...which somehow reminds me of the "six-fingered man" ;-)
Posted on 01/03/2006 12:16:26 PM PST by MRMEAN
It's one of the charges frequently tossed out by creationists, but they rarely follow up with anything resembling evidence.
Here's one. Can't remember which thread, but it was posted more than once. "Common ancestry is a fact."
BTW, I leave open the possibility for that phenomenon. But I also don't think it is small-minded to conclude that something else has put this all in motion. Paint me with a "creationist" brush if you want, but I find it just as dogmatic to shut down that notion without admitting it takes just as much faith to do so as those who don't.
It's one of the charges frequently tossed out by creationists, but they rarely follow up with anything resembling evidence.
Here's one. Can't remember which thread, but it was posted more than once. "Common ancestry is a fact."
BTW, I leave open the possibility for that phenomenon. But I also don't think it is small-minded to conclude that something else has put this all in motion. Paint me with a "creationist" brush if you want, but I find it just as dogmatic to shut down that notion without admitting it takes just as much faith to do so as those who don't.
BTW, I leave open the possibility for (common descent). But I also don't think it is small-minded to conclude that something else has put this all in motion. Paint me with a "creationist" brush if you want, but I find it just as dogmatic to shut down that notion without admitting it takes just as much faith to do so as those who don't.
You may conclude whatever you like. The problem comes when somebody tries to pass off their personal "conclusions" under the color of science. They aren't.
Nobody here says ID should never be mentioned, or never taught. We just say that it shouldn't be taught as science, since there's no objective evidence for it and its own proponents admit that in order for it to be considered "science" the word needs to be stretched so far as to include astrology.
Evolution doesn't require "just as much faith". It has evidence to support it. So much evidence, for that matter, that the proponents of ID accept evolution as fact (they only want to add a supernatural element on the beginning of it).
Nothing "dogmatic" in insisting that words mean things.
...which somehow reminds me of the "six-fingered man" ;-)
"Walt Disney did it 60 years ago in Fantasia."
The search for the Intelligent Designer is over! :)
LOL ;-)
I'll have to admit that I never saw Fantasia. I do have The Rite of Spring though on CD.
You selectively read, or missed my meaning. I am saying I pretty much believe in evolution theory. I am just saying that science runs for the hills when questioned on how did it all start. The dances are incredible.
You are mincing words between belief/conclude/evidence, etc. Yes, words mean things. I have a B.A. in communication. The communicative theory of reality really piqued my interest during my studiess. The evidence you treat as a sacrement is interpreted and processed differently by every single human being that receives the communication transmitting said evidence. That makes it real in varying degrees and never understood in the same way. It is just a construct.
That we don't have more acknowledgement of our true limited understanding and potential to ever understand the forces around us baffles my mind. It makes science a type of religion to me. I don't think you can do anything other than theorize it's not.
If that was your point, then I didn't miss it at all.
The Theory of Evolution doesn't address the origins of life any more than Gravitational theory is required to explain the origins of matter.
And for the record, I don't see anybody "running for the hills" when the subject comes up, other than when somebody tries to tie it into the ToE in order to attempt to imply that the ToE is somehow deficient. Most scientists have opinions as to how life started, but no full-blown theories.
That opening bassoon solo makes most bassoonists I know cringe. But Fantasia takes it right from primordial ooze through. Amazing for Disney and the times.
Your question regarding bisexuality is a good one. Unfortunately a good answer would be textbook size but let me give it a shot.
First step might be to clarify that some features exist not because they are so perfect but because there is no particular evolutionary pressure against them.
Second the majority of living things are not sexual in our male/female sense. One organism has 28,000 mating strains. Others change gender according to environmental factors like temperature. Some insects can produce tens of female-female generations before any male involvement occurs. Plants have something called alternation of generations. One has all of its chromomsomes in a linked ring, reducing variability to a minimum.
Each of these adaptations continues to exist only because it works or, at least, does not significantly harm the reproductive effectiveness of the organism involved.
Tomorrow I'll try to get you some links if you think that'll be useful.
[errors in math class]
I remember once in an algebra class:
question: list all the groups of order 91
next session: Well, unfortunately, a lot of you thought 91 is a prime number...
They look pretty good to me, all artists have a few unique abstract works. :)
I like how evolutionists want to start out with a creature evolving into something else. Show me how a single cell organism evolves into either one of those and then tell me where that single came from in the first place?
Then tell me if it did evolve into that, did the creator create that single cell specifically designed to morph into that over time?
So then their was an intelligent creator? The one that created the first spark of life that may or may not have had successive minimal evolutions over time?
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.