Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Read more

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#105991 Nov 16, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
When we find intermediates, you simply deny that they are intermediates. Perhaps you just don't know what an intermediate is.
If I took a typical chimp skull and a typical human skull, and averaged every measurable difference to create a perfect intermediate form, it would look startlingly similar to a Georgicus, Erectus, or Ergaster skull.
But you seem to think that intermediates should be something different.
What then?
Ok, I get your point. I used to trap and skin animals, I trapped the entire weasel series. With the skin off there was almost no difference except size, weasel to wolverine. Skin on and habitually - major differences. God made them. Jump out of the weasel series to bears. Big split, no scent glands for one, nothing in between. Skin off, little difference in general, just much much larger. So we have commonality in the maker, not evolution. Where and when did evolution start or stop? This concept must be going on today and observable in nature but it is not. We have gaps everywhere and utter opposition in the DNA and cell mechanisms. They watched ecoli for 20 years and 40,000 generations and in the end, got the same e.coli. Same with fruit flys. If evo worked it should have shown up in either study but it didn't. Now that we have bigger microscopes we know why, cell design and operation clearly controverts the theory. So if we can't observe it in scientific study, don't see it happening in the field and cell operation and complexity stand against it, the only answer left is some level of ID, just like Crick asserted once he completed his work 50 years ago. So now we take that framework to the fossil beds to the chip-human issue, that is only reasonable.

I posted this question to D.Collin Patterson 20 years ago before he passed away, one of the worlds greatest Zoologists. This is a guy that spent his entire life dedicated to the study of bone structure and anatomy. His head was a catalog of parts, encyclopedic. He said of my observations above; "my colleges from the tropic's tell me the same thing". When you read his stuff he was questioning the whole matter in his last years.

This goes for the primate series. You have a constellation of unique tree climbers and a small group of upright walkers; one with with a U-jaw and walking anatomy, and the other with curved appendages and a V jaw. Watch their behavior with the skin on and you have a big gap is my point. An assembly relating to this summary -

http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/the-quest...

I think this is the best new video series out, one short clip, with Dean Kenyon's journey I think is pretty good -

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#105992 Nov 16, 2013
MAAT wrote:
Dude needing another ironymeter is normal.
So this post is not the start:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...
However i found the reference on pg 5018:
(The problem is that she keeps changing the heading)
Where is the data that supports the paradigm of the talking snake?
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
So here we are today and the best you and the other evos here can do is beg sciences correcting mechanism. IOW, you are telling me that you cannot present any research that demonstrates the genomes ability to adapt endlessly and without limit while I can present plenty of research data that supports the opposite claim.
Well Subby that's just great Subby because despite your ridicule of our documented account, as far as SCIENCE goes you cannot scientifically refute my claim. The best you can do is beg your disbelief in the first documented account of life arising in the sea because you cannot refute the claim that the genomes ability to adapt is limited. That's great and you don't realize how great that is for us, like it or not.
The claim that the genome cannot possibly be billions of years old is a testable hypothesis that can be supported and falsified, and you evos cannot speak to it. GREAT! That's what I like to see, Subby. However as far as science goes, you're excuses are not acceptable.
This below is the testable claim using genomics that suggests life on earth cannot possibly be billions of years old.
Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/ ...
A characterization is also given of the fixation probabilities for such mutations.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3 ...
As a result, the human race is genetically mutating, according to Japanese geneticist Yusaku Nakabeppu of Kyushu University and his team, who released their findings Monday in the trade journal Genome Research.
http://www.naturalnews.com/021220_genetic_mod ...
These data support models in which negative epistasis contributes to declining rates of adaptation over time.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/11 ...
In other words, random detrimental mutations build up in the gene pools of living things with a low reproductive rate far far faster than natural selection can get rid of them. This generally accepted fact of modern science strongly implies, therefore, that we have devolved, not evolved, from an originally superior state, as a species or collective gene pool, compared to our current rapidly degenerating condition
http://www.educatetruth.com/featured/dr-john -...
Life is devolving as per a documented account. Life must be much younger than the evolutionary model suggests. Evolutionary scientists can only offer complicated hypothesis as to why all data supports a creationist paradigm and gives evolutionists headaches.
--
Oh and another of jewel of sharp deduction: all evo's work in the pharmaceutical industry.
One of the evo's own, Ayala, tried to warn them 40 years ago about "genetic load" timelines, that this would catch up to them. The US science institutions swept it under the carpet hoping for controverting evidence to save them. All they got was this mouse under the carpet and the MO-1 from the Japanese. Guess they don't "Expel" researchers over there. Their new secret weapon; "SHHHHH", keep quiet and add an evo stmt in peer review, quick..
http://creation.com/germ-7-motors-in-1

