Skip to comments.
The problem with naturalism, the problem with empiricism
Journal of Creation ^
| Lael Weinberger
Posted on 10/23/2009 8:51:50 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-109 last
To: GodGunsGuts
Very strange indeed. I was under the impression that Cold Water is a non-Christian. But you keep calling him “brother.” Sigh.... Sorry if my language offends or disturbs you in any way.
At the very least he is my neighbor.
101
posted on
10/25/2009 1:52:21 PM PDT
by
betty boop
(Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
To: Alamo-Girl
Yes.All the phenomena except that explained by ID is explained by natural causes? Does that mean that the arm is a function of evolution?
102
posted on
10/25/2009 6:29:17 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: ColdWater; betty boop
As far as I know, there has been nothing offered to suggest that arms are best explained by intelligent cause. In molecular biology, maintenance and repair functions however are a different story. They are temporally, non-local phenomena suggesting a final cause, e.g. Rosen's relational mathematical model for biology in "Life Itself""
Or to put it another way, the functions appear before the biological system obtained awareness and intelligence to anticipate the need for them.
To: Alamo-Girl
Or to put it another way, the functions appear before the biological system obtained awareness and intelligence to anticipate the need for them.We got arms before we knew what they were for?
104
posted on
10/25/2009 8:13:48 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: ColdWater
It's not the same category of issue. Arms followed the emergence of awareness and intelligence, molecular level maintenance and repair preceded it.
To: Alamo-Girl
It's not the same category of issue. Arms followed the emergence of awareness and intelligence, molecular level maintenance and repair preceded it. Man to God: Please give me my arms!
106
posted on
10/25/2009 9:22:31 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: ColdWater
To: GodGunsGuts
I know, when your side fully admits that they must rely on philosophy...that means EVERYONE must rely on philosophy. When calle don it, followers must change “hilosphy” to “logical thinking”......but define “logical”, because one does not need to know Logic 101 to learn specialized science fields.
108
posted on
10/26/2009 5:43:07 AM PDT
by
ElectricStrawberry
(Didja know that Man walked with vegetarian T. rex within the last 4,351 years?)
To: GodGunsGuts
Does it require logic to make progress in any of those fields?No. Doesn't take logic to observe insects. Doesn't take logic to study human physiology. Doesn't take logic to study the immune system, the edocrine system, or any other system.
...and logic does not equal philosphy.
109
posted on
10/26/2009 5:45:07 AM PDT
by
ElectricStrawberry
(Didja know that Man walked with vegetarian T. rex within the last 4,351 years?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-109 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson