Replies

allmendream....

The answer I gave you is from a PhD who is doing genetic research right now. If you won’t accept what he tells you, why would I want to dance with you any further on this? It wouldn’t matter if God Himself refuted you, you wouldn’t accept it anyway.

You have throughout this process refused to answer any questions while insisting everybody else answer yours, all the while mocking and deriding.

I believe I’ll stand right where I am. As I said before... you need to do some soul-searching in regard to Jesus Christ.

I’ll leave you with this which I posted quite a while ago. I’ll repost it here:

One of these statements is true:

1. Matter/Energy do not exist.
2. Matter/Energy are eternal.
3. Matter/Energy spontaneously generated out of nothing.
4. Matter/Energy were created.

Option #1 is falsified by the Scientific Method.
Matter & Energy are observed everyday.

Option #2 is falsified by the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which states (basically) that energy is running down and we will eventually have no usable energy left. At that point we will suffer “heat death”....the sun can not burn forever, it will eventually run out of fuel. If the universe were eternal, this would have happened already.

One more thing on this.... secular science is all-in on the Big Bang theory, admitting that there was a beginning and therefore the universe is not eternal.

Option #3 - Spontaneous generation is falsified by the 1st Law of Thermodynamics (By natural processes, energy cannot be created or destroyed), The Law of the Conservation of Matter (By natural processes, matter cannot be created or destroyed although it can change form) and the Law of Cause and Effect (every effect must have a greater and preexistent cause).

That leaves us with Option #4... that matter and energy were created. This does not violate any natural law.

Can I prove that the universe was created? No. I can’t.

However, natural law itself has falsified all the other options..... Naturalists, who believe only in nature and in nothing Supernatural have to ignore natural law to believe what they believe.

Can you define “macro” or “micro” for me such that it would be explainable?

Nothing your guy said addressed the issue how one change that was ten times as much could be micro - and could happen in a thousand years; while the other change that is ten times less can only be called macro and is supposedly impossible even after seven million years.

Your supposed geneticist point #4 is contrary to a basic knowledge of genetics. FOUR variations at any given genetic loci.

My point at the beginning of this thread stands.

Creationists say they don't believe in evolution or speciation or common descent of species - but apparently believe in it at thousands of times the rate and with an amazing power to change species over a very short period of time - as long as you call it “micro”.

You need to do some soul searching. Some actual research from non creationist sources - one who can count loci might help. I will pray for you.

Naturalists, who believe only in nature and in nothing Supernatural have to ignore natural law to believe what they believe.

A most penetrating insight, schaef21!

RE: naturalist/materialist theory, there seems to be something "unnatural" about Natural Law: It does not fit within either evolutionary theory or scientific methods. So are we just to disregard it?

But if we disregard Natural Law, then how can we make sense of the world? The fundamental insight of Natural Law theory is that there is a direct correspondence between the natural world and the structure of the human mind — which is what makes the world intelligible, knowable by us.

Because a picture is worth a thousand words, I drew one, based on insights from the mathematician/theoretical biologist Robert Rosen:

Another point: Natural Law, or any law, is by definition what philosophy calls a universal. Universals are "supernatural" in that they are not direct observables — they are non-phenomenal objects, intangible, and thus cannot be tested by the techniques of science.

Rather, science proceeds according to the fundamental insight of Natural Law theory: that the universe is fundamentally knowable by the human mind.

If science didn't believe that, it wouldn't have a single thing to do.

Thanks so very much, schaef21, for your outstanding essay/post!