Posted on 10/11/2002 9:02:01 PM PDT by gore3000
Suuurrrrreeee you are....
(Two-faced so-and-so!)
Many posters, even many on this site, have vehmently expressed the view that Christianity held back the advancement of human progress,
The charge that Christianity has held back scientific progress is utterly ridiculous. Perhaps the best example of pagan materialistm is atomism. The fortuitous and mindless joining of atoms holds absolutely no prospects for scientific inquiry and neither does the fortuitous and mindless mutations held by present day materialists. Only theories which deny mindlessness and propose order can be the source of scientific inquiry. It is this belief in order, in natural laws which as stated in our Declaration come from God that has proven to be the source of the scientific spirit and scientific progress in the Christian West.
12 posted on 9/15/02 6:07 AM Pacific by gore3000
I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.
These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!
Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.
God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.
452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar
I believe both work. I've pinged a number of these threads to *crevo_list and it always works. Someone mailed and said it was due to the threads location (General Interest). I suppose that can be true, it's just weird.
If you had read post#659 you would know that 'junk DNA' is just one more evolutionist assumption which has been proven false. From the article by Baltimore on post#659:
The most discussed are coding regions that specify the sequence of proteins. Proteins are the actual machines that do the work of the body. The protein-coding regions are all that is captured by most metaphors for DNA. DNA as a book implies that all DNA has are letters that transform into words, the meaningful units of language, and that words are like proteins. But the regions of human DNA that encode proteins are only a few percent of the 3 billion-long string of letters. Most of it does other things. What are these other things?
The DNA code can specify the sites and nature of many different events. While we don’t know them all, there are easily 10’s of others aside from the sequence of proteins. For instance, DNA does not encode proteins directly, it uses an intermediary chemical string called RNA. Each RNA encodes one protein so an RNA is a form of packaging of the DNA string into meaningful, bite size pieces. But then the DNA must have a code for where to start an RNA, and where to end an RNA. The RNA is not used as a direct copy of DNA but rather is processed by destroying parts of it, modifying other parts and putting special structures at each end. There is code for each of these events.
a single base-pair mutation can cause a big difference in an organism's structure. . While the fruit fly example where an extra pair of legs or wings pops up with a single mutation is not a useful feature, that doesn't mean that no such mutation could be helpful, given how many will occur.
I already explained why the fruit fly's new wings were useless - because you need much more than a single mutation, a single gene to provide something useful. Read the 2nd paragraph on the quote above - the protein production needs more than the gene, much more. You are still following the discredited evolutionist assumption that the non-coding DNA is useless. Also check out the links in the article above on 'junk DNA' if you need more evidence.
So you realized it's there.
Yup, I know it's there, and many articles disproving evolution say they prove evolution. Many people just say that as a mantra without thinking or perhaps because they are afraid to be called kooks. Most scientists are concerned with discovering things, they do not want to get engaged in politics and the evolutionists have turned science into a political arena. The evidence disproves evolution.
Such complexity cannot arise by chance.
This is entirely undemonstrated.
Not according to Darwin. He said that if a complex thing could not be shown to have been able to occur by many small gradual steps then it would disprove evolution. This complexity disproves evolution because in the first place you need many things working together to add any kind of improvement. In the second place, because these changes have to be made without affecting any of the other complex processes of the organism. So yes, the complexity disproves evolution. Together with all the other problems I mentioned such as the problem about spreading mutations and the problem of the complexity of genes they all join to show that evolution is impossible.
missing--Butchered dove(TRUTH/SCIENCE/CONSTITUTION)---
appearing rabbit(RATS)/... 'experts'' !
Then came the...
SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/PSYCHO-EVO/NWO Soviet-LIBERAL-Socialist GULAG America---
the post-modern age of switch-flip-spin-DEFORMITY-cancer...
Atheist secular materialists through ATHEISM/evolution CHANGED-REMOVED the foundations...demolished the wall(separation of state/religion)--trampled the TRUTH-GOD...built a satanic temple/SWAMP-MALARIA/RELIGION(cult of darwin-marx-satan) over them---made these absolutes subordinate--relative...
REDACTING them
and calling/CHANGING---
all the... residuals(technology/science) === TO evolution via schlock/sMUCK IDEOLOGY/lies/bias...
to substantiate/justify/validate their efforts--claims...social engineering--PC--atheism...
anti-God/Truth RELIGION(USSC monopoly)---
and declared a crusade/WAR--JIHAD--INTOLERANCE/TYRANNY(breaking the establishment clause)...
against God--man--society/SCIENCE(religious oath-TEST for office/employment)!!
Was my burqas(#688) crooked?
If he had proof of such he would not be doing research on it now would he? Therefore his statements about this supporting evolution are assumptions totally unsupported by evidence. My statements therefore are what science knows about the matter. The statements of Hartwell, like most of the garbage evolutionists state are assumptions and therefore are not evidence and in no way contradict my statement, indeed they verify it.
Evolution is a theory supported by facts.
Contradicting yourself as usual. When I gave evidence disproving evolution you went into skeptical mode and said:
Then, my child, it isn't science, as science cannot "prove" anything.
655 posted on 10/17/02 10:09 AM Pacific by Junior
Now you go back on what you said and there are such things as scientific facts. Apparently when I show scientific facts there is no such thing as scientific facts. However, when you just repeat the stupid evolutionist mantra that evolution is a fact then there are scientific facts! I have presented facts disproving evolution, call them what you will. You have not refuted them and have lamely fallen back on the skeptical position and then taken it back. When you have some evidence for your side, get back to me. In the meantime, spare me your nonsense rhetoric and your convolutions.
You haven't presented anything except
Then refute it instead of going around saying that science is nonsense. Prove me wrong with facts. Your insults and rhetoric prove nothing.
Let's see you explain those species up there which disprove evolution conclusively. They are living facts against evolution which neither you nor any evolutionist dares to touch.
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.