're wrong
And thats the memo

 

[FEZZILLA]

I've noticed alot of you like to argue just to argue. No matter how many times the world of academics slams you in the face, you'll deny true information and get false infomation offf your far-left wing websites.
You should try thinking for yourselves sometime, it's fun!

 

[PhantomLlama]

I've noticed alot of you like to argue just to argue. No matter how many times the world of academics slams you in the face, you'll deny true information and get false infomation offf your far-left wing websites.
You should try thinking for yourselves sometime, it's fun!

See avatar.

 

[toff]

Talking Points:
#1.) Darwin saw finches mix-breeding and called it macro-evolution

No, he did not. Do you know anything about either evolutionary theory or Darwin?

I guess you can count-out the evolution alien theory out know You just proved aliens are not responsible for life on earth. Thats will hurt evolutions last resort tactics (hahahaha!!!).

There is no "evolution alien theory." What I THINK you are referring to is panspermia, which has absolutely nothing to do with evolutionary theory.

Again, do you know anything about the topic you're attempting to discuss?

 

[Arikay]

Just thought I would point out, that if you ignore english and look up hebrew, the word that is translated to round, most likely does mean circle, Not a ball or sphere.

 

[Physics_guy]

I've noticed alot of you like to argue just to argue. No matter how many times the world of academics slams you in the face, you'll deny true information and get false infomation offf your far-left wing websites.
You should try thinking for yourselves sometime, it's fun!

You have got to be kidding! A YEC thinks that the "world of academics" is on his side!!!!!

This quote blew both my irony meter as well as my spare. Do you have any idea how ludicrious what you write sounds?

 

[Nathan Poe]

The problem then becomes a theological one, since iggy the magic elf could have made everything last tuesday, and we would never know.

nah, Tuesday's Iggy's day off...

 

[Nathan Poe]

________________________________________________________________
Talking Points:
#1.) Darwin saw finches mix-breeding and called it macro-evolution

nobody claimed Darwin was infallible; Scientists have been picking apart his work for 150 years now, correcting his mistakes.

#2.) Thats because Genesis was not written about Moses! [note: No ad hominem] Exodus on the other hand is where we get to the account of Moses.

That wouldn't explain Leviticus, Numbers, and Deutoronomy, all of which were credited to Moses, little of which is about him, but follows the same theme of Exodus, but not Genesis.

#3.) The word "circle" had a broad meaning (i don't think you would know that since you didn't seem to know that Moses wasn't in the book of Genesis).

Now that's an ad hom....

The word "sphere" is only found in our modern english diction. But if you look round up in the dictionary you will find:Ball, sphere, circle. All these words describe a "round" object. Now, once you've learned that, all you need to do know is add-the 2+2 of common sense, read the verse listed, and WOW!! you just might learn something.

Another ad hom. *sigh* see if you can follow this...

All spheres are circles, but not all circles are spheres. Your logic falls flat.... as a circle.

But..since you're an atheist you're probably forcing yourself right now to think slower and comprehend less so that you can still justify your meaningless life.

So at this point you really have nothing to go on, hmm?

#4.) The Egyptians wern't astronomers; they were astrologers, there is a difference.

Not as much as you'd think. The Egyptians kept meticulous records of the stars in order to schedule their religious rituals. Astrology, perhaps, but the point is that the Egyptians had been studying the sky long enough to learn quite a bit.

Moses knew about the true God and creator and eventually led the Hebrew nation out of Egypt.

Non-sequitor.

These Israelites were not into Egyptian myths, but they knew everything the Egyptians knew and more about origins.

And you say this because you choose to believe the Hebrew myths over the Egyptians. your prerogative, of course, but that doesn't make it "evidence" for anything.

I guess you can count-out the evolution alien theory out know You just proved aliens are not responsible for life on earth. Thats will hurt evolutions last resort tactics (hahahaha!!!).

too idiotic to merit a response-- ah, crud, I just gave one.

Im right, you're wrong
And thats the memo

Most mature thing you've said this whole post...