Posted on 06/05/2024 9:15:18 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
lol. good morning thanks for correcting my comment’s possessives and punctuation. i don’t pay enough (any) attention when writing quickly.
this post is great and exciting to me because, the science of cellular biology is now far advanced over the time of Darwin and Lamarck. we begin to understand more about the amazing things going on in the cell. both Lamarck and Darwin had no real idea what actual mechanism(s) God was using to build-in adaption. we’re still in the infancy of understanding what the cell actually does based on cell bio-chemistry.
my point is that Lamarck didn’t eliminate the idea of adaptation outside of traits passed *solely* though inheritance/reproduction. thus he was right and Darwin wrong philosophically.
like Darwin, Dawkins philosophically can’t cope with that truth. Noble obviously can.
no. i stand firmly on what i wrote (punctuation errors not withstanding :)) there’s a *fundamental* difference between Darwin/Dawkins and Noble. interesting that you don’t see it. i see it because the truth conveyed in God’s Word (for me it’s the KJV despite it’s punctuation and translation errors) stands *forever* as unassailable Truth. ‘He who has an ear, let him hear.’
may God bless you and yours!
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.