Politics and religion enter into evolution debate (71% of Bush voters support teaching ID

MSNBC ^ | Feb. 10, 2005 | Jon Hurdle (Reuters)

[VadeRetro]

Nice baiting, but the facts are clear. With regard to origin of life, you have a greater chance of winning the powerball lottery every second you are alive 10^-17 than the chance life has of spontaneously generating on earth during the geologic timeline 10^{-164 314}. Or in simpler terms probability = ZERO.

Curious assertion. What are you assembling in that model, and how is it being assembled? I never bother to check the math on these creationist dumb-dumbisms. I check the model. It's always something jumping together all at once from tiny parts. ("Half a cell is useless and would promptly 'die' before it could live.")

Your models and their improbability are an argument against, say, a human being made from dirt in one afternoon. Even God wouldn't try to make a bacterium that way.

Evolutionary models are gradual. They involve massive parallelism of experiment. They involve boostrapping from and building upon stable or semi-stable simpler precursors. They allow time.

If your model isn't that model, and it clearly isn't, then you have just made a good argument against creationism. All of your arguments are based on ignorance--your own.

Someone somewhere published some dazzling numbers and, grasping for any straw you can find, you took them. Or, vaguely remembering arguments of this sort, you whipped some up out of your little head to look like what you remembered.

Doesn't matter. Bad model = garbage in = garbage out.

A detailed history of cretinist bad models with critical analysis.

Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics, and Probability of Abiogenesis Calculations, an across-the-board generic debunking.

Yes, the facts are clear. You haven't said a true thing yet and you don't have the integrity to care.

[Grey_Wolfe]

1) Darwin's book is two-thirds theory and one-third problems he had with his own theory.
2) Many scientists consider science as their religion.
3) Anarchists and Atheists are militant about their beliefs.
Why does everyone except Christians have a say in what is taught to our children?

[VadeRetro]

1) Darwin's book is two-thirds theory and one-third problems he had with his own theory.

Darwin apparently tried to anticipate and weigh on the balance scales every argument that could ever be made against his theory. He had a remarkable facility for doing just that. If he didn't anticipate them all, he came close.

He was sharing the adventure of his own intellectual voyage of discovery, and reassuring his readers that he had really thought things out thoroughly. (This he had certainly done.)

By comparison, creationist literature seldom anticipates even the most obvious objection and is never well thought out. There is a reeking intellectual dishonesty to the whole thing, including the way Darwin's rhetorical questions to the reader (which he always went on to dissect to death) are lifted out and offered as evidence that he "had problems with his own theory."

He looked at his theory from every angle and knew he had discovered something important. A lot of other people had problems with it.

[MHalblaub]

1) Darwin's book is two-thirds theory and one-third problems he had with his own theory.

That is a real scientific approach to a new theory. Give me some problems with ID or IC.

2) Many scientists consider science as their religion.

That is not a scientific approach. How much is many?

3) Anarchists and Atheists are militant about their beliefs.

Christians are peacefully except they are on a crusade.

Why does everyone except Christians have a say in what is taught to our children?

Why does everyone have to except what some Christians want is taught to my children?

[bondserv]

Most Christians are unaware of what Jesus said on this subject.

Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. (Red letters indicate words spoken by Jesus Christ, emphasis added)

Jhn 6:67-69
67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God. (Red letters indicate words spoken by Jesus Christ)

Now you know. What will you do with the Son of living God? Pray about these things, they are critical in the coming times. I will do likewise.

[MHalblaub]

There are forms of life that are neither male nor female. Snails I think are one of them. Also exists a fish that is able to change his gender.

So tell me about "them" He was taking?

[animoveritas]

Now where is the logic?

You refuse to check the math, you again use plurium interrogationum, and summarily dismiss the conclusion. Then you resort to argumentum ad hominem.

I would gladly share the boundary conditions for your own calculation. This assumes you understand statistical mechanics. But given your emotional state, IMHO we would start aruging over whether the age of the earth is 1.4 (10¹⁷) seconds, whether 0.0001% of a genetic chain such as Amoeba proteus with 2.9 (10¹¹) base pairs would be adequate on a geometric model of a prime organism's increased genetic replicative efficiencies, whether 10¹⁰ primordial pools is acceptable, the chance of trail success given geometries of the sugars and phosphates, etc...

You haven't said a true thing yet...

I said, "Temporal life exists." Is this not true?

...and you don't have the integrity to care. All of your arguments are based on ignorance--your own. et al

Friend, if you wish to argue, then argue. There is no reason to insult me because you disagree with my conclusions. Buh bye.

[bondserv]

Jesus was speaking of having created Adam and Eve at the beginning of the creation. This was not a comment on any other life forms.

God's commentary regarding creating the universe. Notice how often the creation of the universe is tied to the creation of man:

Isa 45:12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, [even] my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

Zec 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I [am] the LORD; and [there is] none else.

Isa 40:21-22
Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
22 [It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

Isa 64:4 For since the beginning of the world [men] have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, [what] he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.

Psa 104:2 Who coverest [thyself] with light as [with] a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:

Again, more passages speaking about Adam:

Gen 5:1 This [is] the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

Mat 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made [them] at the beginning made them male and female,

Deu 4:32 For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man upon the earth,

[cripplecreek]

Don't ping me for this stuff please.

