Posted on 06/17/2002 3:10:50 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
You: You cannot have read that many of these posts yet. Or perhaps you omitted the "</sarcasm>."
I assumed you would know that tag was intended. I strongly suspect that Scientific American published this article as an aid to hapless school boards who are being beseiged by creationists (and so-called "Intelligent Design" advocates) so they could have a handy reference for use in the heated debates which are raging all over the place.
Please share with us your obvious expertise in such things.
Your God is too small!
My God is also the "sum of all possible mathematical Truth:" because He is the author of the laws that define that Truth, but He is so much more. You ought to consider that there may be more to your God than you thought.
The reason that there is order in the universe is because that is the way it was created. Random chance would not create the ordered universe that we observe today, and are able to quantify so well.
Peace.
The current thinking is that the proto-amphibians adapted fins into limbs because it enabled them to wriggle through dense aquatic vegetation more easily. That the limbs enabled them to move clumsily about on land was fortuitous.
This statement applies equally, if not more, to evolutionists! None of evolution theory's tenets meet the standards for scientific proof. To be scientifically correct, one must always include the descriptor, THEORY, when mentioning evolution. The overuse of the term "evolution" without the proper descriptive term, THEORY, has misled millions to accept this unproven THEORY as valid science.
Free Republic's pro-evolution posters would gain credibility if they would admit that their BELIEF in evolution THEORY places them on equal footing, at best, with their opponents!
Although this has always been a very divisive argument, those of us who believe in The Creator, who actually know Him personally because of Jesus' sacrifice in our place, only debate hoping that others earnestly seeking Him will also accept His offer of forgiveness and come to know Him.
You believe what you believe quite strongly, but it is not necessary to attack your opponents in such a sophmoric manner, especially if you are trying to show yourself more learned.
The very title of the thread is sophmoric. The opinions of Scientific American writers and the High Priests and Priestesses of evolution are not the final word on how things came to be.
The fact that a publication such as Scientific American would stoop to such tactics, to say nothing of the tactics of groups such as the National Association of Biology Teachers, the American Humanist Association, ACLU, National Science Teachers Association, the American Geological Instutute, the American Chemical Society, the National Educators Association, the American Institute of Biological Sciences and the American Anthropological Association, speaks volumes concerning the motovatations of these adherents to the theory of evolution.
These, and other groups, have been working together through a national "comminucations network" for over 20-years, according to a 1981 article published in Scientific Integrety (Scientific Sophistry might make a better title), by Wayne Moyer, NABT Executive Secretary, to marginalize and demonize Creationists and keep their opinions out of education and the public venues.
The published articles and papers I have collected over that time tell me one of two things. 1) Evolutionists are a collective of control-freaks who cannot tolerate their views being questioned; or, 2) They know their positions are untenable and they are very afraid of having to share the millions of dollars funneled into their research and education programs by governments every year. Perhaps they are a mixture of both.
I was taught long ago that, when seeking the truth concerning a thing, one must be prepared to accept the possibility that one's own theories and beliefs will be called into question. That it is often necessary to cast aside those theories and beliefs from time to time, if truth is what one really seeks.
When I read these creation-evolution threads, I have to wonder, what is it that is being soughtafter.
However, the true goal and wish of both the Darwinist AND the Aliens-On-Other-Planets crowd is that:
The Creationism and Genesis of the Bible somehow be discredited
"Proof" that somehow man is NOT THE one creature in the Universe of whom God created as per Biblical teaching
The self-evident fact of 'Intelligent Design' somehow be discredited (by any shred of vague "evidence") and thus deemed a figment of imagination.
A question which I never hear evolutionists answer is why if evolution goes on all the time, if evolution occurs because species must adapt to survive, why are amoebas, such simple creatures, still around after some billion years? Why if evolution goes on all the time, these creatures remain simple and unchanged?
77 posted on 6/17/02 9:27 AM Eastern by gore3000
No, he's just frustrated by the antics of certain creationists on these threads who shotgun these threads with tens of half-truths and misleading statements, and then never defend their misleading statements. I share his annoyance, I just choose to ignore the offender after the first few attempts, while he is trying to get the offender to admit the error of his ways. It's like herding cats, I know, but someone has to try, and I respect him for it.
And we still have "walking catfish" moving about on land. Walking catfish .
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.