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#105993 Nov 16, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And a bridge will collapse without the center stone. Yet it was still formed bit by bit. No problem with genetic scaffolding.
<quoted text>
Um, bub, what do you think the creationist movement IS?
Duh.
<quoted text>
You're tired of *anything* socialist. Education doesn't matter to you, so since you are only interested in flunking out or learning how to be stupid via fundie homeschooling or private schools then yes, I can see why you would find that very frustrating.
Perhaps you'd prefer Iran.
<quoted text>
Funny.
<quoted text>
There is no morals with God. That's merely following orders.
From someone who happened to be an extreme psychopath.
That's why you fundies are such aholes.(shrug)
<quoted text>
Which is irrelevant to morality, and irrelevant to the validity of science.
<quoted text>
Funny though, I'm not really aware of any public schools violating the Constitution and teaching atheism as a fact. Plenty of fundies seem to be getting away with it though. So much for morality, eh?
<quoted text>
Yep, you're obsessed with sex. Not just your own, but everyone else's. And you like to call *others* perverted.
<quoted text>
Yes, man is a cancer. By following God's orders - take Earth, rape it. It's yours.
<quoted text>
Wow. All that irrelevant ranting and you finish with "explain the valve"? What's the problem? Did you manage to demonstrate that it was made with invisble Jewmagic? Thought not.
So is this your way of telling us you can't explain the Foraman Ovale either?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foramen_ovale_%2...
Expanded;
http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/a-questio...

“Move into the light.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#105994 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the evo's own, Ayala, tried to warn them 40 years ago about "genetic load" timelines, that this would catch up to them. The US science institutions swept it under the carpet hoping for controverting evidence to save them. All they got was this mouse under the carpet and the MO-1 from the Japanese. Guess they don't "Expel" researchers over there. Their new secret weapon; "SHHHHH", keep quiet and add an evo stmt in peer review, quick..
http://creation.com/germ-7-motors-in-1
Can you now explain to me in your hypothesis why your god would design sophisticated micro-machine organisms that have the intent to do harm to living creatures? Bacterial flagella and bacterium MO-1 E. coli and Salmonella flagella have the intent to kill you. How do you reconcile this small detail in your creation hypothesis?
Hmmm?

Perhaps your designer is a machine that wishes to destroy the living?

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#105995 Nov 16, 2013
Rounding up to get to the only interesting article.

pg 5020 100,591
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/1...
About chimpz.

humans and chimps...where"? Behe commented on Lenski.(Did not explain. l.o.l. very important difference.)

Even withot reading Lenski the most common mistake made is:

He evolved several thousand generations and only saw degradation. Evolution needs to be able to generate new information, not degrade what is already there.

Why should it? The proper definition:

Evolution is natural selection driven by environmental change.

This is something you keep misrepresenting. The strongest design may be the most simple, as long as the ahem "degradation" improves the lifeforms suitability for the environment whether new information is created or not is incidental. In fact it is fairly obvious that to begin with any existing mechanisms within the genetic code are going to be favoured by natural selection over new ones since they have already been fully developed by past generations.

----
Part of the post by Mazhere. And again two links that are not showing or giving admission to the full text in case people do not want to login.

These data support models in which negative epistasis contributes to declining rates of adaptation over time. Sign epistasis was rare in this genome-wide study, in contrast to its prevalence in an earlier study of mutations in a single gene.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/11 ...

These results provide the first evidence that patterns of epistasis may differ for within- and between-gene interactions during adaptation and that diminishing returns epistasis contributes to the consistent observation of decelerating fitness gains during adaptation.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/11 ...

|(*This has resulted in the accumulation of a |large number of deleterious mutations in |sequences containing gene control elements and |hence a widespread degradation of the genome |during the evolution of humans and chimpanzees.)

