Then how do you explain the following?
Posted on 03/20/2009 8:31:27 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Physicists Bow to Darwin
March 18, 2009
...
Making Darwin the god of physics demonstrates once for all that the Darwiniacs have turned evolutionism into a religion. You need no more proof than to read these articles...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Ping!
Simply ask the Darwinistas how the eye evolved and watch them spittle on their shirt/blouse.
Darwin is the Anti Christ and science is the tool of the Devil??
I’ve seen all the proof I need.
I thought physics (via Einstein) showed that time was a variable (relativity) and depends on your viewpoint.
And I though it also showed (via Einstein) that all matter is just another form of energy (and vice-versa—E=MC squared).
So, a creation event that begins with “let there be light (energy)”, and which takes much less ‘real’ time than billions of years for that energy to become matter, is right in line with what science is finding out about the nature of the universe.
Currently and regarding all evolution-tainted scientific "disciplines", yes.
As often as you present this strawman, it still isn’t true. Scientists do not revere Darwin (or any scientist) as god. As always, it’s just another lame attempt to frame science as a religion and validate your belief in a certain creation myth.
No. Science is the tool of God. He gave it to us to explore his world and universe He created for us, so that we would learn to know Him and His ways.
The earth is placed in just such a place that the stars are visible at night. Closer to the galactic center, and there would be a bright glow that would make seeing individual stars impossible. Farther out and the visible number of stars would drop dramatically. God invites us to study and learn of Him from His Creation as well as from His Revelation of HImself in Jesus.
Our God is a never ending intelligence and He gave us the wonder of curiosity and science (learning) so that we may seek Him and find Him in all that we do, and appreciate how well He has done the job of Creation.
Science is not evil, though evil men can attempt to use it as such.
Then how do you explain the following?
I believe the Lord God makes objects fall to earth, not gravity, so I’m starting a movement to demonize Newton and all his followers.
More spam.
“Intelligent Falling” has a nice ring to it.
Wow...Seth Lloyds section seems to personify “science”...
it just underscores the ancient saying, that wherever we
go God is...(in this case, God is definded by his particular set of
human work area)....
I propose that the current day “science” be classified as
a new religion. It even has a trinity...man talk about
imitation...God(the Father) is “Whatever just IS”, the
Holy Spirit would be CHANCE” and Jesus is “TIME”....
So their “god of the gaps” argument goes like this....
“...I know, we cannot understand this phenomenom, but we
know (and have unshakeable faith) that “Whatever just IS”
will and can work out whatever happens using TIME and CHANCE”
...and we are but a manifestation of it’s outcomes. Amen.
Science is one and Darwin is its Prophet.
I wonder how many “scientists” will stop thinking of their own
mind as “all-knowing” and may be their enemy after they have
their first bout with a stroke, or they start realizing
that they are starting to forget things.
YES! - Oh, wait... no. If you're going to play, you'll have to do a little better than that. Let's see what the old professor himself has to say -
"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." (Darwin 1872)
Of course there's more...
"Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
Now if you wanted to make an intelligent comment and cared to do a little reading, you could start here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB921_1.html http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA113_1.html
Could I offer you a napkin? You seem to have drooled.
It is a cartoon. It is not evidence.
If I’m not mistaken, that image is from a creationist website.
Oh, ok Mr. Spock.
OK Sherlock, now where is the fossil proof.
Napkins to you ...
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.