This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Because he seems to put a lot of time and effort into using science (or at least his concept of science) to disprove Evolution. That's a whole lot of work when a simple "I believe in God therefore I don't have to prove anything. Evolution is false."
In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.Because there is absolutely zero proof/evidence that lends credence to the theory of a creator. THAT is why it is taken as seriously as unicorns and leprechauns are.
DNA AND A BOOK!!! HORRIBLE ANALOGY!oh wait
The burden lies with those making the claim. That would be you regarding a god.We've all taken the time to respond to your challenges regarding our claims on evolution.Why are you so defensive when we make that request of you?
No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
No, convergent evolution means that different organisms that were under the same selective pressures independently evolved a similar solution.Also, to the point about blind humans - what I am illustrating is that humans do have the capacity for sonar. If there was selective pressure for humans with sonar there would be a subset of the population that would have an advantage. No different than bats or dolphins. Some of us already have this ability - but it isn't being selected for because we don't need it.
It does not. We have done gene sequencing and it has turned our tree of life upside down. Lets talk genetics if you care, it does not prove evolution.
Bruce sees this discussion as a direct affront to his religion.News flash, Bruce. I don't care if you believe in a god or not.
I am not being defensive. I am saying that you can assume God away in the assumptions.
Genetics isn't something a chemical engineer would study. Therefore I doubt you are a chemical engineer.
http://www.iqtestexperts.com/iq-improve.php
Solving puzzles is great for bolstering IQ. Reading Darwin is to follow a genius along on one of the most beautiful puzzle-solutions in mankind's history. It's exactly the kind of thing that should top the list of ways to improve IQ.
They do have information - otherwise they wouldn't form a repeating structure - it would just be random.Actually, with abiogenesis you likely would just need a single self replicating protein (last I checked these had been created in labs). Once that happens, that protein is subject to the same evolutionary pressures as anything else.
Instead of assuming things about my assumptions... how about you make your case?We've all answered your challenges (despite your assumptions).Please?
Gene sequencing has shown that every organism on the planet is related there are some genes that nearly everything is sharing and, in our case, animals that look most like us also share the most genetic similarities.
God either exists or doesn't. The answer is one of the two. There is no "evidence" to support existence. There isn't a shread of evidence to support that anything supernatural exists either. None.If man wasn't aware of its own mortality, the idea of the supernatural would never even occur. It is the fear of death that creates the supernatural. Death is the cognitive architect of it all.
Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
That is a distinction without a difference. Tasmanian wolf is not related to north american wolf. We have no proof that they had the same selective pressures. That is a huge assumption.going from point A to point b isn't as simple as putting selective pressure on something. Sonar is a designed integrated biological machines. You need a biological pathway, environmental conditions that require the adaptation to have an advantage.... You can assume all that happened, but that isn't proof.
troll
I just want one piece of evidence that is directly tied to a creator. That's it. Please pick anything you listed and explain exactly how it is tied to a creator. If it is actually evidence of a creator, I shouldn't be able to deny it, right?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
What about murder, cancer, war, the Quran, the teachings of Moses, Buddha, and teachings of all the other religions out there?Are those evidence of your god?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
Oh come on. Just stop. Why can't you admit that sensible people can look at things in a different way. I can't prove it to the level you want anymore than you can prove that life arose spontaneously without God. The bottom line is that we are here, but how we got here can't be scientifically proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and there is much disagreement. Stop asking for that which you know I can't provide.I just want one piece of evidence that is directly tied to a creator. That's it. Please pick anything you listed and explain exactly how it is tied to a creator. If it is actually evidence of a creator, I shouldn't be able to deny it, right?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
They have created self replicating molecules in the lab. But they were not created by chance they were designed. They do not prove evolution they prove intelligent design. Chemicals do not evolve. There is no natural selection or biological force favoring one chemical over another.
My religious beliefs can answer the questions of all of the above, but that is an entirely different subject than what we are discussing.What about murder, cancer, war, the Quran, the teachings of Moses, Buddha, and teachings of all the other religions out there?Are those evidence of your god?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
I did, and we have been talking about it. Information was my answer.
True, we found that we have common genes in things that evolutionary distant. Does that prove evolution?
Yet you make even greater assumptions that point to the existence of God...