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/1 ...

The above Science abstracts ar without more ado extrapolated upon the Plos article, that now get's a new meaning.(*

THAT IS NOT WHAT THE ARTICLE STATED
What did Plos actually state? quote:
Functionally important sequences are expected to evolve MORE SLOWLY than neutrally evolving sequences. This is because long periods of selection for functional efficiency lead to sequences in which most advantageous mutations have already become fixed. The majority of new mutations in a sequence are then deleterious, because they perturb the highly adapted state. Studies of protein-coding DNA evolution have supported this expectation by showing that rates of amino acid substitution are substantially lower than rates of synonymous substitution in the majority of genes (e.g.,[1]).

So shared ancestry has left us allready with ROBUST protein- coding genes, up to their task.
And we can't deal with too many changes or a sweep at the same time. One at a time is fine. NOTE none of the articles state that gradual evolution is impossible. Read the definition of epistatis again that Subduction Zone kindly provided.

'HOWEVER, the extent to which constraint in NONCODING regions varies among species is unclear. In this paper, we investigate sequence conservation in introns and intergenic DNA in interspecific comparisons of mouse and rat (murids) and human and chimpanzee (hominids). To estimate the levels of constraint in segments of non-protein-coding DNA, we compare the observed numbers of substitutions to the number expected from substitution rates at linked sequences assumed to be neutrally evolving.'

!!!'Unexpectedly, we find that SELECTIVE CONSTRAINTS ARE ESSENTIALLY ABSENT IN HOMINIDS in regions upstream of genes and in first introns, in contrast to murids, in which these regions are subject to moderate levels of constraint.'
IN NONCODING REGIONS

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#105996 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the evo's own, Ayala, tried to warn them 40 years ago about "genetic load" timelines, that this would catch up to them. The US science institutions swept it under the carpet hoping for controverting evidence to save them. All they got was this mouse under the carpet and the MO-1 from the Japanese. Guess they don't "Expel" researchers over there. Their new secret weapon; "SHHHHH", keep quiet and add an evo stmt in peer review, quick..
http://creation.com/germ-7-motors-in-1
Nonsense, even if one is just interested in proper reading skills, one would climb in the ropes.
Even more complicated by some strict scientific language.
Normally people have a university education and their own papers peer-reviewed before they wantonly (if ever)amass them to proof or support a point.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#105997 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
So is this your way of telling us you can't explain the Foraman Ovale either?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foramen_ovale_%2...
Expanded;
http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/a-questio...
wiki explains it perfectly.
Keep reading any click on any term that is blue and that you do not understand.

Think of why we have seperated fingers.
It's not the foramen ovale being but the absense that created it.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#105998 Nov 16, 2013
MZ paraphrased: Nature and the lab only show changes at inner-species level.

Maat: Face it your closest relative in the tree is a homonin and then homonids and then apes etc.

So we end up with the only relevant article, which also got a wrong interpretation.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

"In PNAS, the team reports cloning the human and chimpanzee hydroxylase cDNAs, and identifying a mutation in the coding region of the human cDNA that regulates hydroxylase activity. The same gene in apes codes for a hydroxylase enzyme which adds this atom to the sialic acid molecule, but due to a mutation at some point in human evolution, the human gene lacks this coding section, accounting for the structural difference in the molecule."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/ ...

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#105999 Nov 16, 2013
No Peak in Sight for Evolving Bacteria
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/...

Nov. 14, 2013
Still going strong, fittness peak not yet reached, Lenski's bacteria show adaptation to the stressing environment.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#106000 Nov 16, 2013
http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/plants_anima...
Deletion of any single gene provokes mutation elsewhere in the system.

