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

Skip to comments.

Delusions of Evolution
Norcalblogs.com ^ | April 04, 2009 | by OneVike

Posted on 04/04/2009 10:51:32 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary

It is with out a doubt that a majority of Americans believe “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” Genesis 1:1. Unfortunately, most who believe these words cannot answer the questions raised by the thousands of fossils that archeologist's have dug up and claim are millions of years old. ...

(Excerpt) Read more at norcalblogs.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: creation; evolution; faith; religion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-389 next last
To: what's up

Your right that there is nothing wrong with looking up things in the bible...I prefer to look up things I wonder about and not things everyone else thinks. Question for you. Did Jesus speak Hebrew?...Were Pauls letters in Hebrew?


251 posted on 04/04/2009 4:25:39 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
"The fact you don't understand those methods doesn't mean they were followed."

It seems to be a FACT that you that don't seem to understand much of anything, not what a theory is, not what science is, and not what a formula is.

Seems now you don't understand what a FACT is either. You have not established a fact on this forum other than the fact you are very confused about many things.

252 posted on 04/04/2009 4:27:21 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
I told you what a theory is and yet you continue to misunderstand.

Getting a little testy with 'your students? LOL

There is no point in explaining color to the blind.

Wait - is that poster blind or are you denigrate him. You said you don't do that. Is that anyway to lead??

Have a blessed day.

What! Now you ARE 'trying' to be holy! You said you don't do that! You can't seem to get your 'teacher' skills to work - a little bit of this and that. Give it up - God's creation has already been taught by The Creator - it's in His Book. WE read it, WE understand it.
253 posted on 04/04/2009 4:28:11 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
like God needs help

Their god is no better then their faith. If their god cannot create the universe without some clumsy, messy, illogical method as evolution. Then how pray, tell can their god save them from eternal damnation?
254 posted on 04/04/2009 4:34:41 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
Did Jesus speak Hebrew?...Were Pauls letters in Hebrew?

Jesus probably spoke Hebrew at times but likely his daily discourse was Aramaic.

Paul's letters were likely in Greek.

Genesis and likely most if not all of the Old Testament prevailed through the centuries in Hebrew until the Greeks translated it.

255 posted on 04/04/2009 4:34:47 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
"Did Jesus speak Hebrew?...Were Pauls letters in Hebrew?"

He must have, but then Christ seems to have been able to speak several of the languages that were spoken in the region. If I recall correctly, seriac(?) was the local language.

Jesus was also "unlearned" meaning uneducated, no formal education, yet he was able to read the Hebrew transcripts in the temple, which shocked the pharisee's. I don't know if Pauls letters were in Hebrew, but all the gospels books were written in greek except one if that helps.

256 posted on 04/04/2009 4:37:37 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Thats what I meant. Aramic.


257 posted on 04/04/2009 4:41:47 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Speak to Christ

I DO and at His invitation - not yours. I speak to my Savior all the time.

He will have a great time with you and your ilk.

A great time indeed - there is NO ONE like HIM! But He won't be pleased with you calling His Children ilks. Not pleased, but not surprised because He warned us - for His sake - this will happen. He protects us and fights our battles. Praise God and ALL HIS WORKS!

Have A blessed day

That doesn't work for you. It's so insincere. Evil detests Good as your comments show.
258 posted on 04/04/2009 4:43:42 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
Jesus was God, I guess since God spoke to Moses and Moses wrote the first five books in Hebrew, He probably communicated to him in Hebrew.

So, to answer the question you really wanted to know, Yes Jesus could speak in Hebrew, which he might have been doing when he was transfigured on the mountain in the cloud with Moses and Elijah. I say Hebrew because until Christ was crucified and raised from the dead no one from before then would have been taken up yet.

Now for the answer to the question you did asked, Jesus probably only spoke in the language the Jews spoke in because He came for the Jews first. That would have been Koinonia Greek or Aramaic, but He could have spoken Latin as the Romans did also.

Your point for asking?
259 posted on 04/04/2009 4:45:59 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
Then there's this: "Who does he think his message is for?...With his 'sav lasav, sav lasav, kav lakav, kav lakav, zeer sham, zeer sham!' Yes, certainly with stammering lips and in a foreign language, he will talk to this nation, he who once told them: Here is rest... But they would not listen."

