Posted on 11/14/2007 4:00:52 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Discovery is spelled "cdesign proponentsists."
When did God give us the seedless watermelon?
Answer, when he gave human beings the brains to untangle genetics, he gave us the seedless watermelon. Just like he gave us the beaver dam when he gave us the beaver.
==The axes are labeled. A-L on the X axis, and I-XIV on the Y. If they appeared without a key, then they’re pretty pictures with no meaning. If, as I strongly suspect, you omitted the key, then you’re intentionally omitting information to claim that it isn’t there.
It’s the only chart Darwin included in his “Origin of Species.” It’s purely a conceptual chart with no actual data points whatsoever. Here are some phrases to give you a flavor of Darwin’s “key.”
“Let A to L represent the species of a genus large in its own country”
.....
“Let (A) be a common, widely-diffused, and varying species, belonging to a genus large in its own country. The little fan of diverging dotted lines of unequal lengths proceeding from (A), may represent its varying offspring. The variations are supposed to be extremely slight, but of the most diversified nature; they are not supposed all to appear simultaneously, but often after long intervals of time; nor are they all supposed to endure for equal periods.”
....
“But I must here remark that I do not suppose that the process ever goes on so regularly as is represented in the diagram”
....
“In our diagram the line of succession is broken at regular intervals by small numbered letters marking the successive forms which have become sufficiently distinct to be recorded as varieties. But these breaks are imaginary, and might have been inserted anywhere, after intervals long enough to have allowed the accumulation of a considerable amount of divergent variation.”
....
(For some reason, this last passage reminds me of Chauncy Gardner’s explanation of economic cycles in the movie “Being There”—GGG)
“The affinities of all the beings of the same class have sometimes been represented by a great tree. I believe this simile largely speaks the truth. The green and budding twigs may represent existing species; and those produced during each former year may represent the long succession of extinct species.”
==Likewise, the evidence against evolution being exposed almost daily is causing constant “rethinking” on the part of evolutionists.
Yep...what we are witnessing is the evolutionary-biological equivelant of epicycles.
It's hard enough to ponder why a single universal code would evolve, but how in this world or any other could the SAME DNA code evolve convergently?
Cordially,
They’re looking in the wrong places.
I’m here: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=2856
==You know, I am a Christian, and I am a biologist / biochemist. One does not preclude the other.
Who said being a Christian is incompatable with being a biologist/biochemist? Certainly not me. However, I could point you to a mountain of replies by Darwinists who claim that Creationists and IDers are not pacticing science, and are therefore not “real” scientists.
Like it or not, the Creation/ID/TOE debate is both scientific and political. Indeed, so political that our presidential candidates are being asked pointed questions as to where they stand on this issue at the nationally televised debates. Even President Bush has weighed in on the subject. In short, this is a very important issue to millions of Americans on both sides of the political divide. And I for one am taking a stand...and it will most certainly be one of the criteria I take into consideration when I step into the ballot box in ‘08.
So are you saying you won’t vote for a candidate that believes in evolution?
So whether or not the DNA that does the job was simply squeezed out of the materials at hand or came about through some sort of mutation, or evolutionary demigod like "natural selection", only that one would work.
If you need a certain protein on Earth, you will find essentially the same little DNA engine elsewhere producing it ~ even at the farthest reaches of the observable universe.
==So are you saying you won’t vote for a candidate that believes in evolution?
Can you read? Seems to me you are turning out to be quite the personification of the “agi” in agiprop. Feeling short-changed? Don’t worry, there’s still plenty of time for you to live up to the second half of the word.
It will be one of the criteria I use to determine who I will vote for in the primary. If a candidate is hostile to CR/ID, it will have an influence on how I vote. Is that clear enough for you?
The complete works of Charles Darwin are available online at darwin-online.org.uk, including the text of every edition of Origin and complete scans of most. The text accompanying the diagram starts on page 116 of the 1st edition, and can probably be found in that neighborhood in the subsequent editions.
Just in case you were curious.
What’s your evidence???
To believe in evolution requires that a person be utterly devoid of the presence of the Holy Spirit. Such a person has no hope of ever making a proper decision regarding any geo-political event or question. The only way that I would knowingly vote for such a person is if there is no other choice.
So did the muzzie terrorists that crashed the planes into the WTC. I wasn’t talking about prayer; you can pray for ‘most anything.
So whether or not the DNA that does the job was simply squeezed out of the materials at hand or came about through some sort of mutation, or evolutionary demigod like "natural selection", only that one would work.
You speak of protein synthesis as if it just popped into existence, but it is a phenomenally complicated thing that defies explanation. If proteins are required in the protein synthesis process, then where did those proteins come from in the first place? And why would a code evolve in the first place without the cellular machinery to use it? The code is so complex that numerous conjectures are advanced that the code evolved from simpler codes. But If that were the case why couldn't have different codes evolved in different lineages resulting in different codes in present species?
Given that the code is chemically arbitrary, and that another code would work just as well, how is it even conceivable that the same code just happened to evolve separately in different parts of the universe?
Cordially,
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.