Skip to comments.
Yale Computer Scientist David Gelernter Abandons Darwinism
breitbart ^
| 8/22/19
| Tom Ciccotta
Posted on 08/25/2019 2:15:58 PM PDT by Roman_War_Criminal
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-129 next last
To: bwest
Evolution theory does not claim to address the origin of life.On the contrary, it does:
81
posted on
08/25/2019 9:26:43 PM PDT
by
ebb tide
(We have a rogue curia in Rome)
To: bwest
Something with some evidence. Why do we need to believe in evolution?
82
posted on
08/25/2019 9:52:51 PM PDT
by
bray
(Pray for President Trump)
To: Jonty30
Where our Creator created one kind of canine, which branched out into wolves or foxes or dogs. Or one kind of feline that eventually branched out into tigers, desert cats, that became our house cat, Panthers, Jaguars.
Etc.
First I heard of that explanation/theory was earlier this month at Ark Encounter. It was a very interesting presentation with many exhibits comparing creation vs. evolution. Many of the Kinds shown were closer to dinosaurs than the animals we see today...veeerrry interesting.
83
posted on
08/25/2019 10:19:39 PM PDT
by
gnickgnack2
( Another bad day for Trump, he only got seven major things accomplished .)
To: Timmy; bwest
I dunno, maybe wherever the evidence leads? Scientists have hung onto Darwinism for years because, as Richard Lewontin said, Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. And maybe because they know the only alternative is a Designer/Creator?
84
posted on
08/25/2019 10:53:09 PM PDT
by
boatbums
(semper reformanda secundum verbum dei)
To: fuzzylogic; steve86
85
posted on
08/25/2019 11:03:53 PM PDT
by
boatbums
(semper reformanda secundum verbum dei)
To: dfwgator; Mrs. Don-o
Galileo pretty much proved that the geocentric system was wrong.
Copernicus beat him to it. The Bible beat them both:
In the heavens He has pitched a tent for the sun like a bridegroom emerging from his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. It rises at one end of the heavens and runs its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth. (Psalm 19:4-6) The sun goes in a circuit (Psalm 19:6). Some scientists scoffed at this verse thinking that it taught geocentricity the theory that the sun revolves around the earth. They insisted the sun was stationary. However, we now know that the sun is traveling through space at approximately 600,000 miles per hour. It is literally moving through space in a huge circuit just as the Bible stated 3,000 years ago! http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html
86
posted on
08/25/2019 11:34:08 PM PDT
by
boatbums
(semper reformanda secundum verbum dei)
To: ebb tide
To: bwest
88
posted on
08/26/2019 6:47:02 AM PDT
by
Jan_Sobieski
(Sanctification)
To: Bulwyf
“Whos got no biology training?”
David
To: Bulwyf
“Theres no way any FR folk believe in evolution. “
There are a lot.
To: Manly Warrior
“Thought and practice are not the same, but you know that.”
Perhaps David should not practice his thoughts.
To: TexasGator
Evolution takes more faith to believe than believing the Bible. Good to know there’s lots of faithful people here, it would be great though if they directed that faith at Jesus, the Son of God.
When I get home today, I’ll link a decent article I found.
92
posted on
08/26/2019 9:01:50 AM PDT
by
Bulwyf
To: adorno
Autos and trucks did not evolve by myriads of random mutations. If they did, you could get yourself a nicer pickup by shooting the one you've got repeatedly with the constitutional firearms of your choice. Through automotive history, autos and truck have been modified intentionally by agents who have thought about it. They are products of intelligent design.
"Intelligent." Uhh---
93
posted on
08/26/2019 9:43:26 AM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(And that's a fact.)
To: TexasGator
So, are you saying the biologist and the thoracic surgeon are on the same level? Of course, one would not dictate procedure to a surgeon, but then again, one CAN study procedure or practice and comment on it. Just don’t try it on your father-in-law who needs a stint or bypass. Indeed, as an engineer I too worked on a facility while it was in full operation ( bridges etc)... Does that make my profession equal to that of a surgeon operating on a living human?
Biology, archeology, geology, etc, all are indoctrinated to Darwinism and the eons of time it would have to require in order to be remotely plausible. On the other hand, a chest surgeon is literally operating in the here and now. Big difference, as it does not matter what philosophy the doctor adheres to personally, as long as he performs the procedure properly, fixing the patients problem (or attempting to anyhow). He has no narrative to follow, just practical medical science. Sure, biology at the organism level is applied ( in the background), but it matters not whether the surgeon believes we morphed from a monkey or were created by the hand and breath of God.
A biologist that assumes God created per the Biblical account likely will find a new career rather than live in the paradigm of the institutionalized religion of ‘”the theory” of evolution”’, else become an apologist.
94
posted on
08/26/2019 10:24:51 AM PDT
by
Manly Warrior
(US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War")
To: Mrs. Don-o
Autos and trucks did not evolve by myriads of random mutations.
You're seconding the point I was making, The auto and truck industries did not evolve. They were intelligently 'evolved' by human. Just like humans and all life forms were intelligently 'evolved'. One cannot argue that there is 'shared' DNA in all life forms, but that it all happened as described in Darwin's "science" of evolution, is not proven nor can it be proven. There is no progression in life forms; only observed similarities which seem to suggest progression. But, it's a smartly designed progression, where there are no DNA progressions from one species to the next 'higher' species in that 'apparent progression'.
95
posted on
08/26/2019 12:16:13 PM PDT
by
adorno
To: adorno
That’s right. Good point, and very much borne out in the fossil record.
96
posted on
08/26/2019 12:50:21 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
("Genius is of small use to a woman who does not know how to do her hair." - Edith Wharton)
To: Roman_War_Criminal
Evolution still can’t be modeled. The so called theory is a bunch of anecdotes.
97
posted on
08/26/2019 12:54:40 PM PDT
by
DungeonMaster
(Prov 24: Do not fret because of evildoers. Do not associate with those given to change.)
To: Manly Warrior
“So, are you saying the biologist and the thoracic surgeon are on the same level? Of course, one would not dictate procedure to a surgeon, but then again, one CAN study procedure or practice and comment on it. “
No. ...and the dear author has not studied microbiology. He is just parroting the words he was paid to write.
To: Manly Warrior
LOL! Every day we see doctors promote quackery.
To: Bulwyf
“Evolution takes more faith to believe than believing the Bible”
Which Bible?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-129 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson