Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Instaed of the same old "attack the man" (Failure in argumentation)n try addressing the actual points.
I know too hard to read and it is easier to throw rocks than deal in facts.
I am stating a fact, not making an attack. You did fabricate "studies" that never appeared. It is in writing, here on this thread; end of story. You do post information from very, very questionable sites; also right here on this thread. End of story.
A person's credibility is shot on these factors; period.
And you are deflecting yet again - fact.
You have not shown yourself to be credible on this issue (I am only addressing this issue in order to keep from referencing other threads). That is a simple fact.
As far as it being easier to throw stones, apparently it is also easier to deflect than to come up with "studies" including "proof" that you yourself promised existed (nobody asked you for those, you brought them up). And the throwing stones reference is itself yet another deflection, ironically. So back to topic, how about those studies? You have deflected for about a day or so now on that issue. Remember, it was your idea, you brought this up. Let us see those studies with proof. So far you've managed to come up with one book of opinion, and one Bigfoot site.
Says the guy who's never even taken a 10th-grade biology class.
And your proof for that statement is the same as that for evolution . . . nonexistent.
So tell me friend, if the original earth became a chaos and vacant/sterile and then in Genesis 1:2 onward God made the earth habitable again 6000 years ago, how is that enough time for humans to have evolved from primates?
What the hell do you think I posted above???? Are you having trouble reading? Here it is again . . . the test you are asking for that the PROCESS of evolution does operate as advertised.
You clearly do NOT know enough about the existence of different species/kinds of bacterial life to comprehend the enormous significance of Lenski's multiple decades long experiments. It requires that you know that all bacteria are NOT the same and definitely NOT the same species.
The different species of bacteria are like dog versus cat species in the Animalia Kingdom/Domain. So when actual species-level differences occur in the Bacteria Kingdom/Domain it is NOT like the different breeds of dogs in the same species . . . or what ignorant Creationists call micro-evolution. It is like the difference between dogs and cats within the Animalia Kingdom/Domain.
Lenski has isolated bacteria and subjected them to different environments for decades to restrict any changes to only those resulting from random DNA genome mutations and environmental selection. His results conclusively demonstrated the mutation/environment selection evolution PROCESS for creating an entirely new species of bacteria that can "eat" citric acid in an aerobic (oxygen-rich) environment. The ONLY reason these experiments were possible within a human lifetime is because of the rapid life cycle of bacteria allowing millions of random mutations over tens of thousands of lifetimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA
Instaed of the same old "attack the man" (Failure in argumentation)n try addressing the actual points.
I know too hard to read and it is easier to throw rocks than deal in facts.
I dealt in facts and you ignored it using your lack of knowledge of evolution theory and ignorance about the level at which speciation distinctions occur (as in dog/cat). Re-read the FACTS of Lenski's multiple decade research experiments. The whole point of scientific experiments IS to control the conditions to allow for the NATURAL processes to function in ways that reveal the process unambiguously. Lenski did NOT control the outcomes or in any way control the processes at work. Your lack of knowledge of the scientific method is a sad commentary on our education system.
Then again, once science finally catches up with the Bible, they will say, How could people have been so stupid to believe in evolution? Those creationists were right after all.
Right.
Because religion and the Bible has been proven as the best explanation for our natural world so many other times in the past.
Religion has had over ten thousand years to give us just one reason to believe that magic and superstition are the most logical explanations for anything in this universe, and each time one of these cannards was trotted out for study and analysis, magic and superstition met an untimely demise. But sure, THIS time, magical deities and ancient holy books got it right. Yes, this time for sure!
Christian beliefs have nothing to do with evolution. Christians are followers of Christ and their focus is on following His instructions to "love God and each other" daily and repent when they don't. It is NOT to argue absurd theories about creation and deny what science has discovered. The amount of ignorance revealed about science here is staggering. To do it in the name of defending God and Christ is outrageous. There is no contradiction between belief in God and Jesus and evolution theory . . . NONE! This sort of foolishness does no credit to God or Christianity. For shame!
Quote:
Originally Posted by justtitans
Scripture absolutely contradicts evolution! Let's start with the most simple and basic thing that is not support biblically and that's where we as people have come from. The Bible clearly teaches that God created man from dirt (Genesis 2:7). There was no evolving, no monkeys running around talking to God. I can go on and on, but that is about as clear as it comes. If you believe that scripture to be true, then evolution could not have happened and if you believe it to be false then you can't be considered something that you don't believe in.
As I and others have repeatedly tried to make clear . . . evolution says NOTHING about how life started!!! Since earth and all life is created from the "dust of the stars" . . . it is not hard to imagine the metaphor of dirt ("dust of the earth") referring to that fact. Since there are two Genesis accounts . . . it is just as plausible that the first refers to the evolution stage and the second of the "breathing of life" (consciousness) creating a living soul within one of the hominids that had evolved by that time. The separate mitochondrial Eve that came later could actually refer to a "rib" (or offshoot hominid species). But such speculation is pointless and has NOTHING to do with Christianity and being a follower of Christ . . . THAT is my point.
The Bible stories chronicle our experiences and attempts to understand God, period. The prophesies about the Christ are the most important because they tell us of Christ, who He is, how to identify Him, what He would do, and how to validate Him long after His death through prophesies about Him. That is what Christians need to believe from the Bible . . . not implausible and improbable fables that contradict what we know from science about our reality. The warning about those who would believe in fables in the latter days should give those fable believers pause. These are certainly the "latter days" relative to 1st century Christians.
This topic, and the people who keep polluting it, has left a terrible taste in my mouth for Christianity.
I understand and have similar feelings on the subject . . . but I see it as the fault of the religions that have indoctrinated them and denigrated knowledge and science as not to be trusted as the "wisdom of man." That phrase was applicable to the ignorant occult practices and other "knowledge" and that existed at the time the scriptures were written. The retention of such ancient ignorance as a sign of fatih in God has been a travesty of major proportions perpetuated by the religions. The promotion of belief in fables is another error that was warned about being prevalent in the "latter days." It is hard to overcome such indoctrination.
Do you mind me asking what study you are referring to? Thanks!
So very sorry to take so long to answer, busy, busy, busy.
Also sorry I can't accomadate you with the study. I was doing paperwork and had a Christian TV show on. By the time caught my ear the name of the study/questionnaire had passed and I did not catch it. You might try Googleing it: "Christian evolution study/questionnaire" or the like. Looks like our own numbers from the poll are a bit startling but this isn't a scientific poll either.
To all who are not Christians and did not vote- thank you for your honesty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
