Posted on 12/21/2005 6:22:46 AM PST by truthfinder9
One of biggest paradigm shifts in origins in recent years is when genetics and morphological studies began to show that Neanderthals and humans werent related. Sure, a lot of Darwin Fundies around here dont know that because they get all of their science from the talking point lists of their Fundamentalist Leaders. So this is probably a big shock too, science is also showing that man is not related to any hominids including apes.
In the groundbreaking book, Who was Adam?, biochemist Fazale Rana examines the scientific research that is overturning Darwinian Fundamentalism. Here, using peer-reviewed research that the Darwin Fundies claim doesnt exist, Rana shows man is unique and designed.
And he details the latest findings on the fossil record, junk DNA, Neanderthals, human and chimp genetics. There's more science here than most Darwin Fundies have ever read, but this will be the next great paradigm shift.
The parallels between Genesis and the latest scientific data are profound... - John A. Bloom, Ph.D., professor of physics, Biola University
On Ranas previous book, Origins of Life:
Evolution has just been dealt its deathblow. After reading Origins of Life, it is clear that evolution could not have occurred. - Richard Smalley, Nobel Laureate, Chemistry, 1996, professor of physics and astronomy, Rice University
Real science by real scientists. According to Darwin Fundies this doesn't exist, but here it is.
...and Lyola? ;^)
Maybe the forests shrunk and the grasslands expanded. Kind of forces some changes.
Oh, now I see, you just replied to the wrong post. I'm no longer confused.
I think your paradigm shift just striped it's clutch.
Like this?
I'll leave that excercize for his followers.... ;^)
I'll leave that exercize for his followers.... ;^)
However, to continue this thread, your tagline:
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
contains an improper number of "dots" for ellipsis (3 is the standard).
Now its you're turn, to find sumthing wrong in my post!!
Does everyone who believes E=mc2 "worship" Einstein?
Other than the ritualistic sacrifices and the Tuesday meetings?
No.
It reminds me of the debate in cosmology over the big bang. The Bible was correct. The steady-state model has since been discredited.
There we go... Now, granted, these words are David's not God's, per se... But we know, scientifically, how a baby is created and formed in the mother's womb. We know it is not God putting the baby together, part by part. Rather, God created the process by which a Baby is "knit together."
It is similar with evolution. The exact process of evolution is not understood as well as the process by which a baby is created and develops in his mother's womb. But the God-as-Potter process of evolution, but the God-created (and maybe sometimes manipulated) process is there.
So the Darwinists are in the same boat with the engineers, baseball umpires, orchestra conductors, podiatrists and traffic cops. Their field of expertise does not include the origins of the universe.
Evolutionary theory does not answer the question of the origins of matter because that's not what it's about. When a child asks his mother where babies come from, it's not a cosmological question.
Evolutionists find themselves in the same boat as those that believe in a designer - something existed forever or something sprang forth from nothing - both are miracles (supernatural based on our current knowledge of the natural)
Either supernatural, or just beyond the scope of our current knowledge. Some people who believe in the account in Genesis -- and I am not extrapolating this out to all ID supporters or even all creationists -- seem to believe that because their account of creation answers everything, that is a necessary feature of any theory of human origins. It isn't.
You do know how to use copy & paste don't you?
So then, what does "common descent" mean, if not some kind of relationship? I sense a semantic shell game here.
"Public School Fact:
"Religious Student doesn't believe in Darwinism = F in class"
You are not graded on your belief or disbelief; you are graded on your understanding of the material presented. I do not, for example, believe in Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, but I did get a A- in a Comparative Near Eastern Religion class I took in 1993, as I was able to identify the critical elements of each of those religions' beliefs. A religious student who correctly identifies the critical features of the theory of evolution (random mutation plus natural selection eventually equals speciation) on the test passes the test.
"Atheist Student doesn't believe in Religion, subscribes to Darwinism = A in class"
Again, not demonstrated. An atheist who does not do his homework and misstates critical elements of the theory of evolution on his biology exam fails the test.
"Religious descrimination at its worst."
It isn't, for the reasons described above.
"Sending kids to public schools will guarantee religious discrimination...take the hint."
Filing a lawsuit on this basis will be correctly identified as vexatious litigation, and will result in the plaintiff getting to pay sanctions...take the hint.
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.