Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Discontinuity of Life (creation, not evolution, explains life's discontinuities)
Answers Magazine ^ | Kurt Wise, Ph.D.

Posted on 06/07/2009 3:27:11 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

Our Creator placed enough discontinuity in just the right places, showing us that no natural process could have generated such a diverse creation...

(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholic; christian; creation; darwincultexposed; evolution; evoreligionexposed; goodgodimnuts; intelligentdesign; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

1 posted on 06/07/2009 3:27:12 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

That one’s funnier than most, but not your funniest to date.


2 posted on 06/07/2009 3:31:03 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny (ALSO SPRACH ZEROTHUSTRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Isn’t it odd that the author does not cite any actual experiments or data to back up his assertions?

Could that be due to the fact that there is absolutely no empirical evidence to support his pseudoscientific claim?


3 posted on 06/07/2009 3:38:04 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

You realize that it’s things like this that make it hard for many people to vote as conservatives, even people who are, in fact, mostly conservative. They’ve been falsely led to believe — by the lying leftist media — that in order to be a conservative you have to accept ideas like “Creation Science”.

Articles like this have only one effect: make the media’s false case appear true.

Clear thinking independents, who are in fact conservative on most issues, say to themselves, well I guess I’m conservative but I can’t go along with a bunch of right wing nut cases.

I truly wish there was a way to define conservatism in such a way as to completely leave out any discussion of evolution or creationism. Frankly, I don’t give a darn about that discussion. Our country is going down the toilet and the left is flushing the handle and it’s “ideas” like this one that is handing more and more power to the left.

I want to save our country, not win some stupid argument one way or another about “life’s discontinuities”.

(And for the record, I think “Creation Science” is hogwash and I’ll match my conservatism, my true, pro-US-constitution, pro-America, pro-FreeMarket, pro-FreeSpeech, pro-2ndAmendment conservatism against any so-called Christians pushing this Creationist crap.)


4 posted on 06/07/2009 3:39:40 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I reached my hands inside his body & ever so gently lifted out his lungs. With the tip of my finger, I traced the blood vessels as they entered in & out of the cavity organs. I saw the muscles, tendons, & ligaments, as well as bone & tissue.

My eyes filled with tears as I looked upon the complex beauty inside a human being...the beauty that is life giving & only God given.

There is ONLY the Creator!


5 posted on 06/07/2009 3:44:48 PM PDT by Atom Smasher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

You sound just like a squishy, country club Republican. Close to half of the country believes “God created man in pretty much in his present form at one time in the last 10,000 years.” These people are one of the main pillars of the Reagan Coalition. To write them off is to write off the Republic Party.


6 posted on 06/07/2009 3:46:19 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; metmom; Alamo-Girl; betty boop; GourmetDan; MrB; valkyry1; DaveLoneRanger; ...

Ping!


7 posted on 06/07/2009 4:09:14 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
Thanks for being a responsible conservative.

Where is your proof of your belief? The Darwin fraud that has been going on for a very brief period of time. LOL!!!

Yes religion once claimed a flat earth. This has been proven wrong.

Where is your proof of Life springing from inert matter? Or for that matter where is your proof of inert matter springing from nothing?

In an infinitely old universe.... yadda yadda yadda...... is it not also possible a hyper intelligent multidimesional eternal super being evolved that created this universe? How would you know?

8 posted on 06/07/2009 4:09:35 PM PDT by rawcatslyentist (<P><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajsov1M4h50"> Thank You Satan 1:50</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

==Yes religion once claimed a flat earth.

While I see your heart is in the right place, you might want to read the following before repeating the “religion once claimed a flat earth” canard again:

http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/97/cm9711.html

All the best—GGG


9 posted on 06/07/2009 4:17:17 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“If all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate.” ~ Kurt Wise Ph.D.

Absolutely no evidence of any bias, or agenda by this author just review the data and see where it leads.


10 posted on 06/07/2009 4:19:57 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
“(And for the record, I think “Creation Science” is hogwash and I’ll match my conservatism, my true, pro-US-constitution, pro-America, pro-FreeMarket, pro-FreeSpeech, pro-2ndAmendment conservatism against any so-called Christians pushing this Creationist crap.)”

You came here to say that? Why? To establish your bona fides? For whom?

Be careful, Your “true, pro,pro,pro,pro,against” rep might be tarnished by posting here.

11 posted on 06/07/2009 4:23:33 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

[[Where is your proof of Life springing from inert matter?

