Posted on 12/27/2008 5:57:08 PM PST by Inappropriate Laughter
Charles Darwin: His observations undermined the traditionally held view of 'stability of species'
There is a strange object sitting on my desk as I write. It is a shiny sphere of fossilised, primeval slime. Known technically as stromatolites, this blue-green slime was the original ooze from which all life on this planet evolved.
This painfully slow process began about 3,000 million years ago and has led, ultimately, to us, the extraordinary human species.
Whenever my gaze happens to fall upon my lump of fossilised slime I experience a strange sensation, a deep respect, for I am looking at my most ancient ancestor.
Yours, too, unless you still believe in the tale of Adam and Eve and a talking serpent in the Garden of Eden.
In a few weeks, on February 12 to be exact, the scientific world will be celebrating the bicentenary of the birth of Charles Darwin, the man whose theory of the gradual evolution of living things has changed the way in which most of us see the world in which we live.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Stick to the facts. Ad hominem attacks lose your argument.
thank God.
Creation and evolution do not work together. If there was no fall of man, there was no need for a Savior.
I don’t see how that makes them mutually exclusive. Evolution tells us how everything happened. Creation tells us why.
But if it is true that Evolution and Creation cannot coexist, then it follows that Evolution is fact and Creation is fable.
The reason you find different plant and animals in different layers of rocks is because there was a worldwide flood. Trilobites are still found in the deepest parts of the ocean.
thanks for your reasoned posts.
I have only one thing to say to those who rant about how “scientific” intelligent design is: Gene therapy.
None of these virulent “anti evolutionists” would give up their medical treatments, even when shown how evolutionary theory plays a significant role.
And to throw a little salt on the popcorn, how about them gnostic chapters of the bible that tells us a very different story of Mary Magdeline.
Bwahahahahaha ... what argument?
Evolution is amoral. Survival of the fittest is the ultimate good for mankind. Therefore, anything goes. OTOH, Creationism sees man as a creature who has lost his original glory and goodness. The ultimate good for a Creationist is redemption, which equips him to love God with all his heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love his neighbor as himself. The firm belief in human evolution led to The Holocaust and the slaughter of millions of the unborn. Redemption, OTOH, has led to the abolition of slavery, Christian hospitals, Mother Theresa, and countless good works. Free your mind and the rest will follow.
You make it sound like the Cambrian Explosion happened over a weekend. You’re still talking about a period of 50 or 60 million years.
“allow me to write that Darwin’s accomplishment was a spark of genius”
Darwin’s ideas were mostly if not completely borrowed from others before him, going back at least as far as Lucretius in the first century B.C.
The gnostics were simply anti-Christians. They are not credible. I believe this is supported by mainstream historians and other scholars (which doesn’t include Hollywood types like Bill Maher).
From what I can understand, gene therapy is based on the processes involved in nucleotide synthesis/replication and protein sythesis.
In this light you can see that gene therapy demonstrates nothing with regard to the validity of random mutation, natural selection or speciation.
Perhaps you don’t understand the difficulty presented by the Cambrian Explosion to the credibility of Darwinian theory.
No fossils have been found of any species leading up to that period, or of any intermediate species within that period. In other words, there are more missing links than there are species. The probability of such a gap in the fossil record would be mathematically impossible if the theory of evolution had been correct. Yet the gap is there.
"This planet will, as it did thousands of years ago, move through the ether devoid of men."
"The folkish-minded man, in particular,has the sacred duty, each in his own denomination, of making people stop just talking superficially of God's will, and actually fulfill God's will, and not let God's word be desecrated. For God's will gave men their form, their essence and their abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is declaring war on the Lord's creation, the divine will."
Adolf Hitler...emphasis added. SeeCharles Darwin and Adolf Hitler
Not at all, but evolution is one subject, and the statements by anyone about God, regardless of their beliefs regarding evolution are another.
Their comments about something unrelated are unrelated. It's as if I attacked you for anything you said because you're a hockey fan.
Which I don't know whether you are or not, but that's just the point. It's irrelevant.
That is a stunning fact. The last one known alive was nearly 400 million years ago, so you could make a lot of money by coming up with a live specimen.
And Einstein borrowed heavily from others. But there was a spark of genius to see the data in a way no one else had seen it. That Darwin took his notion too far is not a detractor from the genius he showed. It just indicates that even a genius can get it ‘no so much’ in the end. Human arrogance seems to get in the way with many geniuses.
NASA is now a costly flight of fancy
The Advocate | 01/28/08
Posted on 12/29/2008 5:47:05 PM PST by KevinDavis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2155899/posts
Erhlich thought it relevant enough to make abiogenesis the first chapter of his evolution textbook.
Uh, not. there were many different groups of Christians and it is well known that ultimately the catholic church and Orthodox church “won out”...then we have Luther.
Most scholars of the Bible that are ‘mainstream” agree that the gnostic documents at least raise the ability to question the origins of the Christian faith, which by the way, does not hurt my belief in Jesus.
the whole idea of gene therapy is based on genetics...which Darwin contributed to its beginning of understanding.
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.