"That is why the Lord now says: 'sav lasav, sav lasav, kav lakav, kav lakav, zeer sham, zeer sham', so that when they walk they may fall over backwards and be broken, snared and made captive." (Is.28:10-13).

Isiah prophesied that he would speak Greek to his people.

260 posted on 04/04/2009 4:51:28 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name; Nathan Zachary; what's up
Gentlemen? Where are your detractors? It seems they all dropped their rocks and went home.

Mind if I speak for what I do believe the Lord would say to you all?

Well done good and faithful servants.

Let us all pray He will also say some day to us all,

Enter into my rest good and faithful servants.

Zach, thanks for posting my article. I have a lawn to cut and a honey-do list that my wife is waiting for me to do.

God bless you all.
261 posted on 04/04/2009 4:56:07 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary; freedumb2003; presently no screen name; OneVike
No, you told me what YOU think a theory is. And you also told me and everyone else that you think a THEORY , namely TTOE, is a science.

Because it is. He's correct, you're not.

So we have you stating a mathematical formula as being a theory, and a theory as being science.

And you call me blind?

Well, when the shoe fits... On the one hand, we have freedumb2003, whose definition of theory in a scientific context matches the one used by the scientific community, who would probably be in a position to know it and get it right, on the other hand we have you and your own personal definition of it, which is at odds with how science actually uses the term, not to mention that you're the guy who can't even get it right when you try to make an objective, verifiable claim like the degree of DNA similarity between snakes/monkeys/humans...

Yeah, I'd say that freedom2003 has you pegged.

And since you're so far being oddly silent on my challenge that you support or retract your snakes/monkeys/human DNA claim, indications are that there are greater obstacles between you and accuracy than merely being blind to it.

Can someone please explain to my why the folks who most claim to be the righteous ones on this topic have are so fond of false witness?

262 posted on 04/04/2009 4:57:08 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: OneVike; Nathan Zachary
Mind if I speak for what I do believe the Lord would say to you all?

Well done good and faithful servants.

I really doubt that the Lord would say such a thing to someone who was in the habit of posting blatant falsehoods and then fell silent when challenged on them.

Or do you really have such a low standard yourself, and expect the Lord to applaud falsehoods as well?

263 posted on 04/04/2009 5:02:43 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

No, He’s not correct, and your validation is as about as worlthless as his.

F= M whatever is a freakin’ formula, not a theory.. TTOE is a theory, not science.

And, I am also right in the degree of DNA simularity between humans and other animals being greater than of apes.

Been through that argument before as well.

Posting biased crap will not help you there either.


264 posted on 04/04/2009 5:04:54 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
NONE of them evolved into other animals. NOT ONE SINGLE LOUSY BIT of evidence that even ONE, out of millions, billions of creatures is there that ANYTHING evolved even...once.

Now you have me curious. Is it your belief that every animal and bird species that now exist were on the ark with Noah?

265 posted on 04/04/2009 5:21:08 PM PDT by Wissa (I despise the liberal media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
When studying the human genome and its similarity to that of the chimp, scientists have recently concluded that 96% of our genome is similar. However, most people are unaware that this percent pertains to the regions of our DNA that result in proteins. It seems logical that if a protein performs a certain function in one organism, then that same protein should perform the same function in a variety of organisms. This is evidence for a common designer as much as for a common ancestor. But most of the DNA sequence performs an unknown function and has been largely dismissed as “junk DNA.” However, increasing evidence supports the view that “junk” DNA performs an important role. For example, a recent report unexpectedly found specific sequence patterns in “junk” DNA which scientists have termed “pyknons.”1 It has been suggested that these pyknons may be important in determining when and where proteins are made. Within this “junk DNA” there may be large differences between man and chimp. The areas of greatest difference appear to involve regions which are structurally different (commonly called “rearrangements”) and areas of heterochromatin (tightly packed DNA).

Here are some other interesting differences between the human and chimp genomes which are often not reported:
*The amount of chimp DNA is 12% larger than what it is in humans.
*Several hundred million bases (individual components of the DNA) of the chimp genome are still unanalyzed.
*In many areas of the DNA sequence, major “rearrangements” seem apparent. These account for perhaps 4–10% dissimilarity between chimps and humans.
*Chimps have 23 chromosomes and humans have only 22 (excluding sex chromosomes for both species)

Thus, the physical and mental differences between humans and chimps are most likely due to the differences in purpose and function of the so-called junk DNA. This understanding should leave us more mindful of the awesome complexity of the Creator and His creation of DNA.
266 posted on 04/04/2009 5:21:39 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Is.28:10-13 I don’t find in scripture what you state...Is.28 Is prophesy against Judah. Is.28 1-6 Is The fate of Samaria. I do speak english, is english your second language and therefore only part of your answer is in english?