Geez man. Listen to yourself. You just listed off "The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus." as evidence of creation and in the next post you're saying they aren't? Which is it? You did get one thing right. No one knows how we got here. I'm okay with saying "I don't know". Why aren't you? Why do you feel the need to attribute it to one of the thousands of man-made gods? You said you "could literally go all day here". All I'm asking for is once single piece of evidence that can be tied to a creator. This is why your theory of creation is laughed at. You cannot provide a single thing to back it up.Oh come on. Just stop. Why can't you admit that sensible people can look at things in a different way. I can't prove it to the level you want anymore than you can prove that life arose spontaneously without God. The bottom line is that we are here, but how we got here can't be scientifically proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and there is much disagreement. Stop asking for that which you know I can't provide.I just want one piece of evidence that is directly tied to a creator. That's it. Please pick anything you listed and explain exactly how it is tied to a creator. If it is actually evidence of a creator, I shouldn't be able to deny it, right?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
I am not, but I am not making the claim either way. See the point about the humans and sonar? If you look at our ear you wouldn't think we could use sonar but some people can. Whose to say that hearing developed first in early whales? Whose to say that some wiring in the brain or soft tissues that aren't preserved helped underwater hearing? Maybe it was an ambush predator in water and hearing vibrations on stone helped it? Who knows for certain? This is what Creationists don't understand. Evolution isn't perfect. However, we do know for certain that only modern cetaceans have the bones that we see in Pakicetus. We do know that other proto/primative whales shared that bone and teeth. We know that their skulls have common characteristics, are older than whales, and were found near the seas where some of the earliest whales were found.
Here is the problem - what would make it a better specimen? This is what always happens, the moving of the goal posts. It is a good example, it is a logical example, is it 100% certainty - no, of course not. However, that doesn't disprove evolution, it just means there are limits to what science can do. Initially, a whale ancestor wouldn't look much like a whale, any more than you or I look like a small rodent, or even further back like a microscopic single cell. If you aren't convinced because the differences are too vast then that is fine - but the other fossils are probably much closer to what you are looking for. Dinosaurs and birds are another decent example especially now that we have fossilized skin imprints and other evidence.
Also, I didn't ignore those other fossils. I spent an hour looking through the first 30 google links, reading wikipedia, talk origins and any other website I could find on pakicetus and decided to start with this one.
If someone admits to me "ok, that's a pretty iffy speciman of whale evolution" I'll move on. If they change my mind, and show me why it is a great example of whale evolution (besides just stating "because scientists say it is"), I'll accept it. Thus far, no one has done either, so I'm not going to take the time to go through the other ones.
You make just as big an assumption that life occurred without a God.
Crystals have information, of course. But random structures would be much more densely packed with information than crystals are, precisely because crystals have a repeating pattern.Consider two strings of 100 characters composed of ones and zeros. The first is generated randomly, with each character equally likely to be a one or a zero. The second consists of "10" repeated 50 times. Which string can be precisely described in fewer words (so that your friend could accurately transcribe all 100 characters, in order, based on your description)?
You make an even bigger assumption that life occurred without Santa Claus.
Geez man. Listen to yourself. You just listed off "The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus." as evidence of creation and in the next post you're saying they aren't? Which is it? You did get one thing right. No one knows how we got here. I'm okay with saying "I don't know". Why aren't you? Why do you feel the need to attribute it to one of the thousands of man-made gods? You said you "could literally go all day here". All I'm asking for is once single piece of evidence that can be tied to a creator.Oh come on. Just stop. Why can't you admit that sensible people can look at things in a different way. I can't prove it to the level you want anymore than you can prove that life arose spontaneously without God. The bottom line is that we are here, but how we got here can't be scientifically proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and there is much disagreement. Stop asking for that which you know I can't provide.I just want one piece of evidence that is directly tied to a creator. That's it. Please pick anything you listed and explain exactly how it is tied to a creator. If it is actually evidence of a creator, I shouldn't be able to deny it, right?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
All of those things are evidences to me. If you'd like I can just say DNA and I'll take my ball and go home. But it's not just DNA. It's not just ONE piece of evidence anymore than you believe in evolution because of one fossil or one DNA comparison. It's an accumulation of the evidences that I've seen. I'm never begged you to believe. That's just what I believe. I'm comfortable saying I believe in a God. If you aren't, then don't. Stop spending your precious remaining time on earth trying to convince people that there isn't a God.
You've yet to explain how any one of those things is tied to a creator.Geez man. Listen to yourself. You just listed off "The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus." as evidence of creation and in the next post you're saying they aren't? Which is it? You did get one thing right. No one knows how we got here. I'm okay with saying "I don't know". Why aren't you? Why do you feel the need to attribute it to one of the thousands of man-made gods? You said you "could literally go all day here". All I'm asking for is once single piece of evidence that can be tied to a creator.Oh come on. Just stop. Why can't you admit that sensible people can look at things in a different way. I can't prove it to the level you want anymore than you can prove that life arose spontaneously without God. The bottom line is that we are here, but how we got here can't be scientifically proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and there is much disagreement. Stop asking for that which you know I can't provide.I just want one piece of evidence that is directly tied to a creator. That's it. Please pick anything you listed and explain exactly how it is tied to a creator. If it is actually evidence of a creator, I shouldn't be able to deny it, right?Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.
Let's make a deal. I'll stop doing that if you promise to stop trying to disprove Evolution. And while we're at it it would be nice if other believers didn't try to push to have ID/Creationism taught in public schools.Believe whatever you want to believe. You want to teach your kids about Creationism? Great. Just keep it at home and in the church.
This is indeed the bottom line.You attack speculation while relying on it entirely for your own position.
