Posted on 04/05/2006 10:32:31 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
Really? According to the Bible, God Himself admitted to making a mistake right before he Flooded the world.
Thank you, I've been around for a while although I have not requested a ping. Ichneumon overwhelms them because they do not understand his level of competence. I try to give a simple example they can't refute. Remember our high school graduates are now only 24th in the top 25 countries in math and science. They are first in self esteem. Their opinion has become more valuable to them than knowledge.
"and cloning does what?"
Makes an exact copy.
"Meaning that the clone is not an individual, yet a likeness of the host?"
Meaning its genome is not unique.
" Then you cannot make a true clone, due to the fact that by age, clones are not alike either."
True. Your point? I was not the one who claimed to be a clone; that was you. :)
And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. [Gen 6:6-7]
Psst...I am female.
I read that differently. But to each his/her own.
What is the biological mechanism that transforms the lobe-finned fish into the tetrapod?
Oh puleeeze...it is a load of crap, IMHO. Please know that I understand some people disagree with me on that, you included, but I will not make 3rd grade comments about your IQ, etc... you lose the argument once you do that.
I can't tell you the incongruity in your characterization of your creation. Of course, who am I to question God's will? God may have wanted to create an obnoxious ignoramus to heckle science from a seat on an upended crate.
We will just have to agree to disagree.
Then what's this then?
Still waiting on someone to explain the complexity of the cell to me or "molecular machinery". Nothing in Darwin's "THEORY" accounts for the complexity of the cell.
This thread is about how the "no transitional fossils" mantra you guys chant is false. Now, all your other mantras are dishonest, too, but even if one or two weren't it wouldn't give you a license to lie about anything else, would it?
Point One: Complexity can evolve.
Point Two: Molecular evidence overwhelmingly supports evolution.
So, in summary, the "no-transitional fossils" mantra is a lie, and all your other mantras are lies.
No, they are philosophers of theology. They argue faith and belief.
So is gravity, ignore it at your peril.
So9
Please post Darwin's theory so we can see for ourselves.
I owe you two apologies then. One for calling you "he"; and one for mistaking you for the other poster on this thread who is ignorantly asserting that he (or she?) is a clone.
Sorry!
Didn't mean to get under your skin so badly. Good day.
The picture is no doubt a Peppered Moth evo fake of the most egregious kind, as no mudskipper ever climbed a stump like that.
It's the Creationists who are desperate - desperate to come up with another spin on how to ignore another scientific discovery that doesn't fit in with their pre-conceived ideas.
I'll ask Creationists once again to explain the hundreds of different breeds of dogs. If God created every form of life exactly how it is now - then how did mankind breed different types of dogs? And if men can do it - why would you not think Nature can do the same thing?
I was hoping for something better from you. Don't you have someplace else to be????
Apology accepted. I understand how it can happen.
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.