.
Posted on 04/05/2006 7:26:24 PM PDT by MC Miker G
Evolution by learning? Wouldn't that be a miracle? Probably just a slip of the tongue.
Oh? Which one is missing?
These people just don't get it...... I suppose that a whale like creature evolved into an elephant. I always wondered what kind of fish was my ancestor....:))) lolol...../sarc
So the missing link you just posted looks alot like most men from Southern Italy. Maybe he really is my predecessor?
Well .. I believe the Bible is the truth about creation.
Straw man arguments serve no one.
It would be more useful dialogue to imagine how design might drive evolution, or show how it could not, than to simply reduce the others position to its stupidest possible form.
If it's science and not ideology you are defending, that is.
Wouldn't that be an interesting development: if evolutionary scientists and their apologists were someday no longer compelled to only look at, and present, the evidence from one ideological position?
It is not, and has never been, the job of "science" to validate or invalidate your faith. If any religious belief system were backed up by factual evidence, we wouldn't have dozens of religions and thousands of sects.
By definition.
It appears that one went right over your head, as your response has nothing whatsoever to do with my comment.
carry on
LOL!
Science and religion are not the same. They do not have the same goals. Contrary to the paranoid and faithless, the goal of science isn't to disprove religion.
Carry on.
Oh? Which one is missing?
The last one is missing again (the one they just found), after they find the last "missing link" proving evolution somehow the puzzle falls apart again and they keep looking for another last "missing link". After they find the last current "missing link", the previous "missing link" is not the last missing link anymore but just a "missing link".
So actually we always have thousand of "missing links" but only one "last missing link".
Do you get it now ma friend?
+
What, again? Look, I generally accept the ToE, but articles like this--in the Guardian of all places--are just hyperbolic fluff. This discovery doesn't "solve" anything. It's just another link in an infinitely long chain.
My point was, using their standard, they could not attack the silly straw man. That shows that their standard is not worthwhile.
Now appealing to the Bible as inerrant is a different approach, but has its own problems. The problems are: Dinosaurs are not in the Bible, so they don't and didn't exist. For that matter, the value of pi in the bible (in Kings, based on the diameter and circumference of a sacrificial vessel) is 3. If that is good enough for you, and what you do, you are welcome to it. It does not suffice for me.
If I was king, I would allow people to suffer the consequences of their beliefs. Those who do not believe in evolution would not be eligible to products of biological knowledge.
No vaccines, no medicines developed by controlled breeding, no grain from genetically modified plants, no pork from pigs (which now take 6 months to mature, instead of the 6 years only 500 years ago.
No footballs for the Orthodox Jews (that pigskin, you know).
Well, it is a good thing that I am not king, no?
I then relent. It is not their kids who refuse knowledge, and their kids should not pay.
I really think you are still missing my point. Not trying to be snarky. An apologist, in this venue more likely a non-scientist, is merely someone who argues their case for them.
For the record, I am a believer in Evolution, as is my Church. I just don't get the (yes) ideological prejudice against any other possible change agent other than random mutation and natural selection (which the fossil record and the microbiological evidence is necessarily agnostic about) you can even leave my Creator out of it. When people get SO steamed/condescending/strawman tilting about any issue it sure seems ideological to me.
This whole thread is about a fish with legs that branched away from the fish that developed lungs. Now I could be wrong, but it seems to me there is a problem (or at least an opportunity to explore here, unless you insist we don't). How did the lungs and the legs get put back in the same bucket? & if they could just simply(ha!) evolve the same features in parallel, couldn't that possibly suggest to a rational man that they might have shared a blueprint? And since some of the early fish in that immediate group (coelacanths) had that six fin thing going on how come there are no six legged hexapod fossils or hexadogs for that matter. Why couldn't they have evolved in parallel like the other divergent forks?
Glad to hear scientists don't have opinions though. It is comforting to imagine them all agreeing all the time. Would that we freepers could all be so fuzzy.
"Those who do not believe in evolution would not be eligible to products of biological knowledge. "
And those that do not believe in a higher power would not be eligible for what religion has developed?
Charity, Philanthropy, Self-sacrifice, Peace, Loving one's neighbor, the first Universities, the Arts.
I think I'd take the trade.
Actually -science can not prove or disprove 'religion'; although some 'scientists' may pretend and go through the motions...
Science deals with the physical e.g. real links versus the religious faithful metaphysical e.g. missing links...
LOL
In your post #36, you speak about problems in the Bible, and mention Dinosaurs not being in the Bible... many anti-evos, have come up with some rather creative explanations for Dinosaurs...one explanation they offer, is that all those dinosaur bones, that have been found for all these years, are not really fossils, left there by long dead dinosaurs, but are rather 'fake' fossils left in place by the Devil, so as to confuse and mislead men...another explantion offered is that those 'fake' fossils were put there on purpose by God, as a sort of 'test' or 'joke' on mankind...and another explanation offered is that dinosaurs really did exist, as evidenced by Gods description of the Leviathan in the book of Job...and one another explanation they offer is that dinosaurs did exist, but existed while living alongside of modern man...I suppose there are any variety of other 'dinosaur' explanations out there...
I actually took the time to watch a little 1/2 program on the Creation Network, as they were going to discuss this very thing...the lecturer, invites us to 'take a wee walk', into history...what he presents are numerous drawings from past civiizations, with drawings of what he claims are actual drawings of dinosaurs, that lived alongside of man...he even claims they caught one, as a baby, and kept it locked in a cage of sorts...how he got to this is something I cannot fathom...
He also claims that many of the 'tales' from the past, are about actual dinosaurs...the main 'tale' he speaks about is Beowulf...he states, this is no fairy tale, but an actual reporting of a battle with a real dinosaur...and goes on to inform us, that many tales from the past, are actual historical reportings of modern mans encounters with real life dinosaurs...
Not saying that I believe any of this...just reporting of what I have been told by different anti-evos, and saw on the 'Creation Network'...(folks really do believe this stuff)
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.