267 posted on 04/04/2009 6:02:22 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: ga medic
Fortunately for me, it is highly unlikely that anyone here on this thread has any input on whether I should be condemned. Not saying it won’t happen. Just pretty sure that it won’t have anything to do with the people posting here :)

I agree with you on that one. But it seems there are posters here that have all the answers about God and Judgement for all. They have in inside track with God.He tells them who is good and who is bad, much like Santa Clause. I doubt that a hard nose attitude leads anyone to the love of Christ..

268 posted on 04/04/2009 6:17:54 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
TToE is taught as the foundation for all life sciences all over the world.

IOW, no reputable biological research proceeded the introduction of the ToE? All that biology that occurred before and during Darwins time is for naught?

Evolution is not foundational to biology. There's plenty of biology that can be studied without ever addressing how one species allegedly changed into another.

And in public high schools, it covers 1-3 days tops, according to every high school sophomore that I've ever asked.

269 posted on 04/04/2009 6:20:21 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Are you kidding? Some people DEFINE THEMSELVES on there being a difference. They won’t stop until all of scientific progress ceases and bows its collective head to Biblical teachings. You know, like islam.

Geez, fd, you know better than to equate Christianity and creationism with islam.

You slipped.

Whatever happened to mr. niceguy?

270 posted on 04/04/2009 6:22:53 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; Nathan Zachary

1. These are all life scientists?

2. You are about 9,987 short.

I can get 10 scientists to say that astrology is how they should live their lives. It is a numbers game.

You need a significant sample.
******************************************************

Chesterton put it quite nicely in his essay The Error of Impartiality.

“First he challenged me to find a black swan, and then he ruled out all my swans because they were black. The fact that all these great intellects had come to the Christian view was somehow or other a proof either that they were not great intellects or that they had not really come to that view. The argument thus stood in a charmingly convenient form: ‘All men that count have come to my conclusion; for if they come to your conclusion they do not count.’”


271 posted on 04/04/2009 6:25:42 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DevNet; Nathan Zachary
Science doesn’t prove things - why do you think it does? FYI - ants have only been on the planet for 130 - 200 million years.

If science doesn't prove things, then how do you know how long anything has been anywhere? Why should I believe you then?

272 posted on 04/04/2009 6:31:07 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: OneVike

” also point that statement to anyone who says they believe in God but do not think he has the capability to create everything from nothing without using an illogical messy method such as evolution.”

I stated very clearly that God is capable of doing anything that he wants. I never said that he was incapable of using anything but evolution. Unlike you, I don’t claim to understand how God thinks.

I don’t understand how he can let a small child suffer from cancer for several years before dying at age 7. I don’t understand why miracles cure some people and not others. Do I trust that he has a reason? absolutely. Do I understand it? not at all. Do I still love and trust him above all else? Sure, but it goes way beyond my capacity for understanding. That is faith. It can’t be tested as science because no matter how much we learn, we will never understand why God does things the way that he does.
At least that is my belief.

I guess in your faith, you have an understand what God would and wouldn’t do. You know what he believes is messy and what he doesn’t Maybe you feel comfortable putting yourself in the place of God. I was taught that wasn’t a good idea.


273 posted on 04/04/2009 6:32:50 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: OneVike

When Cain slew Abel, he was banished from the soil and had a mark put on him so that no one would kill him...Now we have Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel...Abel is dead yet Cain left to live in the land of Nod and had relations with his wife...Where did she come from...Poop magic or were there other humans on earth at that time? Cains wife bore Enoch.


274 posted on 04/04/2009 6:37:41 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
*You wrote:

You might want to reread your posts. People denigrate themselves with promoting evil and trying to “educate” others - lead others - into deception. Satan is the Father of Deception. Now who are you emulating? Surely, you can figure that out. Since ‘It Is Written’ you can look it up - an open book test.

Since Satan is the father of deception (I will not put caps on Satan's works) Perhaps your the one that is being decepted.