[bondserv]

Your wish is my command.

[MHalblaub]

Nice cites but the Bible is not a science book.

If your faith is so weak that you can't withstand some scientific theories then you should go to a monastery and close the doors behind you.

God made man but I never found a construction manual within the Bible how He did it. Even the point with the clay has no confliction with modern science.

I oppose teaching ID, IC or something like that in a science class. For a philosophy class it would be all right. There you can discuss the differences between a scientific theory and beliefs.

[Dimensio]

You refuse to check the math

The math is worthless if the model is not representative of reality. From where did you derive your calculations? What are you assuming needs to occur that leads to your determined probability?

[bondserv]

Nice cites but the Bible is not a science book.

I am sorry you feel the way you do. The Bible has much to say about the reality in which we live, otherwise it could be relegated to a relativistic mythology as the secularists so strongly desire. the Bible specifically address who Created us, and the evidence throughout the pages of Scripture consistently point to it having occurred on a specific day in history. These truths close the door on the justification of many malicious behaviors men are capable of, and is that which our Republic is founded. "All men are created equal."

"If it works for you, great. Putting people in a wood chipper works for me, and you need to just pull back and let me be me. I like to call these experiments science, and your book says nothing about science, so again, back off." Paraphrase of Saddam Hussien.

I understand that you are not personally taking things to that extreme, however according to your logic, cloning, embryonic stem cell research and pre-birth body part farming are in the realm of science and outside the realm of Scripture. Trust me, the courts have used this legal secularist argument since Roe v. Wade, which would have the Founding Fathers turning in their graves. We already had one guy convince 30 million Germans that this was reality, lets not go there again.

Some of the pathways science is taking are fraught with evil intent. Reality must be derived from a Higher Source, otherwise it becomes to each man his own. Then we can wave goodbye to goodness and respect.

[MHalblaub]

You can't be Amish because you are using a computer.

The Bible has much to say about the reality in which we live, otherwise...

The Bible really tells us much about our live and moral values but not much specific about nature e.g. why the sky is blue and how your computer works. Your computer is outside the realm of Scripture.

I understand that you are not personally taking things to that extreme, however according to your logic, cloning, embryonic stem cell research and pre-birth body part farming are in the realm of science and outside the realm of Scripture.

Cloning is very useful and makes a great effort for a fast development of new powerful plants. Cloning of animals as an attempt to understand what is going is in my opinion not to condemn. For humans I can see no need at all. Just do it because we can is not a reason.
Embryonic stem cell research is a dead end row and has a very slippery moral background. But not for stem cell research alone.
I must confess I have never heard about "pre-birth body part farming" before.

Some of the pathways science is taking are fraught with evil intent.

American and others scientists were developing the bomb in America while some others did it in Germany. Where is the evil intent? Not science is the evil it is the society which use the science. Therefore we need a moral background in science and not a condemnation of science in common.

[bondserv]

American and others scientists were developing the bomb in America while some others did it in Germany. Where is the evil intent? Not science is the evil it is the society which use the science. Therefore we need a moral background in science and not a condemnation of science in common

If you read through the posts by the ardent evolutionists on this board you will notice their desire to keep the Bible out of science. They are committed to separating scientific reality from Biblical reality. The reason for this is because it is their attempt to continue disregarding the truths of Scripture from their reality. Nothing untestable needs to be completely obeyed. It is subjective truth.

Look through the posts and consider the implications. By separating the truths we open the door to racism, eugenics, human cloning, euthanasia, abortion... Science must always be subjected to a moral compass. None on FreeRepublic condone these ideas, however because of the position they have taken they have no way to speak against these things. Within their worldview these things must be possible.

[Dimensio]

If you read through the posts by the ardent evolutionists on this board you will notice their desire to keep the Bible out of science.

Funny how you don't criticize proponents of gravitational theory for doing exactly the same thing.

The reason for this is because it is their attempt to continue disregarding the truths of Scripture from their reality.

Wrong, liar. The reason for it is that the Bible is not a science text, and the Bible makes claims that fall outside of the realm of scientific inquiry.

[bondserv]

The reason for it is that the Bible is not a science text, and the Bible makes claims that fall outside of the realm of scientific inquiry.

So you are saying the Bible has no relevance to science whatsoever. Just as I have contended.

Just because the Bible was not designed to be a scientific text does not mean it's comments have no scientific ramifications.

To quote Behe:

"Still, some critics claim that science by definition can't accept design, while others argue that science should keep looking for another explanation in case one is out there. But we can't settle questions about reality with definitions, nor does it seem useful to search relentlessly for a non-design explanation of Mount Rushmore."

God created the universe and all that there is within the universe, that is science. Because you deny He did it has no significance to the reality.

[Dimensio]

God created the universe and all that there is within the universe, that is science.

How can this claim be tested? What hypothetical observation would falsify your claim.

[WildTurkey]

Aerospace Engineering 101A: How Planes are held aloft by Angels.

[WildTurkey]

God created the universe and all that there is within the universe, that is science.

God made the tsunami that killed hundreds of thousands ...