Or for that matter where is your proof of inert matter springing from nothing?]]

“It is no valid objection that science as yet throws no light on the far higher problem of the essence or origin of life” (Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species. 6th edition, 1882. p. 421).


12 posted on 06/07/2009 4:27:12 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
(And for the record, I think “Creation Science” is hogwash and I’ll match my conservatism, my true, pro-US-constitution, pro-America, pro-FreeMarket, pro-FreeSpeech, pro-2ndAmendment conservatism against any so-called Christians pushing this Creationist crap.) - samtheman

Well said.

13 posted on 06/07/2009 4:29:20 PM PDT by Pistolshot (The Soap-box, The Ballot-box, The Jury-box, And The Cartridge-Box ...we are past 2 of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
>"“It is no valid objection that science as yet throws no light on the far higher problem of the essence or origin of life”

So Darwin plugs his fingers in his ears and goes "la la la la".

Way to prove yer belief system.

14 posted on 06/07/2009 4:36:00 PM PDT by rawcatslyentist (<P><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajsov1M4h50"> Thank You Satan 1:50</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Close to half of the country believes “God created man in pretty much in his present form at one time in the last 10,000 years.” These people are one of the main pillars of the Reagan Coalition. To write them off is to write off the Republic Party.

Half of those believers are welded-on Demoncrats who are never going to vote Republican.

At best the issue is a wash, at worst you are getting atheist conservatives to not vote.

15 posted on 06/07/2009 4:37:37 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (a competent small government conservative is good enough for government work)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
The Darwin fraud that has been going on for a very brief period of time...

Where is your proof of Life springing from inert matter?

Darwin's theory of Descent Through Natural Selection said nothing about the origins of life.
16 posted on 06/07/2009 4:44:27 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

In fact what he his saying is that the origin of life is not part of his Evolutionary theory.

His theory is regarding how life has changed since its inception.

However not knowing that is understandable since that is a major misconception that is spread by the creationist.


17 posted on 06/07/2009 4:46:33 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Don’t get me wrong, there are many good conservative Christians and I support them 1000%, even when I disagree with them on some issues.

And I also believe that the US was founded on essentially Christian principles and that to deny that connection is to subvert one of the pillars that makes Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness possible in this great country of ours.

But I think it’s important to also realize that right now in our history this issue of Creation vs Evolution isn’t that important, not compared with keeping our right to own guns, our right to have citizens-only vote in our elections, our right to free speech, our right to private property and the fruits of our own labor, our right to the Republic that was founded according to the US Constitution. These are the fundamental rights and to risk all of those to have some silly argument about “Life’s Discontinuities” and in doing so convince a lot of otherwise level-headed independents that the leftist media is correct when it says all conservatives are whackos... to risk that... to risk it all... over this... it is wrong.

It’s just plain wrong.


18 posted on 06/07/2009 4:52:47 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
You sound just like a squishy, country club Republican.
That's such BS.

To define conservatism based on belief in Creation Science (which, by the way, is much younger than Darwinism) is just so much BS.

I've listed the principles of a true conservative and I dare you to say otherwise. A "country club Republican" does NOT believe in ANY of the things on my list. Not a single one of them. And you know it.

So please, don't give us your impression of a leftist media liar who says, in effect, that all conservatives are born-again creationists.

Please.

19 posted on 06/07/2009 4:55:50 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
And for that matter, there are plenty of Christians who aren't conservative, or at least not very conservative. And I'm not talking about the obvious leftist hags who follow things like "liberation theology". I'm talking about people like Huckabee and many of his supporters. They have one single "conservative" credential... their believe in "creation science".

And in the meantime they support every socialist scheme that comes down the pike.

Judge a conservative by the conservative POLITICAL principles s/he holds, not some arbitrary "creation science" yardstick.

20 posted on 06/07/2009 4:58:15 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

For all the “actual experiments or data,” that you’ll ever need to back up the case against evolution, go to www.reasonstobelieve.org, and check the articles and books, by Fuz Rana. The theory of evolution has been mathematically and experimentally debunked to the point that it is no longer anything but a fading ideology. Just bear in mind debunking evolution is not the same thing as promoting young earth creationism.

One of the most vital controversies going on right now in cosmology is not between evolutionists and creationists, but between old earth creationists and young earth creationists. Old earth creationists take an “intelligent design” approach to bio-diversity, supporting classic Big Bang cosmology, whereas young earth creationists take the 6-days of creation/6000 year-old cosmos approach. Young earth creationists believe Big Bang cosmology compromises Scripture, whereas the folks at Reason to Believe have proven conclusively that it does not.


