Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/08/2014 1:03:50 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind

2 posted on 12/08/2014 1:04:13 PM PST by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

The “absolutely/very certain” option seems geared toward eliciting an uncertain response.


3 posted on 12/08/2014 1:10:21 PM PST by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Pretty stupid poll.


4 posted on 12/08/2014 1:12:01 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

More Cultural Marxism attacks on Christianity...


5 posted on 12/08/2014 1:12:58 PM PST by Mechanicos (Nothing's so small it can't be blown out of proportion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Were respondents asked whether they were absolutely certain about the evolutionism, or just the creationism?


6 posted on 12/08/2014 1:13:08 PM PST by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

I am 100% sure that God does what God does regardless what polling data says about what others should think.I also believe as we live in these last days there will be more and more pressure for people to fall away. I would firmly suggest that you hand onto the only Eternal option that exists thru Christ our Lord...and let the pollsters go to hell!
Freegards
LEX


7 posted on 12/08/2014 1:13:36 PM PST by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

The young earth old earth debate is a red herring. Time is not a constant. It changes dramatically across the universe.....and God is outside of time constraints period. Quantum physics demonstrates that both could be true.


9 posted on 12/08/2014 1:16:39 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright (www.FireKarlRove.com NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Heh. Like we’re supposed to determine what is truth by polls.

Got relativism?


10 posted on 12/08/2014 1:17:17 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Slate?

Meh.


11 posted on 12/08/2014 1:21:22 PM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

It is way past high time for supposedly conservative politicians to stand up for the Biblical world view. Embarrassing for the GOPe though.


13 posted on 12/08/2014 1:30:26 PM PST by Menthops (If you are reading this..... the GOPe hates you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

I am convinced by the preponderance of evidence that the theory of evolution is correct. My beliefs have nothing to do with it.


14 posted on 12/08/2014 1:32:04 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
In that three-decade span, the young-Earth creationist option has always been the most popular choice. The percentage of respondents who affirm it has never fallen below 40. These findings, along with similar poll numbers, often alarm scientists, journalists, and educators. Nearly half of Americans, if not more, seem to be hardcore creationists. But they aren’t. A new study, sponsored by the BioLogos Foundation and conducted by Calvin College sociologist Jonathan Hill, explores beliefs about evolution and creation in greater detail. The results show far more nuance, variation, and doubt than is commonly supposed. Most Americans do believe God created us. But the harder you press about historical claims in the Bible, the less confident people are. The percentage who stand by young-Earth creationism dwindles all the way to 15 percent.

PFL

15 posted on 12/08/2014 1:38:02 PM PST by Alex Murphy ("the defacto Leader of the FR Calvinist Protestant Brigades")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Where’s the question

“I’m sure humans evolved from single cell bacteria”.


16 posted on 12/08/2014 1:39:08 PM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

I’m certain the author is correct and arrived at his hypothesis by omitting certain facts, to arrive at the narrative he was searching for...


17 posted on 12/08/2014 1:46:30 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind; All

Creationism discussion should be used to support fulfilling the great commission, spreading the good news of Jesus.


18 posted on 12/08/2014 1:54:41 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Need to redo the entire thing, after controlling for the severe intellectual handicap in a population subjected to public schooling.


19 posted on 12/08/2014 2:11:14 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Well after all, all those “infallible” ancient churches are claiming that evolution is a dogma and that they’ve always taught it.


20 posted on 12/08/2014 2:12:52 PM PST by Zionist Conspirator (Throne and Altar! [In Jerusalem!!!])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
To grasp the reality of life as it has been revealed by molecular biology, we must magnify a cell a thousand million times until it is twenty kilometres in diameter and resembles a giant airship large enough to cover a great city like London or New York. What we would then see would be an object of unparalleled complexity and adaptive design. On the surface of the cell we would see millions of openings, like the portholes of a vast space ship, opening and closing to allow a continual stream of materials to flow in and out. If we were to enter one of these openings with find ourselves in a world of supreme technology and bewildering complexity. We would see endless highly organized corridors and conduits branching in every direction away from the perimeter of the cell, some leading to the central memory bank in the nucleus and others to assembly plants and processing units. The nucleus of itself would be a vast spherical chamber more than a kilometer in diameter, resembling a geodesic dome inside of which we would see, all neatly stacked together in ordered arrays, the miles of coiled chains of the DNA molecules. A huge range of products and raw materials would shuttle along all the manifold conduits in a highly ordered fashion to and from all the various assembly plants in the outer regions of the cell.

We would wonder at the level of control implicit in the movement of so many objects down so many seemingly endless conduits, all in perfect unison. We would see all around us, in every direction we looked, all sorts of robot-like machines. We would notice that the simplest of the functional components of the cell, the protein molecules, were astonishingly, complex pieces of molecular machinery, each one consisting of about three thousand atoms arranged in highly organized 3-D spatial conformation. We would wonder even more as we watched the strangely purposeful activities of these weird molecular machines, particularly when we realized that, despite all our accumulated knowledge of physics and chemistry, the task of designing one such molecular machine – that is one single functional protein molecule – would be completely beyond our capacity at present and will probably not be achieved until at least the beginning of the next century. Yet the life of the cell depends on the integrated activities of thousands, certainly tens, and probably hundreds of thousands of different protein molecules.

