Posted on 06/17/2014 8:31:55 AM PDT by fishtank
Powerhouse of Scientists Refute Evolution, Part Two
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
In 2011, 29 leading design scientists held a Biological Information symposium in which they compared the standard Darwinian explanation of origins to amazing new discoveries about biological languages. The second major theme among the group’s presentations dealt with “Difficulties in Creating Biological Information.” In essence, they tried to re-engineer aspects of creating information. What did they uncover?
Geneticist John Sanford, lead organizer of the Biological Information symposium, helpfully summarized the technical proceedings in a document titled, Biological Information: New Perspectives. A Synopsis and Limited Commentary.1 The document summarized evaluations of evolutionist’s digital attempts to envision natural selection generating information, for example with the software program Tierra.
In one paper, Dr. Ewert, an electrical and computer engineer, along with mathematician and philosopher William Dembski and computer engineer Robert Marks II, showed that Tierra failed to evolve information in computer simulations, even though its programmer placed unrealistic, evolution-friendly parameters into the software.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
Can’t wait to see when God destroys this creation and we get to watch the new one being created. All knowledge will pass away...So why argue about it?
Yes, if it is such “crap”, refute it fishtank, instead of just making yourself look like a sourpuss who can’t handle someone having a different opinion than you.
Oops, my previous post should have been directed to ZULU, sorry about that.
The geological and paleontological makes it apparent that species evolve.
The Bible is a religious text designed to inform people about God, how to live a decent life, to predict the arrival of a Saviour, his life,suffering and death for our sins and the promise of redemption
It contains some biology but is not a biology text.
It contains history but is not a history text. It is full of symbolism amd allegory as in Christ’s parables.
You CAN believe it is the word of God AND in evolution.
I do.
You can believe in the Bible as the word of God and on evolution.
I do
I think this thread is a good example of people commenting without reading the article.
A time-honored FR tradition, I suppose.....
haha .... yeah that was confusing.
By the way, I know at least one of the authors. Before he retired, we were in a book discussion group that focused on Christian worldviews issues.
“The Bible is a religious text designed to inform people about God, how to live a decent life, to predict the arrival of a Saviour,”
Yes.
“his life,suffering and death for our sins and the promise of redemption”
What is life? What is Death? What is sin? Who brought sin into the world?
“It contains some biology but is not a biology text.”
Is Biblical biology true?
“It contains history but is not a history text.”
Is Biblical history true?
“It is full of symbolism amd allegory as in Christ’s parables.”
How do you really know the Bible talks about life, death and sin? How do you know? You are forced to make epistemological assumptions that are only answered by information theory. An information creator (intelligence) sends a message to an information receiver (intelligence).
“You CAN believe it is the word of God AND in evolution. I do.”
Respectfully, you can only believe that by using a set of illogical presuppositions. (For example, was Jesus using allegory and parables when he mentioned Adam and Noah in his discourses? I don’t think that’s consistent in the narrative.)
“You can believe in the Bible as the word of God and on evolution. I do.”
May God bless you, I have answered because you certainly seem to be a brother (or sister) in Christ, and I thought you should know I bear you no ill will.
“The geological and paleontological makes it apparent that species evolve.”
Then why is always that you seem to attack anti-evolutionists with vitriol instead of just presenting this “apparent” evidence?
Anyway, what you say isn’t even a question that anti-evolutionists take issue with. Nobody disagrees that species change over time, or evolve. To say that is in dispute is just a straw man. The real dispute is with the bigger picture that evolutionists infer: that natural selection and other unguided processes can account for the full diversity of life, starting from one simple ancestor.
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.