Posted on 09/11/2008 9:55:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Sept 10, 2008 — Astrobiologist David Deamer believes that life can spontaneously emerge without design, but he thinks lay people are too uneducated to understand how this is possible, so he gives them the watered-down version of Darwin’s natural selection instead, which he knows is inadequate to explain the complexity of life. That’s what he seemed to be telling reporter Susan Mazur in an interview for the Scoop (New Zealand). Is the lay public really too dense for the deeper knowledge of how evolution works?...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Not today and not ever! ;)
You need to read your history. The pagan Constantine was your man : )
“The disagreement is that LeGrande is claiming that at any given instant, the sun's apparent position is lagged behind it's actual(and gravitational) angular position by about 2.1 degrees due to the earth's rotation rate of 2.1 degrees during the ~8.3 minutes it takes light to reach the earth from the sun. He'd be absolutely right if the sun orbited the earth - but it pretty much doesn't.” [excerpt]There is something very fishy going on here...
“The two body example is a good one. If one is completely stationary, its optical image will be aligned with is gravitation pull.Why did he agree?
Viewing the orbiting planet from the stationary planet will cause the optical image of the orbiting planet to lag its gravitational pull.”
“By definition of course there is a difference, but it is the same difference between accelerating at one G or being in the Earths gravitational field. The result is the same, it is a distinction without a difference.” [excerpt]To which I replied:
There is a distinction.And then to my statement about creating the appearance of angular motion, he replied:
They are the same in that they both create the appearance of angular motion.
But only one is detectable with a laser ring gyro.
“Thank you, my job is done : )”
I read your post. It is meaningless and a total distortion of any sense of reality.
That has nothing to do with my point.
My point is that killing millions of men, women, children, fetuses, puppies and other animals with the flood, there is no improvement in the world. Biblical history after the flood is full of corruption, warfare, genocides ordered by God, slavery sanctioned by God.
I'd say not many people would trade their lives today for that of a random person in Old Testament times. Especially considering the odds against being one of the Chosen.
Are you saying that if you pointed your finger at the optical position of the Sun, you would be pointing 2.1° behind its gravitational position?“Your argument the whole time has been that the sun appears to go across the sky every day?”“Pretty much that is it : ) Apparent vs the actual position of what we see, using the Earth as our point of reference. It couldn't be much simpler. ”
Gen 9: 5&6 5 And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man.
6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man.
There's also all the cases that required the death penalty in the OT.
And as for why? I'd say that morally, it's because God is the Author of life and no man has the right to determine when or where another will die. It's not man's place to decide that.
As a practical matter, giving the death penalty to murderers protects society. It would likely prevent conditions on earth from getting as bad as they were just before the Flood.
A case in point is our society today as the death penalty has fallen by the wayside. Look at how many murderers are repeat offenders. If they got the death penalty, the crime rate would go down.
“I read your post. It is meaningless and a total distortion of any sense of reality.”I'm sorry, I didn't mean to talk over your head.
I guess it is back to the basics to relieve you from your confused state. It takes about 8.3 seconds for the light to travel from the sun to earth. In that 8.3 seconds the earth rotates approximately 2.1 degrees.
Read it. Go to church. A Christ centered church. Read Christ’s own words.
More hyperbole, as is expected from the evos. Point to where MrB stated that he wanted the OT laws to be the law of the land, if you will.
I’m familiar with Constantine, I’m referring to the authors of each book. Alot of people were responsible for the NT.
Not to worry. Your posting 'highly technical stuff' is the last thing I would expect to see.
I wouldn’t necessrily say everyone, but far too many were, IMO.
You’re parsing words here.
You must be a raiders fan? :)
(Did you mean 8.3 minutes?)“So where do the 8.3 minutes and 2.1° fit in?”“I guess it is back to the basics to relieve you from your confused state. It takes about 8.3 seconds for the light to travel from the sun to earth. In that 8.3 seconds the earth rotates approximately 2.1 degrees.”
Try again. A quick google search will show that you're wrong, again. But coming from someone who thinks that "the pope and his boys" wrote the NT, that's not surprising. (post 1,254).
Apparently anything I say that’s not dead on is “hyperbole”. If I take comments at face value I’m “parsing words”. It’s really hard to have a conversation under those conditions.
This is from the interview that is the basis of the thread.
Suzan Mazur: But there are other mechanisms contributing to evolution. The public is not being told about this. Not informing the public is not really serving the public.
David Deamer: The Astrobiology Primer and the Origins of Life program are intended for a lay audience. Biologists agree that life started simple and became more complex through a natural process, and at the most general level we call that process evolution.
If I were teaching an advanced class in evolutionary biology to a college level audience, they would have enough preparation to deal with the other aspects that go into the evolutionary process beyond Darwin’s initial explanation. It takes a lot of background to understand the details that contribute to the evolutionary process.
For instance, the Altenberg 16 you have written about are professional biologists who are trying to go beyond the simplistic explanations that involve nothing more than natural selection. They are bringing to the table ideas that require considerable knowledge to understand their argument.
I certainly wouldn’t want to state that natural selection is the only process driving evolution, but if I am going to explain what that means my audience needs to have enough information to understand the questions that are being raised.
Suzan Mazur: But as Stuart Newman, one of the Altenberg 16 scientists has pointed out, there would be more of an acceptance of evolution if the science was where it should be. He also says “old science” is being pushed in the mainstream media.
David Deamer: I get the point. Unfortunately, creationists have politicized the science so much that the very fact of evolution is being questioned.
Perhaps this is why scientists tend to fall back on the bedrock of Darwin’s basic concepts when they speak in a public forum. No one denies the factual basis of evolution, but we are still learning how evolution takes place, particularly in animal and plant populations in ecosystems.
I have debated creationists and intelligent design people in public forums, and my impression is that they are not looking for scientific truth. Instead they are working to advance their political aim, which is to get Christian fundamentalism taught in public schools as an alternative to evolution.
No. I am saying that the component in the change in apparent position due to the earth's rotation is approximately 2.1 degrees.
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.