275 posted on 04/04/2009 6:48:05 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon; Nathan Zachary; Bryanw92
Call me old-fashioned, but I've got a greater respect for truth than that. So you're being called on it, Nathan -- accept my bet and let the chips fall where they may, or retract your out-and-out falsehood and apologize for misleading your fellow Freepers.

Science isn't about truth. Haven't you got the memo?

http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/LiU/resource/misused_glossary.html

Truth. This is a word best avoided entirely in physics except when placed in quotes, or with careful qualification. Its colloquial use has so many shades of meaning from ‘it seems to be correct’ to the absolute truths claimed by religion, that it’s use causes nothing but misunderstanding. Someone once said "Science seeks proximate (approximate) truths." Others speak of provisional or tentative truths. Certainly science claims no final or absolute truths.

If you don't have truth, you can't have a lie. There's nothing to base that judgment on. All that's left is a quagmire of opinion with the most dogmatic being filtered out by peer review and used to establish *consensus*.

IOW, if you don't tow the party line, you can kiss your career good-bye.

276 posted on 04/04/2009 7:01:34 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: goat granny

” doubt that a hard nose attitude leads anyone to the love of Christ..”

Probably not. Let’s just hope they don’t turn others away. I don’t believe that they know any more about God, than most people. They, like us, are limited by what God has chosen to reveal about himself. God has revealed much, but there is much that is still a mystery.

I find science to be fascinating, and the more I learn about science, the stronger my faith in God becomes. The planet of Earth has been so carefully created, that there are many ways that the climate and currents, are kept in balance. When the oceans get too hot, there are hurricanes to transfer the warmer water into cooler areas. Talk about messy.

The immune system of the human body is another incredibly designed system. Fevers, sneezing, coughing, vomiting are all part of this incredible security system, that protects each and every one of us, with a success rate that is unmatched by most man made systems. That is all pretty messy too. Science and research is what helps us to understand the truly incredible nature of what God has given us.

Science is what taught us about infection, and what teaches us how to prevent it and to cure it. Science is what teaches us about geology and why we have earthquakes and volcanoes. It allows us to better protect ourselves from danger. God gave us the Bible to show us his power, and to teach us right from wrong. He told us of his Son through scripture. I believe that science is just another way of God revealing Himself and His creation to us.


277 posted on 04/04/2009 7:05:13 PM PDT by ga medic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
They were all living hundreds of years.

What do you think the chances are that after lets say, 300 years there was enough people to populate an area a couple hundred miles from where he was born that was named Nod by the inhabitants.

Then he happened to meet a sister or a great great niece that was, lets say 100 years his junior.

Then lets say, he fell in love and got married. They married. After all if Tony Randal could marry a girl 50 years his junior. How many years younger of as woman could a guy who lived to be 500 to 800 years marry?

Next question please?
278 posted on 04/04/2009 7:05:53 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: ga medic

Very well put....You and I could get along and talk of many things including God. I worked in a hospital for many years as a nurse and believe me you can find lots of things that happen in a hospital that can increase faith and also doubt God. But you just keep on trucking one foot at a time..


279 posted on 04/04/2009 7:12:45 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: OneVike
Next question..........Can you back that up with the Bible? Or are you having a fantasy to explain your faith? The bible says nothing about Adam and Eve having any daughters, aunts uncles cousins sister-in-laws, brother-in-laws, neices or nephews,or any other blood relatives in the land of Nod. In the biblical story, there was Cain, Abel and one was dead. Cain was banished and found some female someplace that the bible is silent on...as it is silent on many things..But glad you found your answer in a fantasy.
280 posted on 04/04/2009 7:23:19 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: goat granny

You mam are an idiot. Good night.


281 posted on 04/04/2009 7:30:06 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary; freedumb2003; presently no screen name; OneVike; Bryanw92
[On the one hand, we have freedumb2003, whose definition of theory in a scientific context matches the one used by the scientific community, who would probably be in a position to know it and get it right, on the other hand we have you and your own personal definition of it, which is at odds with how science actually uses the term, not to mention that you're the guy who can't even get it right when you try to make an objective, verifiable claim like the degree of DNA similarity between snakes/monkeys/humans...]

No, He’s not correct, and your validation is as about as worlthless as his.

