- May 11, 2015
- 17,420
- 3,593
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I assume your talking natural selection and not the mutation theory.
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.
I assume your talking natural selection and not the mutation theory.The mechanism for evolution is explained in great detail. Your ignorance of this mechanism, is not an argument against it.
Was this a joke? Because if it is your suppose to add a smile face. For the benefit of the lukers: according to Theistic Evolution DNA is the "Language of God". There is no known natural process that can produce DNA.Sure...in the same way hydrogen and oxygen are coded to make water.
Natural selection and mutation are part of the same evolutionary mechanism, or more specifically, one acts on the other.I assume your talking natural selection and not the mutation theory.
That doesn't answer the question being asked.Collins has to be slightly more of a moderate.
Depends on the theistic evolutionist, some aren't of that opinion and others are.Was this a joke? Because if it is your suppose to add a smile face. For the benefit of the lukers: according to Theistic Evolution DNA is the "Language of God". There is no known natural process that can produce DNA.
Collins has to be slightly more of a moderate.
Was this a joke? Because if it is your suppose to add a smile face. For the benefit of the lukers: according to Theistic Evolution DNA is the "Language of God". There is no known natural process that can produce DNA.
Yes but DNA does not make the code for the molecular structure that makes up DNA. It does not make itself.No, it's not a joke. As I have told you before, DNA is not a computer code. It's a physical molecule, and it's changes are chemical reactions.
Collins has to be a moderate for one thing because he is an author and wants to sell book. He has to appeal to the largest number of people that he can. It looks like your not going to grasp the concept anyways so I guess it is not that important.I only stated that he accepted scientific reality. Accepting science means you can't be a moderate? Is that what you mean? There are lots of moderates who accept science.
Yes there are different theistic evolutionists but Collins seems to have more acceptance than the others. Which is fine with me, we can just go along with his program.Depends on the theistic evolutionist, some aren't of that opinion and others are.
Incusvasaurus, caudotheryx, Avimimus, Microvenator, Chirostenotes, Anzu, Protoaechaeopthery, Similicaudipteryx, Caudipteryx, Oviraptor, Citipati, Wulatelong, Khaan, Conchoraptor, Ajanciengenia, Heyuannia, Talos, Sinorhithoides, Gobinvenator, Troodon, Zanabazar, Mei, Byronosaurus, Confuschis, Microraptor, Epidexipteryx, Scansorioptery, Yi, Wellnhoferia, Jeholornis, Sapeornis, Confucisurnis, Yanoris, Balaur, Microraptor, Velociraptor, Buitenraptor, Sinornithosaurus, Protachera, Anchiorni, Jinfengopteryx, Sinovenator, Archaeopteryx, Paracoracias.
i heard on a program this morning that birds are warm blooded and dinosaurs were reptiles, which are cold-blooded, and therefore birds would've never evolved from dinosaurs...there were some other things said, but i remember this the most.
i admit that my knowledge on dinosaurs and birds and the intricacies of each is quite limited.
i found this interesting however.
Collins has to be a moderate for one thing because he is an author and wants to sell book. He has to appeal to the largest number of people that he can. It looks like your not going to grasp the concept anyways so I guess it is not that important.
Yes there are different theistic evolutionists but Collins seems to have more acceptance than the others.
Which is fine with me, we can just go along with his program.
If they did, would they still be creationists?Are any creationists going to give a substantial response to In Situ's OP?
Well, that's what I'd like to see. This forum used to have a fair number of creationists who felt they could defend their position from a scientific standpoint, but they had a tendency to become very quiet whenever someone posted a thread like this one.If they did, would they still be creationists?
I assume your talking natural selection and not the mutation theory.
Yes but DNA does not make the code for the molecular structure that makes up DNA. It does not make itself.
I'll be off for some weeks later today, but specialized structures need specialized code.
Code doesn't write itself.
Molecules are made up of atoms that are held together by chemical bonds. These bonds form as a result of the sharing or exchange of electrons among atoms.Yes, it does. Where do you think the DNA comes from for each new cell?
The incorporation of genetics and Darwin's theory is known as "modern evolutionary synthesis." The physical and behavioral changes that make natural selection possible happen at the level of DNA and genes. Such changes are called mutations.What is the mutation theory?
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?