Look, it's evolving before our very eyes! The misssing link! I've documented evolution!
Posted on 08/10/2008 3:50:04 PM PDT by EveningStar
Last November, radio host Michael Medved was made a Senior Fellow at the anti-evolution “think tank” known as the Discovery Institute, and he has some rather interesting things to say about “intelligent design:”
(Excerpt) Read more at littlegreenfootballs.com ...
Do you understand what a family and genus classification are for biology? When you have evolution at that level - above species - then you have macro evolution.
One of the oldest debating shenanigans in the book - when you can’t answer the question, make up another question and assail that.
Evolution illustrates this truth about the world God placed us in: adaptation leads to survival.
The last 4,000 years has shown us the power and success of the Judeo-Christian ethic. Its commands are like established laws of physics. To wit, if you think you can get from the third floor to the sidewalk by jumping, you can, but the law of gravity ensures you pay a penalty. To wit, if we think we can indulge in immoral sexual values we can, but we pay a penalty. If we think we can indulge in envy and lust and avariciousness we can, but our moral fabric pays an ugly penalty, just like the guy who jumps in water gets wet.
From it we've taken the combined respect and responsibility ethic that has enabled free enterprise and Western Civilization. Clearly when humans adapt their behavior to Judeo-Christian teachings, they thrive. When they don't, they flounder.
To me, evolution IS intelligent design, and the bible is our Divine guide to survival.
The same can be said for evolutionists - no facts to support it. It is not science - it is an argument against God.
They most certainly do. Natural selection cannot account for the appearance of new species that did not previously exist. The argument is not about micro-evolution (natural selection within species), but transformations of species into new species that cannot breed with their ancestors (macro-evolution).
If you think there are no facts to support evolution you are so out of the argument that your opinion is less than worthless.
You can’t even refute an argument if you can’t acknowledge that there are facts in play.
Actually there is a powerful forensic tool. Organisms engineered by humans don't fit the nested hierarchy of common descent. This demonstrates that engneered things are likely to differ in a predictable way from evolved things.
that's a lie. Every ID supporter/creationist I have heard or read readily agrees that micro-evolution is true. There is no argument there. Macro-evolution is a whole different story.
BTW, Wikipedia is hardly an authoritative source for the definition of anything.
Look, it's evolving before our very eyes! The misssing link! I've documented evolution!
Quit, dude! The cultists will only say you’re misrepresenting their views!
Wikipedia is not an ultimate authority but they are a good starting point on non-political topics. However, check the other links at my post #28. They say the same thing.
Here is one of the links:
http://creationismunleashed.blogspot.com/
Might do you some good to actually read it.
“Do you understand what a family and genus classification are for biology? When you have evolution at that level - above species - then you have macro evolution.”
Are you saying that the spontaneous generation of life from non-life is not an example of macro-evolution?
Hunter112 asked the most relevant question I’ve seen in FR thus far. Not a wimpy, feeble, dance-around-the-issue offerings that doesn’t go anywhere. It gets right to the heart of the matter.
But let’s narrow the scope to three major religions, so that it can be treated in one post; the other thousands of religions fit in the broader context.
The concept of Messiah is not lost between Judaism and Christianity. It is at the root of both. Take away Messiah, you have no Judaism or Christianity. The only fundamental difference is: Christians believe the Messiah arrived in the person of Jesus Christ, and the Jews rejected him because he didn’t fit their preconception (and are still looking, albeit very passively). Mohamed came 600 years afterwards, so he’s not even in the running. As a bonus, if you studied Mohamed’s unsavory history, you will find that he wanted to become a prophet for the Jews, not having gotten the memo that Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection precluded any further need for prophets. Besides, he didn’t heal anyone, and he’s still in the grave.
So how can one reconcile all this mess?
Answer: The over 300 prophesies fulfilled by Jesus helps you choose within the open buffet of religions. Mohamed, Buddha, Shiva, and everyone else claiming to be deity couldn’t do that. Please don’t miss this: The real God of the Bible fulfilled a ton of prophesy in order to point humanity to Him so that He could save them (those who ultimately chose him). That is the faith aspect, but it’s not a blind faith. It’s a reasonable faith.
Lamentably, most choose to ignore them; which fulfills this prophesy by Peter:
—> 2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
—> 2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
—> 2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water
In other words, they are WILLINGLY ignorant of how God, through His word, provided a way to pay their sin debt. And they scoff at believers in Scripture in the process.
Another reason for the many religions is equally fundamental: there is a spiritual war going on, and it is very real. And very deadly.
Paul wrote to Christians:
—> Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
It begs the question: Is it possible that the demonic influence in this spiritual war is a major reason why people don’t accept Jesus (or they follow false gods) because they refuse to investigate for themselves, VERY SIMPLE prophesies that would otherwise settle the issue?
Paul affirms this in Scripture:
—> 2Co 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
In other words, unbelief is a product of supernatural blindness. Which begs the last question: How does one see if it is supernatural?
Once you make a decision for Jesus, the blindness is instantly and supernaturally lifted. Like a light bulb turned on that quenches darkness. There are many websites with all of the prophesies. You can check it out yourself, and you don’t have to have a degree. Or you can find a Bible believing pastor walk the dog with you. I pray the Lord shows unmerited favor towards those reading this, not having made a decision for Jesus (the Christ).
That is Intelligent Design in a nutshell. He designed a way to redeem everyone. But some have chosen to hitch their trailer to evolution (Psalm 14:1).
I love you guys. Grace to you.
On the contrary, for most scientific and factual (geography, physics, automobiles, the like) issues it tends to be quite definition.
But how about this definition from Merriam Webster's dictionary? Or how about this definition from a university? Both of which relate to macro evolution being evolution at the higher, genus and family levels. And not "life from non-life" like you contend.
The problem with anti-evolutionists is they refuse to accept scientific definitions for terms because it blows their argument out of the water.
Since you argue that macro evolution is NOT evolution at the genus or family level, I hereby define ID to be the theory that the Flying Spaghetti Monster dropping meatballs to create the Earth in the year 1 AD.
My definition is as rigorous as those you put forth; rantings of bloggers shouldn't be your basis for science. Unless, of course, your science doesn't hold up under scrutiny.
Yes. In fact, the theory of evolution does NOT address the origins of life, but how life diversified into the billions of species over the billions of years.
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.