21 posted on 06/07/2009 5:39:20 PM PDT by Arsee (It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

“But I think it’s important to also realize that right now in our history this issue of Creation vs Evolution isn’t that important, not compared with keeping our right to own guns, our right to have citizens-only vote in our elections, our right to free speech, our right to private property and the fruits of our own labor, our right to the Republic that was founded according to the US Constitution.”

Fact is, Samtheman, the evolution/creation debate is THE most vital issue in maintining all those rights you enumerate. The theory of evolution is the very foundation of the ideology, in fact IS the ideology that seeks to rob us of those rights. That is why the controversy I mention in my previous reply is as vital as it is. Evolutionists use young-earth creationism as the THE model of creationism in their war against God and Christianity.

It is vital that evolutionism be defeated. It is the foundation of Socialism, Communism, and Fascism, in fact, all totalitarianism. And this is why people must understand that there is another model of creation that is supportable and testable under the classic laws of cosmology, AND that the theory of evolution has been mathematically and emperically proven to be scientific waste.


22 posted on 06/07/2009 5:39:21 PM PDT by Arsee (It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy; samtheman; count-your-change; Arsee
==Half of those believers are welded-on Demoncrats who are never going to vote Republican.

Complete balderdash. The born again/evangelicals (read: Young Earth Creationists) overwhelmingly went for McCain, even though there really wasn't much for them to be excited about. It is these absolutely crucial voters who Oztrich Boy and Samtheman want to alienate in favor of fickle independents, and liberals who only vote Republican when they sense the Left has gone too far (and even then, only when a Ronald Reagan comes along!):

The Evangelical Electoral Map

Obama didn't win a majority of evangelicals in any state. No surprise there. But there was some question about whether Obama's support with evangelicals would draw one out of three evangelical voters (as Clinton did in 1992) or one out of four (as Kerry did in 2004). The answer is closer to the latter: Exit polls say 26 percent of American voters called themselves evangelical or born-again Christians, and of these, 74 percent voted for McCain, with 25 percent voting for Obama. (Another measure put the percentage of evangelicals at 23 percent, with 73 percent voting for McCain, 26 percent for Obama.)

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctpolitics/2008/11/the_evangelical.html

23 posted on 06/07/2009 5:50:04 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Arsee

OK if “The theory of evolution has been mathematically and experimentally debunked”

Then you would not mind reviewing and responding to this:

Variations.

1. Variations exist with in all populations.

2. Some of that variation is heritable

3. Base pair sequences are encoded in a set of self-replicating molecules that form templates for making proteins.

4. Combinations of genes that did not previously exist may arise via “Crossing over”
During meiosis, which alters the sequence of base pair on a chromosome.

5. Copying errors (mutations) can also arise; because the self-replication process is of imperfect (although high) fidelity; these mutations also increase the range of combinations of alleles in a gene pool.

6. These recombination’s and errors produce a tendency for successfully increasing genetic divergence radiating outward from the initial state of the population.

Selection

7. Some of the heritable variations have an influence on the number of offspring able to reproduce in turn, including traits that affect mating opportunities, or survival prospects for either individuals or close relatives.

8. Characteristics which tend to increase the number of an organisms offspring that are able to reproduce in turn; tend to become more common over generations and diffuse through a population; those that tend to decrease such prospects tend to become rarer.

9. Unrepresentative samplings which alters the relative frequency of the various alleles can occur in populations for reasons other than survival / reproduction advantages, a process known as” genetic drift”.

10. Migration of individuals from one population to another can lead to changes in the relative frequencies of alleles in the “recipient” population.

Speciation

11. Populations of a single species that live in different environments are exposed to different conditions that can “favor” different traits. These environmental differences can cause two populations to accumulate divergent suites of characteristics.

12. A new species develops (often initiated by temporary environmental factors such as a period of geographic isolation) when sub-population acquires characteristics, which promote or guarantee reproductive isolation from the alternative population, limiting the diffusion of variations thereafter.

Sufficiency

13. The combination of these effects tends to increase diversity of initially similar life forms over time.

14. Over the time frame from the late Hadean to the present, this becomes sufficient to explain both the diversity within and similarities between the forms of life observed on earth, including both living forms directly observed in the present, and extinct form indirectly observed from the fossil record.

