My opinion is that you believe in evolution religiously. You believe that evolution has been observed, just as some believe they observe Mary weeping.
Posted on 11/28/2005 3:40:35 AM PST by PatrickHenry
The fuel driving this science education debate is easy to understand. Scientists are suspicious that Christians are trying to insert religious beliefs into science.
They recognize that science must be free, not subject to religious veto. On the other hand, many Christians fear that science is bent on removing God from the picture altogether, beginning in the science classroom--a direction unacceptable to them.
They recognize that when scientists make definitive pronouncements regarding ultimate causes, the legitimate boundaries of science have been exceeded. For these Christians, intelligent design seems to provide protection against a perceived assault from science.
But does it really lend protection? Or does it supply yet another reason to question Christian credibility?
The science education debate need not be so contentious. If the intelligent design movement was truly about keeping the legitimate plausibility of a creator in the scientific picture, the case would seem quite strong.
Unfortunately, despite claims to the contrary, the Dover version of intelligent design has a different objective: opposition to evolution. And that opposition is becoming an increasing liability for Christians.
The reason for this liability is simple: While a growing array of fossils shows evolution occurring over several billion years, information arising from a variety of other scientific fields is confirming and extending the evolutionary record in thoroughly compelling ways.
The conclusions are crystal clear: Earth is very old. All life is connected. Evolution is a physical and biological reality.
In spite of this information, many Christians remain skeptical, seemingly mired in a naive religious bog that sees evolution as merely a personal opinion, massive scientific ruse or atheistic philosophy.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Oh, sorry, I forgot to add (I'm on a conference call and distracted! hahah). The Bible is clear that Man now caps out at 120 years. So I don't think splashing that stuff will do anything for adding to one's life. But I'm not saying that the UV thing isn't a rational theory prior to the destruction of Man. I would say the physics of the earth would have changed given it didn't even rain prior to. So maybe there is something to the UV thing. I don't know and it's speculation at best.
As opposed to the rest of what you just posted?
You sound religious.
"Skin cancer doesn't significantly reduce average life expectancy."
If it's left untreated, it possibly can.
"As opposed to the rest of what you just posted?"
Just responding to your thoughts and post on "So you think if you slap on the SPF 30, you can live until you're 900?"
It would be an interesting if you could. I've already got some good product names..."Hell on Earth" (assuming you'd be married to the same woman for 900 years). Or maybe "Death B Gon". Maybe "Tax Slave". Can you imagine paying taxes for 900 years?!?
Non-sequitur. Do you have an argument or just inane one-liners in abscence of rationality?
Average life expectancy is a statistical average over a population. If you get skin cancer and decide not to treat it, it will have a negligible effect on the average life expectancy.
It would be an interesting if you could. I've already got some good product names..."Hell on Earth" (assuming you'd be married to the same woman for 900 years). Or maybe "Death B Gon". Maybe "Tax Slave". Can you imagine paying taxes for 900 years?!?
LOL!
And besides, if they think Social Security is in trouble now, wait until they add a few Methuselahs!
Calling you religious was supposed to be an insult apparently.
social security would kick in at year 675...
"Average life expectancy is a statistical average over a population. If you get skin cancer and decide not to treat it, it will have a negligible effect on the average life expectancy."
I got ya now. Statistically speaking, yes, you're probably right. I was thinking more in terms of an individual.
"And besides, if they think Social Security is in trouble now, wait until they add a few Methuselahs!"
LOL! Yeah, but I'm betting your friendly federal government would increase the mandatory benefit qualification age to 899 years!
Well, what if another fundamentalist Christian choose the version where God creates Man and then in searching for a companion for man, creates animals, and then finally takes a rib from Adam and makes Eve. Because the first version says that God created humans. The first version is the Priestly version. The second version is the J or Yahwist version.
I'll go with the first version.
I believe in God. I also believe the same as you. I don't think that "6 days" has to be taken literally; I think that evolution may not be at odds with the common beliefs how Christians interpret the Bible - just a matter of time and perception. I believe that it is enough to believe that there is such as Faith.
Not even individual cells?
I believe God created evolution.
My opinion is that you believe in evolution religiously. You believe that evolution has been observed, just as some believe they observe Mary weeping.
Brain on creationism alert
Christians can't afford to follow the word of [evangelical-biologists] if they don't adhere to the word of God !
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.