And the scientific community? Your personal "definition" supercedes the one that scientists themselves actually use. How "special" of you. I'm sure you consider your definition of a scientific term to be somehow "better" than that used by scientists, but hey, you're entitled to think whatever you like, no matter how ludicrous it might be.

F= M whatever is a freakin’ formula, not a theory..

"F= M whatever"? ROFL! Can't even remember one of the most elementary and foundational equations of physics, eh? No wonder you're out of your depth on these science discussions.

And why are you misrepresenting what freedumb2003 actually wrote? Besides the obvious motive, I mean... What he actually said was, "And, to some degree F=ma is a theory (using the lay definition)". He was clearly *NOT* claiming that it was a theory in the scientific sense. Why are you now attempting to claim that he did? Please explain your actions.

TTOE is a theory, not science.

Now you're just being goofy (or very confused). Theories are very much a part of science. Indeed, it would be impossible to have science without them. Theories are the very heart of science. Why do you keep posting nonsense like this? Do you think it's advancing your cause any, or helping to bolster your credibility on this subject? If so, you're very mistaken. Quite the contrary, in fact.

TTOE is indeed a theory, and it is indeed science. Deal with it, and stop wasting everyone's time trying to clumsily split semantic hairs.

And, I am also right in the degree of DNA simularity between humans and other animals being greater than of apes.

No, you are not, and repeating the false claim only digs you deeper.

It speaks volumes that you YET AGAIN FAIL TO MAKE EVEN A TOKEN ATTEMPT TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM when challenged, even when you could make an easy $1000 if you could.

You clearly can't, and what's worse, YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T. Yet you persist in blustering and repeating the claim. Why do you do this? Do you really think this is acceptable behavior for one who is trying to present himself as on the side of righteousness?

Been through that argument before as well.

Yes, and you failed before as well. You've been playing these games here for years.

Posting biased crap will not help you there either.

If you can point out where I have actually posted any "biased crap", I'll be more than glad to retract it and apologize. Unlike yourself.

Now let's cut to the chase again. You very falsely claimed that "You have more DNA in common with a snake than you do a monkey." This is very, very wrong. You've been challenged to support this false claim, or to retract it and apologize. You could even earn $1000 for demonstrating that it's true, not to mention demonstrating a fact that, if true, really *would* be a big blow against current theories evolutionary origins. And yet you run away from the challenge, you don't even make a token attempt to support it. This is, unfortunately, typical anti-evolutionist behavior. Do you think this is helping your case, or helping your credilibity? I'd really like an answer to this question.

Not only do you fail to support your false claim when (repeatedly) asked to do so, you actually brashly *repeat* and *broaden* the false claim. This, too, is unfortunately typical anti-evolutionist behavior -- trying to "win" an argument by bluffing so doggedly that their opponents just give up due to the futility of trying to get the anti-evo to debate honorably. Do you really think this is helping your case, or your credibility?

One more time, Nathan: Support or retract your false claim that "You have more DNA in common with a snake than you do a monkey." Your credibility is on the line. Show us that an anti-evo can actually be honorable for a change, instead of gameplaying and evading. It would be refreshing.

282 posted on 04/04/2009 7:31:39 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: CaptainAmiigaf

The order of creation doesn’t allow for much time to pass between the ‘days’ however much time you want to give them. The plants and trees were created on the third day and the sun and stars on the fourth.

JB


283 posted on 04/04/2009 7:34:18 PM PDT by thatjoeguy (Wind is just air, but pushier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
The bible says nothing about Adam and Eve having any daughters, aunts uncles cousins sister-in-laws, brother-in-laws, neices or nephews

Actually Gen 5:4 does say they had daughters. It's likely that these were the wives of at least some of their sons. (They had other sons too).

They wouldn't have had relatives of the other types you mention.

284 posted on 04/04/2009 7:34:58 PM PDT by Justice (Never trust a Russian. They are cheats and Liars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: metmom
I know you get a big kick out of these pointless word games you endlessly play in order to have a cheap reason to claim "gotcha!" through the disingenuous use of the fallacy of equivocation, but most people just find it childish and tiresome, for obvious reasons. So if you're wondering why your lame attempts at "barbs" get ignored so often, that's why.

If on the other hand you're really so honestly confused as to think that "science doesn't deal in Truth" means that scientists don't think (or shouldn't think) that a claim can even be verified as true or false, then nicely ask me to explain the distinction and I'll be glad to help you out. If you're not that confused, on the other hand, well, enjoy your gameplaying, I'll go back to ignoring your antics.