That’s what Evolution IS! If you have a problem with Evolution you have a problem with one or more of these fourteen points. Which one is it? Provide any evidence of any of the points that are incorrect.

While the origins of life are a question of interest to evolutionary biologist and frequently studied in conjunction with researchers from other fields such as geochemistry and organic chemistry, the core of evolutionary theory itself does not rest on a foundation that requires any knowledge about the origins of life on earth. It is primarily concerned with the change and diversification of life after the origins of the earliest living things – although there is not yet a consensus as to how to distinguish “living” from “non-living”

Evolution does NOT indicate that all variations are explained this way; that there are no other mechanisms by which variations may arise, be passed, or become prevalent; or that there is no other way life diversifies. Any and all of these may be valid topics for conjecture…but without evidence, they aren’t science.

Other peoples opinions presented in the form of quotes are not evidence against the theory of evolution. They are merely opinions, and all people have opinions, which turn out to be false. So lets stick to the facts.


24 posted on 06/07/2009 6:04:14 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
” ....convince a lot of otherwise level-headed independents that the leftist media is correct when it says all conservatives are whackos....”

Oh please! I agree with some things “Creationists” say, some not, but in no case would I worry about what supposedly ‘level headed independents’ think if they pay attention to a leftist media or would I worry about being contaminated by catch-all labels.

If the issue of Creation vs. Evolution isn't that important why are you commenting on it instead of just ignoring the whole question?

“.... to risk that... to risk it all... over this... it is wrong......It is just plain wrong”.

Arguing, debating the account of creation and evolution risks you losing your rights?

Don't offend those in the Temple of Darwin and maybe they'll let you keep your rights? Then again the Romans may come and take away your place and your nation.

25 posted on 06/07/2009 6:08:56 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“The born again/evangelicals (read: Young Earth Creationists) overwhelmingly went for McCain, even though there really wasn’t much for them to be excited about.”

Born again/evangelicals are not synonymous with Young Earth Creationists. The only reason Young Earth Creationists are on the media radar screen at all is because the leftwing media and God haters in general reflexively throw them up as representative of Christianity to debunk Christianity. The Holy Bible is the bible of intelligent design/old earth creationism.

Ironically, the greatest enemies of Big Bang cosmology in its beginning were atheists and evolutionists. Evolution as posited by Darwin was dependant upon a steady-state universe stretching back into eternity to account for the time necessary for the bio-diversity that exists today to have evolved. Also, Big Bang cosmology proved the fundemental emperical fact of Genesis, a finite beginning of the space-time manifold. This caused no small furor.


26 posted on 06/07/2009 6:27:16 PM PDT by Arsee (It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Arsee

I beg to differ. The reason why the biblical creationists are on the MSM/ATHEIST/OLD EARTH COMPRISER radar screen is because they all know that biblical creationists are the MAIN ENEMY of the wisdom of this world.


27 posted on 06/07/2009 6:46:31 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Arsee

It is not an eternity as point number 14 that I posted to you states:

“Over the time frame from the late Hadean to the present, this becomes sufficient to explain both the diversity within and similarities between the forms of life observed on earth, including both living forms directly observed in the present, and extinct form indirectly observed from the fossil record.”


28 posted on 06/07/2009 6:48:38 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; Jim Robinson; samtheman

>>> but in no case would I worry about what supposedly ‘level headed independents’ think if they pay attention to a leftist media or would I worry about being contaminated by catch-all labels.

It’s not the bogeyman “leftist media”. All anybody has to do is look at such celebrations of ignorance as this and the other endlessly repetitive and pointless threads.

On this board legitimate science is pushed into “CHAT”. But this blog-spam is permitted precedence as “NEWS”. Every such article makes us all look like flat-earth fools and taliban’ish clowns. Don’t blame Chris Matthews and friends for seeing the obvious. Every sneer these sermons earn FreeRepublic is legitimate and self-inflicted.


29 posted on 06/07/2009 7:04:33 PM PDT by tlb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tlb

Tell me, tlb, why did you not include me in your ping list? After all, I’m the one who posted this thread. Are you afraid to go head to head with someone who regularly eats Evos like you for lunch, or was it a mere oversight?


30 posted on 06/07/2009 7:12:28 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tlb

PS Did you miss this upsteam, or do you agree with OB et all that these people need to be marginalized and purged from the party?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2266797/posts?page=23#23


31 posted on 06/07/2009 7:20:07 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Feel the power of the FORCE, Luke! You can make those Atheist Conservatives stop voting.”
O B Gone.


