Posted on 02/10/2009 8:25:43 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
...Coyne and Pigliucci tell us (again) that there is such overwhelming evidence for evolution. OK, put up or shut up. They don’t know what a species is, they don’t know what the target of selection is, they don’t know if natural selection is a queen or a jester, they don’t know what adaptive radiation is, they don’t know how speciation operates (the main reason for Darwin’s little storybook), and they can’t connect mutations to any actual benefit to an organism. Other than those little minor matters, evolution is so supported by such mountains of evidence that only a fool with an agenda could dare question it...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
ping!
Wonderful. Don’t forget the whole going from inert matter to a living cell thing!
Don’t let them squirm out of that one. That’s the thing that proves conclusively that evolution is a religion. Because they’ve got nothing. The odds of getting enough L-type amino acids together to form anything even remotely useful are absurdly small. No amount of “billions of years” can overcome those odds.
You are confusing abiogenesis and evolution. Completely different things.
“You are confusing abiogenesis and evolution”
No sir. Either you have a coherant theory or you do not. You cannot have the eiffel tower without foundations sir, no.
Nope. Both are necessary components to the theology of evolutionism.
What if single-celled life forms came to Earth in comets? And evolved from there? The two can be separate concerns.
Well the best way to put up is to put your money where your mouth is, with that in mind Questions
1) Pzier, Merck, Glaxo, etc, etc. don't care about the Evolution Vs Creationism battle, they only care about developing new drugs and making $$$$$$
When these big pharmaceutical companies hire research scientist, do they look to..
A) Hire scientist who believe in evolution
or
B) Hire Creation scientist
2) Same with the oil companies, the don't care if the earth is 4.5 billion years old or 6000, they just want to find oil
So when these big oil companies hire geologist to find the oil, do they look to..
A) Hire geologist who believe in evolution and an ancient earth
or
B) Hire Flood geologist who think the earth is 6000 years
It's clear which side has the overwhelming evidence. When the creationist puts up and starts an oil company or pharmaceutical company using only the latest & greatest Creation science and actually produces something of value then I take you guys seriously.
No, all this argument does is pushes the venue to another location.
Pray tell, where and how did that “comet” travelling life form begin? It’s all about the beginninngs. Either God created or “chance occurred”.
Please do not tell me you may subscribe to the “Mission to Mars” construct that aliens sent something to earth——still begs the question of the origin of LIFE, No?
God bless
I was simply addressing the claim that abiogenesis and evolution have to be treated together - they do not. Oh, and there are a fair number of scientists that think Earth could have been seeded with life by comets. They are mostly water, after all. Heck, we barely know our own oceans, let alone the makeup of comets.
A) Hire scientist who believe in evolution
or
B) Hire Creation scientist
Well, one of the big pharma companies hired me, even though I don't believe in evolution. Of course, "evolution" doesn't have anything to do with biotech or pharmacology, so....
So when these big oil companies hire geologist to find the oil, do they look to..
A) Hire geologist who believe in evolution and an ancient earth
or
B) Hire Flood geologist who think the earth is 6000 years
They hire whoever will find oil for them - regardless of how old they think the earth is.
We may never know how life came to pass (from a scientific basis). However, the fossil record is very clear of a progression from simple life billions of years ago to progressively more complex life, so evolution has occurred. One can fairly debate the mechanism for this happening. But one can state that that progression exists with quite a bit of certainty.
Either an accident occurred or there is a prime cause.
Basic laws of nature include the entropy clause-remember-things tend to become less organized over time, not more organized. Oh, excepting per evolutionary theory-life. Neat how one simply denies the known laws and rules to satisfy a personal distaste for a Creator God (no God, no responsibility to Him).
Anyway, God Bless
I never thought I would miss the ASH alerts.
The definition of a species is tricky. I knew an evolutionary biologist who happened to be my professor. She wrote over 250 different definition on her blackboard. However, it all becomes much easier to define when based on genetics.
It is pretty unlikely and so are many factors in our solar system that are needed for life. Evolution is most definately not “proven” even though it is the best naturalistic theory that we have. The ones who say that evolution describes everything that can ever be known about life are just ignorant.
The origin of life isn’t even regarded as a part of evolutionary theory. We’re going to have to see how future studies affect the science as a whole. I really do believe that if a creationist comes up with evidence clearly indicating that DNA was produced by an otherworldly entity, that scientist will become one of the most (if not THE most) famous scientist in human history. Most people on Earth would be extremely excited about that.
Evolution Is Practically Useless, Admits Darwinist
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1700991/posts
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.