Posted on 12/12/2007 6:04:34 AM PST by libstripper
Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life, just the origin of species.
You're about the billionth person to confuse abiogenesis with evolution.
wait for the article - these previews seldom do justice to the story
Me? Would I do that? Actually, not. I was simply pointing out to dmz that his point applies equally in both directions.
Anyway, water, under 53 atmospheres of pressure, naturally forms itself into lengthy double-helix molecules.
Irrelevant since there's no evidence that the early earth, whatever age you wish to attribute to it, had 53 atmospheres of pressure upon it.
Toss in some impurities and you've got DNA ~ squeezed into existence through universal forces.
Er, no. It's a bit more complex than that, and this still wouldn't explain the naturalistic formation of the "impurities" you'd need anywise.
Betcha' God can do that kind of thing.
He could also turn you into the Staypuff Marshmallow Man, but he didn't (at least to my knowledge).
You seem to think that because your brother may have turned into a horse theft, that that somehow reflects badly on how you led your life. We are all God’s children. Some turn out well some turn out not so well. Lucifer turned out badly and was cast out and took 1/3 of our brothers and sisters with him never to have the chance at physical bodies. We that are here ,while not perfect, did not rebel and therefore come to earth.
You're about the billionth person to confuse abiogenesis with evolution.
Nope, I'm just using the colloquial definition of "evolution" common in everyday parliance, which basically encompasses the idea of both the naturalistic origins or life as well as the naturalistic propagation of diversity. When I wish to speak of evolution in a specific scientific setting, then I will distinguish between the two. When speaking generally in a non-scientific forum, I will use the generally understood definition.
No, but the generally understood usage of "evolution", among a non-scientist audience, does. See #66.
Which, simply, is wrong. It's common in everyday parlance because most people know very little about science.
If you're a druid, I counsel you not to run against Huckabee in an election. You'll be outed!
I offer that advice as a fellow ASA vet."
Well, the white ones of us, at least. The black ones stayed neutral, and were punished by being incarnated as blacks. (Mormons really believed that, at least before it became politically delicate to do so).
The foundering begins.
Mr. Huckabee’s question is not an HONEST question.
This kind of BS might get Huckabee the Republican nomination...but then he’s going to get destroyed in the General Election because people are sick of this religious stuff.
There's actually one group (in Illinois?) that used to be the number 2 Mormon body in existence that actually did make the transformation over to conventional Christianity (sans the snakes of course).
Sometimes I think researchers into early Mormonism confound the pre-existent Church of the First Born (which even has a 1702 American founding date in Brownsville Texas) with Smith's followings.
I know that Mormons frequently make that mistake when I mention the COTFB, particularly the Apostolic Charismatic COTFB. It's not beyond belief that some of the first of Smith's followers came from COTFB since it had a large presence in that part of New York at the time. Some of the elements you mentioned clearly come right out of the traditionalist Scandinavian shamen's trick bag ~ and have more to do with Santa Claus, reindeer and toy making elves than anything else.
Personally I think it's best to stick to the last 100 years of Mormon public belief and skip over that old stuff. The authenticity of much of the oldest stuff supposedly associated with the early Mormons really isn't nailed down all that well.
Doesn't matter. Effective communication includes using language which your audience will understand. If you're discussing evolution in a non-scientific forum, it's best to use the colloquial definition until you ascertain for sure that your audience will follow more technical definitions.
I am absolutely repulsed by Huckabee. To me he is the second coming of Jimmy Carter—who also mentioned “Jesus” every two seconds and was a liberal masquerading as a conservative. If the GOP embraces this ass clown then we deserve to lose the White House.
Glenn Beck just stated that Mr. Huckabee does not now or ever will have his support!!!
Who are southern, gun owning, daisy dukes wearing, pick up driving, Marine Corps joining, whiskey drinking and on half a day Sunday, bible banging southrons supposed to have an affinity to?
-snip-
As a gun-owning, pick-up driving bible-banging Southron myself, I ask you not to characterize my brothers-in-arms in the United States Marine Corps as "daisy dukes wearing."
That would be the Navy and Air Force.
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.