“No “faith” necessary in the least.”(to believe macro-evolution) You humor me. I’ve got a bridge that evolved in my back yard, would you like to buy it?
“When can we interview him or her?”(God our creator) You’ll get your chance. However the meeting won’t go well for many.
My kid eats nylon too. He must be more evolved than most.
“Explanations are ruled out because they don’t work, they don’t match the evidence or they fail upon experimental testing” Amen! brother. That is why I still don’t have faith in the theory of macro-evolution. The theory of evolution and unintelligent chance design origin is one of the largest all encompassing theories and yet still has produced no useful technology that wouldn’t have come about without it. It is a barren theory! It doesn’t produce technology because it is either false or not understood correctly by its adherents. What useful technology or advancement is a direct result of this age old theory? You got nothing buddy! And don’t make me list the ungodly atrocities committed by those who’ve tried to practice their evolution.
“there’s not a single thing that was being taught thirty years ago that is now “known to be impossible”. I’m sure even you know you’re wrong here since you follow this closely. How about minerals in a sunny primordial swamp forming amino acids forming proteins forming genes forming DNA forming living single celled organisms capable of reproducing themselves into higher life forms. Later I was told that since UV light breaks down the building blocks it could have only happened underground and life came up through a geyser fully formed and ready to meet the world. still later your experts tell me life could not have evolved on our hot planet but was instead brought here frozen on an Icy comet. Can hardly wait for the next version. It is amusing.
(macro-evolution)”it’s not taught as dogma” I kind of got the sense from you writing that you wanted me to accept a theory as settled and vetted like one of the laws. I get a sense that if you were my teacher and I did not believe the theory to be true and answered on the test accordingly, I wouldn’t be given an A+. And when you are required to answer in accordance with a belief in a theory that is teaching it as dogma. Nobody ever required me to give examples proving Heisenberg’s uncertainty theory on a test. Nor have I ever been harangued for not believing it.
“Neither creationism nor “Intelligent Design” are scientific theories. They’re loose hypotheses” So evolution is in some theoretical origin hierarchy above my view, huh! .... Bite me, you heathen. Go blow a peppered moth out your a$$. My view was sealed by the all knowing God before the foundation of the universe, written down for mankind thousands of years before I was born and has never needed to change based upon recent findings. Throughout church history those who have tried to meld the Bible with contemporary theories opposed to the narrative have always looked foolish when those opposing theories have gone out of vogue. As for your theory....This too shall pass.
"So what'cha got? Be specific." If you've been studying this as long as you claim, you already know what I got. But so as not to write a book here, much can be found at answersingenesis.org As for just a few of the things I've got: irreducible complexity, Second Law of Thermodynamics, cases of statistical improbability too numerous to count, absence of transitional forms in the fossil record, evidences of catastrophism not traditional evolutionary uniforitarianism, rate of stellar decay, shortages of accumulated meteoritic dust, shortage of helium in our atmosphere, sea-floor sediment accumulation, lack of vestigial organs, and much much more than I can recall. I probably don't follow this as much as you do since my view is static not a constant variable like yours. But instead of asking you to address all of that I'll give you a slow pitch and ask you to describe how the current belief by evolution believing genetic researchers that we all descended from a most recent common ancestor pegged at 2000-5000 years ago fits with our respective theories. I suspect once again I'll be seeing the historical version of evolution modified to allow for the new finding while my view remains yet unchanged. Via Con Dios Brother.
Please post some evidence for the statement that "we all descended from a most recent common ancestor pegged at 2000-5000 years ago."
And those flood sediments date from various times and places during the 4.5 billion year age of the earth. That just proves that there is water, not that there was one flood.
Noah's flood is placed very close to 4350 years ago by biblical scholars. You need to come up with a global flood at that date, not an ocean bottom 500 million years earlier and another one 750 million years earlier, etc.
And a flood at this date will come as a great surprise to the Egyptians (they failed to record a flood about then and just kept on building pyramids and the like).
And how do you explain genetic continuity from before to after that date in North America? A 10,000+ year old individual found in a cave in southern Alaska has living lineal descendants all along the west coasts of North and South America. No break in the mtDNA pattern and replacement by Noah's DNA.
The scientific evidence says there was no global flood at the appointed time, some 4350 years ago. Even the early creationist geologists finally gave up by about 1830.
Bite me, you heathen. Go blow a peppered moth out your a$$.
I'm sure you win a lot of arguments with that line of reasoning.