32 posted on 06/07/2009 7:24:33 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

You lost me on that one. Do you really think I want all atheists purged from the party? Far from it. I welcome atheists who welcome me, and vice versa. These are the people (on both sides) who say, “we disagree on origins, but we agree on all these other core conservative principles...and I’ll be damned if anyone is going to shut them up!”


33 posted on 06/07/2009 7:42:40 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

If you eat evos for lunch then why don’t you take a look at this link and respond to their challenge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkED8cWRu4Q&feature=player_embedded

With the overwhelming mountain of evidence you claim to have it should be a piece of cake.

Simply respond to their challenge, and then go and accept your Noble prize.


34 posted on 06/07/2009 7:44:20 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tlb

“On this board legitimate science is pushed into “CHAT”. But this blog-spam is permitted precedence as “NEWS”. Every such article makes us all look like flat-earth fools and taliban’ish clowns. Don’t blame Chris Matthews and friends for seeing the obvious. Every sneer these sermons earn FreeRepublic is legitimate and self-inflicted.”

Legitimate science will survive “CHAT” but it doesn’t appear that is the problem, rather, it’s your perception of your image in the eyes of ‘Chris Matthews and friends’:

“Every such article makes us all look like flat-earth fools and taliban’ish clowns”.

That’s o.k., not all of us see ourselves through the eyes of Matthews and friends (or care what they see) nor do we feel deserving of anyone’s sneers. Yours included.


35 posted on 06/07/2009 7:51:44 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

Like I said, dig down deep and find the intestinal fortitude to post your weak (and barrowed) evo argument in your own thread, and I will be (not to mention my ping list!) be happy to engage. But instead, after repeated requests to start your own thread, you still choose to post your (copied) list only on threads that are not your own. What’s the matter, afraid to be the center of attention, Ira????


36 posted on 06/07/2009 7:52:17 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

That link was not to my list, which of today not one person has even tried to respond to even one of the fourteen points.

That link was a response to your assertion that you “eat evos for lunch”.

If that is true then that challenge should be quick and easy for you. Next stop the Noble prize.

Are you not up to the challenge?


37 posted on 06/07/2009 8:10:43 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

Like I said, Ira...feel free to post your list, your link, or whatever else you think will keep the HMS Beagle afloat a little longer, and I’m sure the creationists and IDers amonst us would be glad to respond. I have challenged you to post your own thread repeatedly...why do you shy away from such manly endeavors? Could it be that you are what CS Lewis describes as a man without a chest???


38 posted on 06/07/2009 8:15:39 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I know but recall this from #15, “At best the issue is a wash, at worst you are getting atheist conservatives to not vote.” O.B. (p.s., that ain't Old Ben)

Need I explain more? No? O.K., I will. How would you get atheist conservatives to refrain from voting even if you wanted to? You write pretty well, but by what mystical power....

39 posted on 06/07/2009 8:18:36 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

I’m still not following you. I could never stop atheists from voting, nor would I want to. I vote for whatever party is not embarrassed by me, and the millions of other voters who share my faith (to include my biblical creationist beliefs). That means we get to be exactly who we are, and those who are committed to largely the same principles, but disagree re: origins, are not threatened by our presence. If they are, and they want to marginalize or purge us from the party, then it’s on!


40 posted on 06/07/2009 8:27:23 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To read later.


41 posted on 06/07/2009 8:34:26 PM PDT by Hepsabeth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“I’m still not following you. I could never stop atheists from voting, nor would I want to.”

Put your shirt back on, that was the point but at times my humor is subtle, very subtle. You kinda gotta wait for it.


42 posted on 06/07/2009 8:36:54 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Ooops! I didn’t realize what you were referring to...I finally went back and reread #15. Boy do I feel silly...it’s not like you didn’t give me a hint!


43 posted on 06/07/2009 8:40:42 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I have noticed a common denominator with nearly all creationists that I have encountered. That is they are full of hyperbole, and have absolute proof that will discredit the theory of evolution. That is until they are directly challenged, and then they start with the name-calling, changing the subject, and avoidance

It is not about me, or my self-worth. I have no problems with that. It is about you supporting this “mountain of evidence” that you claim to have, and you supporting your assertion in this thread that you “eat evos for lunch”.

The challenge in that link is simple; it is to name a gene that shows no sign of an evolutionary origin.

The specifics are in the link.

