The 'Macro-Micro' thing....again..

[PsychoSarah]

Sorry my questions are so hard.

They aren't hard, you are just so nitpicky about where the information comes from.

 

[HitchSlap]

Sorry my questions are so hard.

They're not so hard as they just don't make sense. You're trying too hard with semantics and double speak.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Are you trying to make excuses for why you can't find 2,000,000 Jews in the desert ... even with their journey well-documented?

I wasn't aware asking scientists to find some bones in the desert constituted 'proving a biblical event.'

I'm glad I didn't ask them to find that million-dollar piece of junk they sent to Mars to sniff around in Martian backyards for signs of life -- that ended up breaking down.

Someone (or something) probably shot it.

I'd probably get accused of asking to 'prove an astronomical event.'

How about this. Position: 2 million people did not cross the desert at the same time.

You can defeat this position, this secular position, and prove a biblical event if you can provide evidence that proves that position wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

They aren't hard, you are just so nitpicky about where the information comes from.

If you can tell me more about Hell than the Bible, I'll listen -- to a point.

Albeit I find there are better things to discuss than such morbid topics.

The Bible describes Hell more than any eleven scientists put together.

And that's not good enough?

Like I asked:

What do you want? pictures?

Me personally ... I'm not so interested in the details that I have to have more than what what the Bible says about it.

I suppose some people are though.

I'm just not one of them.

I'm not going there.

 

[Loudmouth]

Thanks for the QED.

(Make that eleven.)

What QED? Do you really think that fantasies hold the same weight as evidence?

 

[AV1611VET]

How about this. Position: 2 million people did not cross the desert at the same time.

Then where did this itinerary come from?

Or is this conversation going to turn into a Bible-denying discussion?

 

[HitchSlap]

Or is this conversation going to turn into a Bible-denying discussion?

I guess that depends on how adamantly you insist the bible is true.

 

[biggles53]

Then where did this itinerary come from?

Or is this conversation going to turn into a Bible-denying discussion?

You'd like it to, wouldn't you...? Anything rather than trying to honestly and genuinely answer those questions about what exactly it is that prevents evolution from progressing beyond your arbitrarily determined point...

So transparent.....so pathetic.....

 

[Smidlee]

They observed divergence between species. That is macroevolution by definition. If denial is all you have, what is the point in discussing the facts?

I don't dismiss the fact there are many gray areas when it comes to determine what species is what. You seems to aim toward those gray areas to hide the fact that the evidence shows there are limits of how much species can vary. In embryo early development resist changes which are needed for evolution to be true.

 

[HitchSlap]

I don't dismiss the fact there are many gray areas when it comes to determine what species is what. You seems to aim toward those gray areas to hide the fact that the evidence shows there are limits of how much species can vary. In embryo early development resist changes which are needed for evolution to be true.

This doesn't even make sense.

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't dismiss the fact there are many gray areas when it comes to determine what species is what. You seems to aim toward those gray areas to hide the fact that the evidence shows there are limits of how much species can vary. In embryo early development resist changes which are needed for evolution to be true.

What limits? Evidence please.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then where did this itinerary come from?

Or is this conversation going to turn into a Bible-denying discussion?

If you are going to troll me, I will troll you back! You think that an old man like you is going to be better at trolling than a teenage girl? Challenge accepted!

So do you want to have a crappy shouting match, or a legitimate intellectual discussion? Because you cannot contribute crap and expect gold in return.

 

[AV1611VET]

You'd like it to, wouldn't you...? Anything rather than trying to honestly and genuinely answer those questions about what exactly it is that prevents evolution from progressing beyond your arbitrarily determined point...

So transparent.....so pathetic.....

For the what? third time?

Twisted DNA.

 

[TheBear]

Yup ... those genealogies sure were endless, weren't they?

Yeah. Mathew did seem to go on and on and on, about genealogies. That's why I pointed out that whole thing in the first place. duh...

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah. Mathew did seem to go on and on and on, about genealogies.

Matthew 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

Abraham → Jesus ≠ seeming to go on and on and on about genealogies.

 

[Subduction Zone]

For the what? third time?

Twisted DNA.

You need to say why. As I already pointed out the traits of DNA means that is supports the theory of evolution. It does not oppose it in any way that I know of.

DNA allows the traits of the parents to be passed on. For the most part. It also allows for small changes to accumulate. And just like a journey of 1,000 miles will be over one million steps. The changes in life will accumulate over the many millions and even billions of years of existence.

So how does DNA oppose macro-evolution? So far you have not given any valid reasons.

 

[AV1611VET]

You need to say why. As I already pointed out the traits of DNA means that is supports the theory of evolution. It does not oppose it in any way that I know of.

If God tells DNA to oppose it, DNA will oppose it.

God could tell the oxygen in the air to oppose macroevolution, and guess what ... the oxygen in the air would oppose macroevolution.

If it helps any though, I believe the absence of deep time, not necessarily DNA, is the biggest hinderance to evolution.

 

[TheBear]

Matthew 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

Abraham → Jesus ≠ seeming to go on and on and on about genealogies.

Earth life origins → to present day ~ also finite and not endless....


So, put your handy-dandy innerwebs bible search engines away for the moment, and actually think about what you're saying. THINK FOR YOURSELF FOR ONCE!

 

[AV1611VET]

Earth life origins → to present day ~ also finite and not endless....


So, put your handy-dandy innerwebs bible search engines away for the moment, and actually think about what you're saying. THINK FOR YOURSELF FOR ONCE!

Endless genealogies does not mean "infinite genealogies."

You cannot daisy-change cyanobacteria to man, even on paper.

So "endless genealogies" is a near perfect ... if not perfect ... description of evolution from a commoner's point of view.

 

[biggles53]

If God tells DNA to oppose it, DNA will oppose it.

God could tell the oxygen in the air to oppose macroevolution, and guess what ... the oxygen in the air would oppose macroevolution.

If it helps any though, I believe the absence of deep time, not necessarily DNA, is the biggest hinderance to evolution.

Yes, you've already tried sneaking that derail in.........won't work..

You were asked for a specific biological mechanism and the best (worst..?) you can do is throw in some word salad about the double helix...

You. Got. Nuthin'.......

And the neat thing is that, if you had been a man of humble ego, you just would have bowed out and said nothing.........but no, you had to highlight the idiocy of your position and continue with the nonsense....I can only hope that the 'waverers' have taken careful note........