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


1 posted on 04/17/2009 7:59:08 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Finny; vladimir998; Coyoteman; allmendream; LeGrande; GunRunner; cacoethes_resipisco; ...

Fearfully and wonderfully made ping!


2 posted on 04/17/2009 7:59:33 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

of course, it is painfully obvious to all but the most stridently mililtant worshippers at the altar of darwin, that God is behind all of this...

bet they hate it when science confirms more of God’s handiwork.


4 posted on 04/17/2009 8:02:04 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

Ignorance is bliss.


5 posted on 04/17/2009 8:02:13 AM PDT by Pox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

All evidence, properly evaluated, confirms creation.


12 posted on 04/17/2009 8:16:46 AM PDT by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

I didn’t see the part where the scientists who conducted the research confirmed that the fruit flies didn’t evolve.


14 posted on 04/17/2009 8:19:41 AM PDT by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

How many fruit flies had to die for this testing? We must protect the little fruit fly and banish all fruit fly testing.


15 posted on 04/17/2009 8:19:49 AM PDT by edcoil (Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner Liberty is a well-armed lamb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

I haven’t read it. My prediction: a scientific study done by a real scientist, interpreted by the ICR to a conclusion that does not follow the real scientist’s conclusions.


20 posted on 04/17/2009 8:47:28 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts
The Brian Thomas M.S.*/ICR method of scientific research:
1. Read articles that have been recently published by major scientific journals.
2. Claim that sad articles support creation without performing any original research.
3. ???
4. Profit! Special creation is proven!
21 posted on 04/17/2009 8:47:33 AM PDT by Boxen (There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

Fools.


49 posted on 04/17/2009 9:37:17 AM PDT by Glenn (Free Venezuela!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts
The researchers had not expected to find “a much greater degree of genetic variation than had been uncovered by previous studies.”

Because the technology to do this wasn't previously available.

“Notably, most of the candidate transcripts identified were unexpected based on previous mutational analyses of the traits.”2 Thus, most of the genetic organization and activity they observed was not predicted to be there by the evolution-through-mutation story!

They were not observed using the old technology or organized according to the new model.

When the new genomics models appear, poor Brian is going to have to keep re-writing his argument.

53 posted on 04/17/2009 9:42:59 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

>>Gene Construction Confirms Creation

by Brian Thomas, M.S.* <<

I believe this is the same gentleman who wrote that finding proto-feathers on dinosaurs and said that made it harder to say to birds descended from dinosaurs...


124 posted on 04/17/2009 2:33:25 PM PDT by gondramB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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