Posted on 08/01/2005 10:58:13 AM PDT by wallcrawlr
You're right, we should never change our minds based upon new evidence!
/sarcasm
Keeping with the Bacon theme, Bal :-)
Kept in a separate section under a sign reading "do not play well with others."
The list was deployed. Post 10.
Noone anne Singg?
Why don't you demand scientific proof of the Theory of Gravitation, or scientific proof of the Atomic Theory? The fact is, scientific theories can never be proven, they can only gather mountains of evidence in their favor.
Bobby Burns.
We can accept evolution without accepting it as a reason to deny or ignore God. God evidently used evolution. But, this knowledge cannot, as the atheists claim, rid us of the only answer to the ultimate fill-in-the-blank: "in the beginning _______."
If a thing is true, it is from God. Fossils are old. Fossils show a pattern. And now, we are seeing similar evidence in the genomes of those we are studying.
Unlike sin, including sexual immorality, science and history and the ways that they inform us about the nature of the universe that God made should not be made stumbling blocks or tests for fellowship.
Actually, I read a good chunk of it
Timing is everything. You gotta post these threads right after shift-change time at the ol' sawmill.
HhhMMMMMMMmmmmmm.
1D
adof - 3
Oh yeh!.
D. Adolph III. One of the Boys from Brazil crowd. Often wondered what happened to him.
"Evolution tells us that humans and mice diverged about 80 million years ago. And yet, when you line up their sequences of the same homologous gene, you see very interesting evidences of similarity. Figure 3 is a complicated diagram showing this relationship. At the bottom is a schematic of part of chromosome 7 (CFTR is, by the way, is the gene for cystic fibrosis) but 500 kilobases away from that is a gene called CAPZA2 which is chosen at random. Across the top is a schematic of part of that CAPZA2 gene in the human. Each one of those funny looking symbols is one of these repetitive sequences. You need not concern yourself much about those; they are just different types of transposable elements and other types of repeats."
And he goes on to mention the chimp, just as Ichy does:
"It is not just a human/mouse comparison one can do. Eric Green at the Genome Institute has looked at this same region in many other species and, in fact, you can find this same CAPZA2 gene in everything from chimps down to zebra fishes and a lot of things in between (see Figure 4). Notice the pattern. The chimpanzee is almost 100% identical to the human, except the chimp has a deletion just before exon 2 that we do not have. Otherwise the match-up, as in most cases of human and chimp comparison, is about 98.5% to 99%. You can see that the baboon is starting to diverge. The cat and the dog and the cow all look a lot alike, and again if you look at the CAPZA2 exons, you will see that every one of those species has a nice conserved little segment there. But as you get further away to rats, mouse, chicken, two different kinds of pufferfish and then a zebra fish, about the only thing you see is the protein encoding regions, while the rest of the scattered noise goes away. Again, this is a very compelling kind of pattern in terms of what one would expect from evolution."
"Yet for your argument you say that theory's and science are true, yet unproven.
He asked for proof, not evidence. We ask for evidence, when we ask.
"Fascinating
Please tell more, much more.
The Word(tm) is supposed to be absolute, it should be able to supply proof. Theories are not absolute and only require evidence that has passed the falsification test.
Answers: I don't know - reaction to implication?
and
yes, we do, although perhaps not any serpent that had offspring that we would recognize if it bit us today.
You sir, are either mistaken or a liar.
Creation does not need bluster bomb posts to substantiate the existence and orderly workings of the heavens and the earth. They were present and have been the object of scientific study before you and I were born. Without a Creator there would be no creation. It's that simple.
Evolutionism, OTOH, must present itself with all the ostentation of a professional whore in court, declaring in sufficient detail what is, and what is not, lawful fornication; how infinite possibilities over an indefinite period of time can, and do, explain all there is. It's that complex.
Ruby slippers and all?
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.