We would see that nearly every feature of our own advanced machines had its analogue in the cell: artificial languages and their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and modular construction. In fact, so deep would be the feeling of deja-vu, so persuasive the analogy, that much of the terminology we would use to describe this fascinating molecular reality would be borrowed from the world of late twentieth-century technology.

What we would be witnessing would be an object resembling an immense automated factory, a factory larger than a city and carrying out almost as many unique functions as all the manufacturing activities of man on earth. However, it would be a factory which would have one capacity not equalled in any of our own most advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours. To witness such an act at a magnification of one thousand million times would be an awe-inspiring spectacle.

To gain a more objective grasp of the level of complexity the cell represents, consider the problem of constructing an atomic model. Altogether a typical cell contains about ten million million atoms. Suppose we choose to build an exact replica to a scale one thousand million times that of the cell so that each atom of the model would be the size of a tennis ball. Constructing such a model at the rate of one atom per minute, it would take fifty million years to finish, and the object we would end up with would be the giant factory, described above, some twenty kilometres in diameter, with a volume thousands of times that of the Great Pyramid.

Copying nature, we could speed up the construction of the model by using small molecules such as amino acids and nucleotides rather than individual atoms. Since individual amino acids and nucleotides are made up of between ten and twenty atoms each, this would enable us to finish the project in less than five million years. We could also speed up the project by mass producing those components in the cell which are present in many copies. Perhaps three-quarters of the cell’s mass can be accounted for by such components. But even if we could produce these very quickly we would still be faced with manufacturing a quarter of the cell’s mass which consists largely of components which only occur once or twice and which would have to be constructed, therefore, on an individual basis. The complexity of the cell, like that of any complex machine, cannot be reduced to any sort of simple pattern, nor can its manufacture be reduced to a simple set of algorithms or programmes. Working continually day and night it would still be difficult to finish the model in the space of one million years.
- Michael Denton’s Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Adler and Adler, 1985)

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

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

And let me add my two cents to this astounding picture. The model that you would complete a million years later would be just that, a lifeless static model. For the cell to do its work this entire twenty kilometer structure and each of its trillions of components must be charged in specific ways, and at the level of the protein molecule, it must have an entire series of positive and negative charges and hydrophobic and hydrophilic parts all precisely shaped (at a level of precision far, far beyond our highest technical abilities) and charged in a whole series of ways: charged in a way to find other molecular components and combine with them; charged in a way to fold into a shape and maintain that most important shape, and charged in a way to be guided by other systems of charges to the precise spot in the cell where that particle must go. The pattern of charges and the movement of energy through the cell is easily as complex as the pattern of the physical particles themselves.

Also, Denton, in his discussion, uses a tennis ball to stand in for an atom. But an atom is not a ball. It is not even a ‘tiny solar system’ of neutrons, protons and electrons’ as we once thought. Rather, it has now been revealed to be an enormously complex lattice of forces connected by a bewildering array of utterly miniscule subatomic particles including hadrons, leptons, bosons, fermions, mesons, baryons, quarks and anti-quarks, up and down quarks, top and bottom quarks, charm quarks, strange quarks, virtual quarks, valence quarks, gluons and sea quarks…

And let me remind you again, that what we are talking about, a living cell, is a microscopic dot and thousands of these entire factories including all the complexity that we discussed above could fit on the head of a pin. Or, going another way, let’s add to this model of twenty square kilometers of breath taking complexity another one hundred trillion equally complex factories all working in perfect synchronous coordination with each other; which would be a model of the one hundred trillion celled human body, your body, that thing that we lug around every day and complain about; that would, spread laterally at the height of one cell at this magnification, blanket the entire surface of the earth four thousand times over, every part of which would contain pumps and coils and conduits and memory banks and processing centers; all working in perfect harmony with each other, all engineered to an unimaginable level of precision and all there to deliver to us our ability to be conscious, to see, to hear, to smell, to taste, and to experience the world as we are so used to experiencing it, that we have taken it and the fantastic mechanisms that make it possible for granted.

My question is, “Why don’t we know this?” What Michael Denton has written and I have added to is a perfectly accurate, easily intelligible, non-hyperbolic view of the cell. Why is this not taught in every introductory biology class in our schools?
- Matt Chait


21 posted on 12/08/2014 2:13:28 PM PST by Heartlander (Prediction: Increasingly, logic will be seen as a covert form of theism. - Denyse OÂ’Leary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

I don`t see as it matters how long it took to do the creating, all I need to know is that God created it and have no doubt that he did..


34 posted on 12/08/2014 11:38:58 PM PST by ravenwolf (` Does the scripture explain it in full detail? if not how can you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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