Posted on 01/29/2004 3:08:06 AM PST by Ben Chad
:-) Don't lecture me on the genetic basis of disease, because you're way out of your league, kid. The truth is that while mutations can and do pop up anywhere at random in any given chunk of genome, there is sufficient evidence from the gentic basis of disease, which do occur at regular and expected locations, that a mutation could have occured in the same spot of a homologous sequence of DNA in species with similar biochemistries.
Scriptue is silent in regards to the UV radiation or lack thereof after the Creation but before the rebellion of man.
This coming from someone who thinks genetic mutations are due to the "rebellion" of man? I have no idea what league youre in. I am not even sure we are on the same planet!
there is sufficient evidence from the gentic basis of disease, which do occur at regular and expected locations, that a mutation could have occured in the same spot of a homologous sequence of DNA in species with similar biochemistries.
"Same spot" at best refers to regions of DNA, not a single nucleotide. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Provide a reference for such a thing occuring if you have any.
Well why don't you humor me and tell me your opinion on the matter. If there were UV rays, why was there no mutation?
I think you to fail to grasp the resilience of the theory of E. The discovery of comingled elephant/dinosaur bones (fossilized) would lead to yet another "refinement" of evolutionary theory. If those fossilized bones were discovered in strata dated by evolutionary thinking as millions of year of age, they would have to admit they were wrong about their theory of descent for elephants.
If the comingled bones are found unfossilized and determined to be of recent age, then, lo, we have another ancient relic which hasn't changed for millions of years (such as Coelacanth).
In either case, no refutation/falsification of evolution. Even irreducible complexity doesn't appear to be sufficient to falsify evolution (much to Darwin's relief).
Who mentioned "the Flood?"
We can look at the aftermath of Mt. St. Helens to see why trees are better candidates for spanning strata than any animal. The root ball sinks causing the tree to be upright when rapid deposition takes place. (Try doing that with a Whale).
Catastrophism in and of itself does not preclude long-aged models of deposition. The presence of a polystrate mammal fossil, as rare as it might be, could be dismissed as a "tiny mystery" (as Gentry's Polonium radiohalos were).
No Time. "Perfect" exists where God does, who is eternal and outside of time (and in that regards outside of all dimensions, really). So, when perfect, God's creation does not exist in time as we do now. Time is necessary for the Creation that rebelled, to understand what living outside of God would mean, not only to the creation itself (plants and animals), but to man and the rest of the Universe. Time allows for consequences and that's why we now live in four dimensions, time being one. And part of these consequences is againg and finally death.
ATLANTA — Georgia's school superintendent Thursday dropped plans to remove the word "evolution" (search) from the state's high school science curriculum.Source: HERE."I will recommend to the teacher teams that the word 'evolution' be put back in the curriculum," Kathy Cox said in a statement.
Cox said she originally wanted to replace "evolution" with the phrase "biological changes over time" to avoid controversy.
"Instead, a greater controversy ensued," she said.
The proposal drew widespread criticism. Former President Carter (search) said it exposed the state to nationwide ridicule.
The proposed change was included in more than 800 pages of draft revisions to the curriculum posted last month on the Department of Education's Web site. The changes are scheduled to go before the state Board of Education for a vote in May.
"It was the right thing to do," said Gov. Sonny Perdue, a Republican, who had said he thought Cox should drop the proposed change. "As public officials, we don't have the luxury of thinking out loud; I believe that's what she was doing."
House Education Committee Chairman Bob Holmes, a Democrat from Atlanta, said Cox had little choice considering the widespread criticism the plan received.
"I'm glad she was responsive to the outcry, both by scientists and other political leaders who felt this was something completely unneccessary," Holmes said.
Some religious conservatives applauded Cox's proposal as a step toward teaching creationism in schools, while others said it changed little, since the concept of evolution would still be taught.
Cox, a Republican elected in 2002, repeatedly referred to evolution as a negative buzzword and said the ban was proposed, in part, to alleviate pressure on teachers in socially conservative areas where parents object to its teaching.
Under her proposal, the concept of evolution would have still been taught, but the word would not be used in the classroom. The proposal would not have required schools to buy new textbooks omitting the word evolution and would not have prevented teachers from using the word in class.
Fascinating. Please continue...
Was the wind so mighty as to lay low the mountains of the Earth?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.