285 posted on 04/04/2009 7:40:19 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: goat granny

You are concerned about capitalization and what language Jesus spoke while defending evolution. LOL Get real or get lost w/your trivia and a@@hole comments.


286 posted on 04/04/2009 8:02:47 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Justice

Are you saying God created incest?


287 posted on 04/04/2009 8:07:32 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: OneVike
Spell check is our friend. what is mam? God bless and good night to you also...I will not call you a name on this forum...:O)
288 posted on 04/04/2009 8:10:34 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
What is your take on Space Aliens.. Did they “evolve” too?
289 posted on 04/04/2009 8:13:12 PM PDT by divine_moment_of_facts ("Hey Liberals.. We don't lower our standards, so up yours!" - Andrew Wilkow show)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
You're going according to our 21st century standards which weren't in effect all through history. It probably wasn't considered incest back then...but a necessary way to populate the earth.

The chromosomes hadn't broken down yet...even just a couple hundred years ago it wasn't unusual for, say, cousins to marry but it's anathema now.

I've read some of your comments on this thread. You really should try to tone down the cynicism when people come up with possible explanations based on the Bible. You claim that these people are saying they know everything about God and you judge them for self-righteousness. They are just coming up with possible explanations, many of which are based on scripture. I don't see anyone claiming to know everything.

290 posted on 04/04/2009 8:25:52 PM PDT by Justice (Never trust a Russian. They are cheats and Liars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
Theories are very much a part of science. Indeed, it would be impossible to have science without them.

Lets see what one of the biggest defenders of evolution has to say about this so called theory that is scientifically provable. Ok?

One of the biggest defenders of the theory of evolution is a scientist named, Michael Ruse. In 2005 five he wrote a book titled "The Evolution Creation Struggle". Mr Ruse wrote his book as a defense against the growing evidence that supports intelligent design. Here is and excerpt from what he wrote on page 287 of his book,
"My area of expertise is the clash between evolutionists and creationists, and my analysis is that we have no simple clash between science and religion, but rather a clash between two religions."

Let me say that I totally agree with Mr Ruse on his analogy, this is a battle between two religions. Now while both religions can use some of the same technologies to scientifically prove certain portions of their belief systems, they are still religions that need the followers to have faith.

The difference is one religion has millions of variations with many different names to entice many different people depending upon the many different desires of man. Ultimately, this religion boils down to a belief that man is or can be God. So this religion try's as it has for thousands of years to dispel any notion that the true God of the Universe is the sole Creator and Judge of that which He created.

The other religion say's that the universe and everything in it, including man, was created by the one and only "I Am", who was and is and is to come. This religion has for 3500 years based its belief upon the Scriptures, first the Hebrew Scriptures and then later upon the New Testament Scriptures. This religion has been forced by those who would discount it as nothing more then an emotional collection of fables and fairy tales to seek ways of debating for the minds of the intellectually educated masses of modern society. In doing so they have mastered the same methods used by evolutionists, and now stand toe to toe in their ability to convince the educated they are right.

So now we are all at the point of time where we could argue and debate each other until God Himself returns and creates enough heat to melt the very elements both sides debate over. However you look at it, both sides are ultimately putting their money on their ability to have more faith then the other side. Christians admit that our belief in God does come down to faith, now we have one of the leading proponents of the other side admitting the same thing.

The great unwashed in the middle are the true targets of both sides. I for one bring these subjects up so that I may convince one or two of the undecideds every once in a while that my side is right. If by the grace of God I can change the belief of one who has committed their faith to the religion of evolution, then Praise to God we will have one less soul burning in hell when Christ returns.
291 posted on 04/04/2009 8:32:09 PM PDT by OneVike (Just a Christian waiting to go home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
God gave us the Bible to show us his power

YOUR his power SHOULD BE His power. Since you correct spelling and caps by others - I thought you'd appreciate one showing you where you slipped. Twenty lashes. ta ta and all that jazz.
292 posted on 04/04/2009 8:32:19 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: OneVike
one less soul burning in hell when Christ returns.

and they will be eternally grateful to you. And you, too, will hear the words ... Good and faithful servant.
293 posted on 04/04/2009 8:38:54 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: OneVike
When studying the human genome and its similarity to that of the chimp, scientists have recently concluded that 96% of our genome is similar. However, most people are unaware that this percent pertains to the regions of our DNA that result in proteins.

This is false. The 96% pertains to the entire genome, including both protein-coding regions and non-coding regions.,

The percentage of synonymous similarity for just the protein-coding regions is even higher, upwards of 99.7%. P> The percentage of similarity for non-coding regions is slightly lower than the overall 96%, but not by very much, since it comprises most of the genome. I don't have the numbers in front of me right now, but it'd be roughly 95% similar based on the above figures.

It seems logical that if a protein performs a certain function in one organism, then that same protein should perform the same function in a variety of organisms. This is evidence for a common designer as much as for a common ancestor.

If you're working ONLY from a single overall percentage of similarity, yes, you're right. But it's the specific *nature* of the many kinds of similarities and differences that clearly indicate evolutionary origins and not "common design". Common design produces very characteristic patterns of similarities and differences, and so does evolutionary common descent. Every conceivable method of examining the patterns of differences and similarities in the DNA between species matches the patterns that would be produced by evolutionary common descent, not the kind that would be produced by common design.

But most of the DNA sequence performs an unknown function and has been largely dismissed as “junk DNA.” However, increasing evidence supports the view that “junk” DNA performs an important role. For example, a recent report unexpectedly found specific sequence patterns in “junk” DNA which scientists have termed “pyknons.”1 It has been suggested that these pyknons may be important in determining when and where proteins are made. Within this “junk DNA” there may be large differences between man and chimp. The areas of greatest difference appear to involve regions which are structurally different (commonly called “rearrangements”) and areas of heterochromatin (tightly packed DNA).

While it has been long known that some kinds of non-coding DNA serve some kind of function in the genome, and new kinds are being discovered from time to time, the above paragraph vastly overstates the case. There are many kinds of independent lines of evidence which indicate that the majority of non-coding DNA is indeed non-functional, and not merely "all functional for which the function is not yet known".

Four of the more powerful lines of evidence are 1) the non-conservation of most non-coding DNA between lineages, 2) the existence of species (such as the fugu fish) in which almost all of these regions have been naturally eliminated with no detriment to the species, 3) experiments in which gigantic swatches of non-coding DNA have been snipped out from mice with no detriment to the test animals, and 4) a good understanding of how many of these sequences arise via "stutters" during cell replication and other kinds of errors during DNA copying and/or viral infections, etc. -- they clearly weren't "designed in" from the start. Large sections of our DNA is identifiable as the harmless remnants of such genetic malfunctions. For example, 42% of the human genome consists of retrotransposon copies.

Here are some other interesting differences between the human and chimp genomes which are often not reported:
*The amount of chimp DNA is 12% larger than what it is in humans.

This is "often not reported" because it is not true.

The fully sequenced human genome contains 3,107,677,273 basepairs. The fully sequenced chimpanzee genome contains 3,350,447,512 basepairs. This is 7.8% larger.

This is hardly surprising, however, nor significant, nor any kind of problem for evolution, nor does it invalidate the kinds of simimlarities and differences which are compared in order to trace evolutionary relationships.

It's not surprising because as I mentioned above, glitches in DNA replication (as well as transposons and other mechanisms) can easily add "stuttered" repetitions to the genome, increasing its size by "padding" it with numerous repetitions. Also as mentioned above, it's easy for large sections of DNA to get accidentally dropped, and when these are non-essential, non-functional sequences, the deletion gets passed on to future generations without incident. The amount of difference in overall genome size between humans and chimps is of the amount one would expect given six million years of evolutionary divergence.

*Several hundred million bases (individual components of the DNA) of the chimp genome are still unanalyzed.

You're being pretty vague here. What do you mean by "unanalyzed"? The chimp genome has been fully sequenced, if that's what you mean.

*In many areas of the DNA sequence, major “rearrangements” seem apparent. These account for perhaps 4–10% dissimilarity between chimps and humans.

Yes, but again this is no problem for evolutionary biology, and is indeed to be expected. I'm not sure what your point might be.

For what it's worth, there seems to be little if any indication that major rearrangements (wherein a section of DNA is successfully relocated to another chromosome or another location on the same chromosome) make any significant difference to how the DNA operates, any more than the location of subroutines in a program makes any difference.