Looking forward to your prompt reply


44 posted on 06/07/2009 8:50:45 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

All I know is you are chicken to post your own threads. I post my own Creation and ID threads almost every day. What’s stopping you?


45 posted on 06/07/2009 8:55:03 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

1-5: Basic genetics, nothing to do with evolution,

6: These recombination’s and errors produce unsuccessful offspring at best, if they produce anything.

Where is your evidence for “recombination’s (sic)and errors produc[ing] a tendency for successfully increasing genetic divergence?” This is nothing but an unsupportable conclusion.

Remember, we’re talking about speciation. And you’re demanding evidence of me. Where’s your evidence of any species “evolving into” another species? There is no evidence whatsoever. Just because all life forms begin from a similar template does not prove they evolved from a common ancestor. If anything it proves they were created by an intelligent designer. By the way, ever wonder were the information contained in those DNA molecules came from? Only information can produce information. It can’t “evolve” from nothing.

13. The combination of these effects tends to increase diversity of initially similar life forms over time.

More conclusions without evidence - approaching tautology: bio-diversity happened because of bio-diversity.

14. Over the time frame from the late Hadean to the present, this becomes sufficient to explain both the diversity within and similarities between the forms of life observed on earth, including both living forms directly observed in the present, and extinct form indirectly observed from the fossil record.

Again another unsupported conclusion. How did your points 1-13 BECOME sufficient to explain anything, much less the diversity within and similarities between the form of life observed on earth-at any time? How do your points 1-13 explain the Cambrian Explosion when virtually all of the phyla came into existence over a period of 70 million years. You’re demanding evidence from me. Where’s your evidence? What you have here is a page out of a high school biology textbook, which is so out of date it is embarrassing. It reminds me of the textbook graphic of the different levels of embryonic and fetal development. It turned out to be a complete hoax just like Piltdown Man. Both are in high school textbooks to this day.

The core of evolutionary theory itself does not rest on a foundation that requires any knowledge about the origins of life on earth. It is primarily concerned with the change and diversification of life after the origins of the earliest living things – although there is not yet a consensus as to how to distinguish “living” from “non-living”

This is YOUR opinion; also a rhetorical device used by evolution apologists to deflect the inevitable question: Life evolved HOW and from WHAT? You establish YOUR standards for this discussion by excluding opinions, yet you end with YOUR opinion attempting to pin me down as to what’s relevant to this discussion. The question of origins is THE question in an analysis of the validity of evolution. Knowledge about, “the orignins of life on earth” is THE core of evolutionary theory. If you posit a theory of evolution of diversity of species by natural selection through “variation” of genetic information, you must be able to extrapolate backwards to the origin of life to have a viable, testable theory. In fact that’s the whole idea: Z came from Y, which came from X, and so forth. Sooner or later you’re going to be faced with the question of, “Where’s the soup?”

I hate to break this off, but I have to retire in order to get up in time tomorrow to spend a couple of hours with the Creator.


46 posted on 06/07/2009 9:01:17 PM PDT by Arsee (It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“I beg to differ. The reason why the biblical creationists are on the MSM/ATHEIST/OLD EARTH COMPRISER radar screen is because they all know that biblical creationists are the MAIN ENEMY of the wisdom of this world.”

And I would beg to differ with you. I’d say the MAIN ENEMEY of the wisdom of this world is liberals.


47 posted on 06/07/2009 9:01:18 PM PDT by Arsee (It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

It is not an eternity as point number 14 that I posted to you states:

“Over the time frame from the late Hadean to the present, this becomes sufficient to explain both the diversity within and similarities between the forms of life observed on earth, including both living forms directly observed in the present, and extinct form indirectly observed from the fossil record.”

My statement about the furor over the Big Bang was merely an aside. Look again at my answer: How did anything in your points 1-13 BECOME sufficient to explain anything, much less the bio-diversty that exists within any time frame? I think you are well-meaning and sincere, but you really should check out reasonstobelieve.org. I like to say that for bio-diversity to be explained by evolution, the entire planet would be knee-deep in the bones of transitional critters.


48 posted on 06/07/2009 9:01:18 PM PDT by Arsee (It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Here we go again with the name-calling, and avoidance.

So you have no answer to the question?

Looks like you have failed to support your assertion that you “eat evos for lunch”

Well it is time for bed,

Goodnight, and may God bless you and yours, and God bless America.


49 posted on 06/07/2009 9:08:09 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


50 posted on 06/07/2009 9:09:36 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson