DNA could modify itself with no outside help, say biologists

Princeton University ^ | March 28, 2006 | Chad Boutin

[Dimensio]

NO ifs, no could haves,no might haves,no may haves, no might possibly bes, etc etc etc and no theories.

That the statement is not made tentative does not make it true, nor does a lack of tentative language give the statement any additional credibility. It could be said that the use of tentative language is a matter of honesty.

[WKB]

That the statement is not made tentative does not make it true, nor does a lack of tentative language give the statement any additional credibility


You're right BUT the "Born Again Experience"
makes it ALL true. Try it you will not regret
it through out eternity.
Have a nice day.

[Dimensio]

You're right BUT the "Born Again Experience" makes it ALL true.

I do not understand. Could you elaborate?

Try it you will not regret it through out eternity.

That is impossible, as my conscious mind will not exist "through out eternity".

[js1138]

"...everything there is to know about evolution is already known Kool-Aid" placemarker.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

STILL Listening to the crickets chirp while waiting for a citation from SampleMan for:

1) A post where I told someone to shut up
2) Any scientists who has ever said that everything there is to know about evolution is already known.

[WKB]

You're right BUT the "Born Again Experience" makes it ALL true.

I do not understand. Could you elaborate?

It's not surprising that you don't understand.
The Bible says as much.

1 Cor. 2:14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he CANNOT understand them, because they are spiritually discerned
(NOT Scientifically figured out,my words)

John 3:3 In reply Jesus declared, I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Acts 4:12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.
Rom. 10:13 for,Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

Try it you will not regret it through out eternity.

That is impossible, as my conscious mind will not exist through out eternity

To believe that all there is to life is what we have on this earth has to be the saddest and most depressing existence that I can think of. To think that we are born, live a few years, accumulate a few things and then die just doesn't afford much hope does it?

The Bible is very clear that we will have eternal life. It's just a matter of where one chooses to spend it.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

John 5:24 I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

[metmom]

Interesting. I guess getting people to think of stars, lightning, the moon, etc. as part of God's handiwork rather than gods themselves was quite an impressively accomplishment for a work in that era, and quite a revolutionary concept - actually a step in getting people to break away from superstition rather than embrace it.

Which could be a good argument that the Bible isn't incompatible with science as some feel it is. And that believing in the Bible isn't as likely to lead us back into superstition and the Dark Ages as some would also have us believe. Christians are not the anti-science Luddites as often portrayed. The primary area of disagreement here is on origins and the interpretation of the fossil record.

The Bible also addresses several topics which have been confirmed by science, which the ancients would have had no way of knowing about. Some of them are the water cycle, that winds form a circulating system, the life is in the blood, there are oceans currents in the sea, to name a few. It gives credibility to the concept that the Bible IS divinely inspired when things are mentioned that they people of that age would have no way of knowing by themselves.

[Virginia-American]

which the ancients would have had no way of knowing about. Some of them are the ... the life is in the blood, there are oceans currents in the sea...

Surely it doesn't require revelation to notice that animals can bleed to death.

I have no doubt at all that the Phoenicians, Greeks, and other seafareres knew about currents.

[metmom]

Psalm 8:8 refers to *fish... passing THROUGH the paths of the sea*. Different from going ON currents. Fish swim IN the water; this implies that the currents are IN the water, different from currents on the surface of the water.

What about the rest?

How would they know about the circulating system of the atmosphere? Eccles 1:6,

Or the water cycle? Job36:27,28 and Eccles 1:8.

Or that everything was being held together or that everything even NEEDED to be held together? Col 1:17 Where would they have gotten that concept? Nothing in our experience would indicate that stuff needed to be held together but here we have discovered gravity and strong and weak molecular forces.

[Quark2005]

Christians are not the anti-science Luddites as often portrayed.

There are people opposed to science all over the religious spectrum - many Christian, many atheist, many everywhere in between. No argument from me there. On my (short) homepage I point out that spirituality and science are both of importance to the future of our nation and all of humanity, and I seriously mean it.

The primary area of disagreement here is on origins and the interpretation of the fossil record.

It goes much further than that, though. I've always believed that the fossil evidence is given disproportionate attention here, for one. It makes a strong case for evolution, but certainly not the only one. I might not be totally convinced myself if this was the only line of supporting evidence. The genetic evidence is much stronger (but harder to understand to most people, myself included). Biogeography (i.e. where related types of life are found) is also of paramount importance. Add shared morphologies, vestigial organs, observed cases of speciation, ring species, etc. - one can explain away any one or two of these, but all these different and varied supporting points? If evolution didn't occur, it sure seems the Creator went through some great pains to make it appear so. The mere "coincidence" that all these lines of inquiry yield the same picture is what lends so much confidence to the theory - not just one of 'many possible interpretations' of the fossil record.

The Bible also addresses several topics which have been confirmed by science, which the ancients would have had no way of knowing about.

I don't know that that's true, but it's irrelevant as to its authority in spiritual matters, anyway. I don't think accurate science is the point or reason for the Bible. The Bible's credibility comes from the practice of applying its principles and messages in our personal lives and the spiritual strength it gives.

[metmom]

The Bible's credibility comes from the practice of applying its principles and messages in our personal lives and the spiritual strength it gives.

I don't disagree with that either but if someone is not spiritually inclined, the argument is moot because it is not considered valid.

There have been some posters here who have stated that the conflict they see between science and Christianity has caused them to abandon faith/the Bible/Christianity/ whatever they wish to call it in favor of science. There are also others who don't acknowledge the existance of the spiritual realm and so for them, that line of reasoning doesn't work either.

I see the commonality in design because the creatures all live in the same environment and many subsist on the same foods or each other. It would seem that there would need to be similarities so nourishment could be provided.

If all the species were really different, I could see that as an argument against ID also. IOW, why would the designer have designed species so incompatible? Either way, it seems that the ID theory would be discredited.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

STILL listening to the crickets chirp while waiting for a citation from SampleMan for:

1) A post where I told someone to shut up
2) Any scientists who has ever said that everything there is to know about evolution is already known.

He wasn't making that all up, was he? :)

[metmom]

Surely it doesn't require revelation to notice that animals can bleed to death.

I don't really think bleeding to death is a common enough form of demise for people to make the connection. Sometimes creatures die without bleeding. Sometimes some bleed lots and live while others bleed little and die.

Many cultures also believe that people or animals die because their spirits are eaten so even if some animal or person is observed bleeding to death, it's still not recognised as the cause because, after all, everybody knows the real reason. (The People Time Forgot by Alice Gibbons)

[Dimensio]

It's not surprising that you don't understand. The Bible says as much.

I believe that you are attempting to "assume your conclusion" in order to support your claims. This is a logical fallacy, however. You cannot use the assumed truth of your conclusions as evidence that your conclusions are correct. While it is true that if your claims are correct, your Biblical analysis of the situation may be accurate, it is also possible that your claims are incorrect, and my lack of understanding is a result of that incorrectness.

To believe that all there is to life is what we have on this earth has to be the saddest and most depressing existence that I can think of.

You are free to believe that, however not all individuals share your view on that matter. Moreover, whether or not you find a situation desirable has no bearing on its truth value. That you do not find the abscence of an afterlife palatable does not mean that an afterlife exists.

To think that we are born, live a few years, accumulate a few things and then die just doesn't afford much hope does it?

That is your position. It is not shared by others, nor does your opinion on the matter alter reality.

[js1138]

placemarker

[FOG724]

ping

[WKB]

I do not understand. Could you elaborate?



The Spirit told me you were not seriously
asking me to elaborate to find out the Truth but just looking
for a chance to promote your agenda.
And your "oh so logical" reply bears that out.
However I felt it was worth the time and effort
to present the Truth to you the best I could.
Now I have done my part. When you stand before God
on judgment day you can't say
"I didn't know. No one ever told me that Jesus saves."

Also you said:
"That is your position. It is not shared by others, nor does your opinion on the matter alter reality"

All I have to say about that is:
Dittos baby!!!!

[Dimensio]

The Spirit told me you were not seriously asking me to elaborate to find out the Truth but just looking for a chance to promote your agenda.

How can you be certain that this information is accurate? What is my "agenda"? Also, what has this to do with the theory of evolution?

[WKB]

How can you be certain that this information is accurate?

Because God told me so and before you ask yes God speaks
to me and all other Born Again Believers.
Now you prove that God DIDN'T speak to me.


"What is my "agenda"?"

To do your best to make anyone who doesn't agree
with you to look uneducated and uninformed about whatever the subject happens to be at the time.
and in the process to make it look like you are
the only one who has any knowledge about anything.



"Also, what has this to do with the theory of evolution?"

Anything that denies or under minds the Truth about
God is open season in my book.

[Dimensio]

Because God told me so and before you ask yes God speaks to me and all other Born Again Believers. Now you prove that God DIDN'T speak to me.

If you are making a claim that an entity known as "God" spoke to you, then it is your responsibility to support that claim with evidence. It is not the responsibility of others to prove that the event did not occur.

To do your best to make anyone who doesn't agree with you to look uneducated and uninformed about whatever the subject happens to be at the time

How, exactly, am I doing this? I do not believe that I am capable of making others appear uneducated and uninformed. I believe that if a person appears uneducated and uninformed, it is likely a result of their inability to coherently present their position or, possibly a result of them being uneducated and uninformed. I merely state facts as I have obsered them.

and in the process to make it look like you are the only one who has any knowledge about anything.

I believe that your assessment is incorrect. I do not claim that I am the only individual with knowledge regarding "anything". I freely admit that there are a great number of subjects on which I am significantly less educated than others. I do not understand how you have arrived at this conclusion. Could you cite a specific example of my behavior that has led you to such a belief?

Anything that denies or under minds the Truth about God is open season in my book.

That does not answer my question. How does evolution relate to your previous claims regarding eternity or regarding what you claim God has said to you regarding your apparent misconceptions about my motives?