*Chimps have 23 chromosomes and humans have only 22 (excluding sex chromosomes for both species)

True, and actually, this is a great example of how the specific details of similarities and differences between the genomes of various species indicates evolutionary origins, not "common design".

See this post of mine on the subject: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/914961/posts?page=242#242

Short form: One chromosome in the human genome shows clear and unmistakable signs of having been formed by the end-to-end fusion of two smaller chromosomes in a common ancestor which had 24 chromosomes, and not via some original human(s) having been designed with 23 chromosomes from the start. For details, see the link.

Thus, the physical and mental differences between humans and chimps are most likely due to the differences in purpose and function of the so-called junk DNA.

Huh? Your "conclusion" does not follow from your earlier observations. You have yet to actually make a case for this assertion.

This understanding should leave us more mindful of the awesome complexity of the Creator and His creation of DNA.

Maybe so, but the DNA of countless species clearly indicates, in many different, independent and cross-confirming ways, that life on Earth has reached its present form via evolutionary common descent.

294 posted on 04/04/2009 9:02:10 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
Maybe so, but the DNA of countless species clearly indicates, in many different, independent and cross-confirming ways, that life on Earth has reached its present form via evolutionary common descent.

Scoffing at such a pompous not so clear indications. I do realize that you are devoted to amassing what you are calling indicators but for what and to what end? You really think you can disprove what the Heavenly Father absolutely had His children pen and preserve all these generations?

I think this thing called evolution has hit rock bottom and we have now entered the ascension phase, at least for the time appointed.

295 posted on 04/04/2009 9:12:22 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Bama and Company are reenacting the Pharaoh as told by Moses in Genesis!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Depending on what poll you read, this vast amount of technology has convinced 30% to 40% of believers that God must have used evolution in His creative process.

According to latest polls, 40% believe in evolution and 25% do not believe in evolution.

296 posted on 04/04/2009 9:15:27 PM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justice
You should read Leviticus 20: It lists all the types of sexual sin that is forbidden by God. Since He is eternal and doesn't change, I think your wrong about incest being OK with God. Interbreeding among close relatives leads to the people depicted in Deliverance...It multiplies the possibility of deleterious genes being manifest..<.> ..I cannot speak to the idea of chromosomes being broken down. That is supposition.. I think God had rules for the ancient people and many were based on hygeine. For instance, hand washing, not eating pork (as it carries disease, even to this day if not throughtly cooked.) etc. You also must have read that the last post to me was not only misspelled, but did a little name calling... When out of arguments yell and call names...I don't think I called anyone an idiot..But thats not the worse I have been called in my 70 years...not even close.. :O)
297 posted on 04/04/2009 9:28:29 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
not eating pork (as it carries disease, even to this day if not throughtly cooked.)

From foodnetwork.com (quoted. The 'You' is not direct at youP).

-----------------------------------------------------------

You may be a little confused at this point about how long to cook pork. In the past, we were warned to cook it to well done (that is, 170 F) in order to take care of any trichinae parasites, which are killed at 137 F. These days, however, modern advances in pork production have all but eliminated trichinosis in this country. In fact, the few cases reported here in recent years have been traced to either wild game (bears, especially) or privately raised pigs. You no longer need to overcook pork in order to feel good about eating it.

298 posted on 04/04/2009 9:33:16 PM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Your cute but show me in my replies where I called anyone an idiot like I was. Without the name calling, spell check is your friend would not have been mentioned...ta ta and all that jazz. :O)


299 posted on 04/04/2009 9:37:14 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Food network was not around in the days of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers or Deuteronomy, etc etc etc..So I don’t see how your comments about a TV show is relevent...But thank you for the modern information...I cook my pork very well. Being born in the late 1930’s I was taught well...We had an Ice Box and there was no such thing as a supermarket. My brother work at the pountry shop. You went in and looked in the eye of the chicken or rabbit you wanted for supper, came back in an hour and it was dead and dressed and ready for dinner. My brother job as a teenager was killing and dressing Live animals.Life was not what people are use to today...The ice man had a horse drawn wagon piled with 25 or 50 pounds of ice. You put a sign in your window how much you wanted.. I didn’t live in a rural area, I was brought up in Detroit, Michigan. At that time the population was over 2,000,000,


300 posted on 04/04/2009 9:47:20 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-389 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