Again....the whole point of me getting into the pakicetus discussion...This isn't my kind of science. The speculating of what an animal probably looked like based off of skull fragments, the theorizing on fossils that cannot be proven, the guesswork, followed by the dogmatic seal of evolutionary approval are not for me. There are limits to what you can learn about an animal based on fossils. That's the bottom line, and we may have finally found a point of agreement.'sn0mm1s said:I am not, but I am not making the claim either way. See the point about the humans and sonar? If you look at our ear you wouldn't think we could use sonar but some people can. Whose to say that hearing developed first in early whales? Whose to say that some wiring in the brain or soft tissues that aren't preserved helped underwater hearing? Maybe it was an ambush predator in water and hearing vibrations on stone helped it? Who knows for certain? This is what Creationists don't understand. Evolution isn't perfect. However, we do know for certain that only modern cetaceans have the bones that we see in Pakicetus. We do know that other proto/primative whales shared that bone and teeth. We know that their skulls have common characteristics, are older than whales, and were found near the seas where some of the earliest whales were found.'shader said:Here is the problem - what would make it a better specimen? This is what always happens, the moving of the goal posts. It is a good example, it is a logical example, is it 100% certainty - no, of course not. However, that doesn't disprove evolution, it just means there are limits to what science can do. Initially, a whale ancestor wouldn't look much like a whale, any more than you or I look like a small rodent, or even further back like a microscopic single cell. If you aren't convinced because the differences are too vast then that is fine - but the other fossils are probably much closer to what you are looking for. Dinosaurs and birds are another decent example especially now that we have fossilized skin imprints and other evidence.
Also, I didn't ignore those other fossils. I spent an hour looking through the first 30 google links, reading wikipedia, talk origins and any other website I could find on pakicetus and decided to start with this one.
If someone admits to me "ok, that's a pretty iffy speciman of whale evolution" I'll move on. If they change my mind, and show me why it is a great example of whale evolution (besides just stating "because scientists say it is"), I'll accept it. Thus far, no one has done either, so I'm not going to take the time to go through the other ones.
I agree creationism shouldn't be taught in schools. Bill Nye was the one who started this thread with ridiculous statements that were insulting to intelligent Christians, and I didn't know defending your beliefs was an issue. Feel free to believe in the evolutionary fairy tales if you'd like.'Marvin said:
If you can't see it, it's not worth discussing. DNA=blueprints. The watch found in the desert proves a designer. The house you come upon, proves a designer. It's elementary. It's logic 101 to ME. Obviously not to you, and if you don't respect my intelligence due to my "simplistic" view on this, that's your right. But I don't know exactly what you're asking for here. Kind of like the scripture that was posted earlier Romans 1:20. Creation is clearly seen, it's right in front of your eyes every day. Either you see it or you don't.'Cliff Clavin said:You've yet to explain how any one of those things is tied to a creator.'shader said:'Cliff Clavin said:Geez man. Listen to yourself. You just listed off "The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus." as evidence of creation and in the next post you're saying they aren't? Which is it? You did get one thing right. No one knows how we got here. I'm okay with saying "I don't know". Why aren't you? Why do you feel the need to attribute it to one of the thousands of man-made gods? You said you "could literally go all day here". All I'm asking for is once single piece of evidence that can be tied to a creator.'shader said:Oh come on. Just stop. Why can't you admit that sensible people can look at things in a different way. I can't prove it to the level you want anymore than you can prove that life arose spontaneously without God. The bottom line is that we are here, but how we got here can't be scientifically proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and there is much disagreement. Stop asking for that which you know I can't provide.'Cliff Clavin said:I just want one piece of evidence that is directly tied to a creator. That's it. Please pick anything you listed and explain exactly how it is tied to a creator. If it is actually evidence of a creator, I shouldn't be able to deny it, right?'shader said:Why present evidence you will deny?The universe, DNA, the amazing cell, the human brain, our reasoning ability, music, the earth, babies, women, the bible, the teachings of Jesus.I could literally go all day here, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to you, so why bother?'Cliff Clavin said:No, it isn't my opinion. Please present any evidence of a creator. Please. Pretty please.'shader said:In your opinion. Things I take as evidence and as proof, you disagree with. This isn't rocket science guys. There are intelligent people on both sides who see the evidence differently. Even some who believe in evolution, still feel that a God was needed. I can see both sides to a degree, but I've chosen to interpret the evidence as being proof of a designer. If that makes me ignorant in your eyes, so be it. Atheists don't have a monopoly on common sense and your analysis of the evidence is not necessarily correct.'Cliff Clavin said:'shader said:
ok
I don't know how you quantify either on to be honest. Which is harder or less hard. Life from non- life is a miracle and something science isn't close to explaining.'Cliff Clavin said:
Easy. A term you aren't comfortable with."I don't know."
No, not really. And I don't do it while simultaneously denouncing other's theories for not having a standard of proof that my own theory doesn't even come close, by orders of magnitude, of achieving (all while butchering English along the way).'MasterofOrion said:
