Not a bad answer. I can live with it.
If humans can evolve wolves into domesticated dogs of various appearances in 10,000 years, I wonder what nature might be capable of over billions of years this planet earth has been around.
What’s the relevance to anything?
Close enough for a politician.
Good answer, that’s right where I am. God did it and he did it in his own time frame.
The only answer a Repub should ever give to that question is...
“The THEORY of Evolution is just that. A Theory; and any honest scientist will tell you that we do not have all the answers. Science BELIEVES the theory of evolution is correct based on AVAILABLE evidence and people of faith believe the Bible is correct based on available evidence. The two can coexsist just fine until one or the other is proven to be incorrect. So far MR. Reporter, that has not happened.”
The problem with non-liberals is that they think they have to answer every question that the MSM launches.
Screw the MSM.
Good answer, Mr. Perry.
Not a Perry fan, but I agree with this answer.
Perry is moving into Say Anything mode.
The greater issue is whether he can explain his past history of pro-abortion, pro-redefining marriage, pro-amnesty statements.
Evolution should try becoming mainstream science where best answers coalesce when one observes, measures, replicates by experiment, and computes formulas for a phenomenon. Currently, examinations for many physical events have not reached this four-fold rationality.
One example is String Theory, or the “theory of everything”; everything for atomic, micro-processes. Elegant mathematical models utilize eleven dimensions to unify gravitational, electromagnetic, and nuclear strong and weak forces. Here is computation without experiment, measurement, or observation. Niels Bohr would say, “Yes, yes you have the mathematics. But does it make sense?” Notable critics say scientists utilize mathematics, but inadvertently venture into philosophy or religion.
The other extreme is Macroevolution or Darwinism, where all is observation. Rigorous measurements and experiments would require 1,000 to 10,000 times recorded history. Science advocates contemplate observed phenomenon, and decide evolution explains everything. Yet Macroevolution fails computational testing, with vanishing small probabilities, using Thermodynamics, which covers all macro-processes.
For just one trivial example assume there are 82,000,000 steps from the first one cell animal to man and 81,999,500 have an absolute certainty of occurring. If the remaining 500 have a 90% probability of occurring, then the chance Macroevolution explains the presence of humans is 0.000000000000000000000013220708.
Advocates could consider natural processes in open systems, as required by natural selection and consistently note increased disorder, release of energy, and increased entropy. Even huge energy inputs result in Katrina, and not the Brooklyn Bridge absent intentionality.
Rigorous debate continues concerning String Theory, but debate is prohibited concerning Evolution. Darwinist advocates contend contrary arguments require intrusion of God. Yet good theologians of desert religions would say a god hedged in by observation, measurement, experiment, and computation ends up equivalent to the Golden Calf the Israelites constructed in the Wilderness. Their God can only be found by mystical, faith encounters.
This religious bashing by the presstitutes is bogus. Barry lies about having faith, gives a wink and a nod to the gays and the secular humanists, and plays up his "lifelong Christian faith" for the black church going community.
He apparently doesn’t believe the first 3 chapters of Genesis. Does he believe John 3:16 and if so, why? If God would lie about creation, how can we believe Him regarding salvation.
The Scriptures aren’t a smorgasbord where we can pick and choose which parts we’ll believe; any more than we can pick and choose which Commandments need to be obeyed and which ones don’t apply to us.
The Lord’s half-brother James said: Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Likewise it follows that if you choose not to believe certain scriptures, you call God a liar, and you cast doubt on the WHOLE BOOK!
Oh well, I’ll still vote for him. I’ve accepted that the Republican party is going to fall for this Intelligent Design garbage, but it’s so far to the outside of my circle of concern that it’s almost completely irrelevant.
Why do they even bother answering these questions. They should just shoo them aside and say something like, “Let me say something about the economy...” and then launch into what he did to attract businesses away from California.
Why do they even bother answering these questions. They should just shoo them aside and say something like, “Let me say something about the economy...” and then launch into what he did to attract businesses away from California.
“There are clear indications from our people who have amazing intellectual capability “
Meaning, I suppose, there are claims of clear indications from (those of) our people, i.e. my co-religionists” (Amazing to whom? In comparison to Rick Perry? Then why are they not announcing their candidature?)
“that this didn't happen by accident and a creator put this in place.”
This would seem to be a reference to Scientific Creationism, a bankrupt and incoherent pseudoreligion in which whatever cannot be explained at present is attributed to the intervention of a Creator. This is a matter of faith, and not a conclusion to be drawn from an interpretation of geology or astronomy.
”Now, what was his time frame and how did he create the earth that we know? I'm not going to tell you that I've got the answers to that. I believe that we were created by this all-powerful supreme being”
By which all-powerful supreme being?
“and (concerning the question of) how we got to today versus what we look like thousands of years ago”
It is revealing that he specifies the time frame of thousands of years ago. We certainly looked and talked much the same as we do today thousands of years ago. It is more a question of tracking ancestry over more than a billion years, unless one is a young earth creationist.
”I think there's enough holes in the theory of evolution to, you know, say there are some holes in that theory..”
If only a complete evolutionary record, in which every single ancestor were itemized, in a list extending back to the first common ancestor, were sufficient evidence, then evolutionary theory is indeed irrefutable, and thus outside the realm of science. However that implicit standard cannot be met by any human knowledge. If this criterion were applied generally, it would be very similar to saying that, since the entire sequence of events leading to the collapse of the twin towers is not known in every single detail, then there must be a cover-up, and the official story is a conspiracy.
God created evolution.