More on the differences chimpz and humans
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/...
See also further articles on Bonobos etc.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#106001 Nov 16, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm? MazHere has been discussing the fact that there are limits to the change in a genome , that research has shown it does have limits, which you argue against. And what was your argument? she doesn't understand the deep time scales needed to understand evolution. Your words,....this is the God of the evolutionist ...Time, research shows there are limits!, No! just give it time, time can change a dinosaur into a bird, time can change an ape into a man, or even a puddle of goo into life, all you need is time.
Accepting and denying research according to the Bible is tantamount to sticking your nose where the sun doesn't shine.
For what is sure to be the thousandth time, Homo Sapiens ARE apes, not WERE apes, and no one can or has stated as a certainty precisely where life came from - except your lot, who takes mythology as real and pounces to condemn thoughtful pondering as scientific statements and declarations.
Bear false witness, much? Yep - you surely do.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#106002 Nov 16, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Accepting and denying research according to the Bible is tantamount to sticking your nose where the sun doesn't shine.
For what is sure to be the thousandth time, Homo Sapiens ARE apes, not WERE apes, and no one can or has stated as a certainty precisely where life came from - except your lot, who takes mythology as real and pounces to condemn thoughtful pondering as scientific statements and declarations.
Bear false witness, much? Yep - you surely do.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...
Genome Res. 2007 September; 17(9): 12661277.

doi: 10.1101/gr.6557307

PMCID: PMC1950895

Gene copy number variation spanning 60 million years of human and primate evolution
Laura Dumas,1 Young H. Kim,2 Anis Karimpour-Fard,3 Michael Cox,1,4,5 Janet Hopkins,1,4,5 Jonathan R. Pollack,2 and James M. Sikela1,4,5,6

Plus various other interesting papers on apes.
http://genome.cshlp.org/
See the butterfly and evolution.
Recent contribution. 13-14 nov 2013. Also found on sciencedaily.com

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106003 Nov 16, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
wiki explains it perfectly.
Keep reading any click on any term that is blue and that you do not understand.
Think of why we have seperated fingers.
It's not the foramen ovale being but the absense that created it.
I wish someone would send some evolution in a bottle over to my engineering dept so I could take a break. I suppose the bottle would just have the initials T.G. on it for TIME GOD. Kindda like a Genie in a bottle. They wouldn't even have to think over there, TG does all that for us. No planning meeting's either, I hate those and so do my people.

Hmmmm, I could make billions and we could all drive Jags and custom Porsche's with those pick-your-color leather interiors and all and not do a thing. I'm getting to like this idea. I would be having lunch with Generals..

Save the chip mfg's like Intel down the street alot of money too. Last big processor project cost them over a billion..Making the chip that's in the new phone in your hand...pooff, it would be done, the Time God's knew it already! And we KNOW evo is better than anything Intel's got, just look @ MO-1 below.

The valve in the Foraman Ovale is a major part genetically. It must be coded. But that's the easy part, it's existence is useless without thousands of other parts all controlled and convergent to shut it one time in your life. Accidental? Not one chance. Requires a plan, absolutely. Intelligence, yes.

http://creation.com/germ-7-motors-in-1

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106004 Nov 16, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Can you now explain to me in your hypothesis why your god would design sophisticated micro-machine organisms that have the intent to do harm to living creatures? Bacterial flagella and bacterium MO-1 E. coli and Salmonella flagella have the intent to kill you. How do you reconcile this small detail in your creation hypothesis?
Hmmm?
Perhaps your designer is a machine that wishes to destroy the living?
I don't know all the reasons, I am not God. I do know e. coli is a digestive bac that is good, under control. We are living in a running down world, not the one God created originally that was "Very Good". Too understand God, we must understand that. I agree that if we look at the world today with all its health and hate problems, natural disasters etc.. It is difficult to see God in it now in some ways. But, the Bible teaches these things will come, that we are living on a timeline set by God and mentioned over and over in the Bible and by Christ.

Yes, one can say if God is so good, why doesn't He come down and fix it all. He tried - they killed Him. Pre-knowing this, God in His wisdom used that atrocity to show us real love, that is, forgivness after our hate. That amazing demonstrated forgiveness is what got me thinking. Long time ago, one of our top pilots took out the bosses favorite heli and wrecked it. He was OK, and brought back to base. He walked by Arlo once, not a glance, twice, same response, third time he couldn't stand it any longer.. "If your going to fire me, please do it now, I cant stand the silence!" Arlo looked up and said, "Son, I can't afford to fire you, I have $50,000 in vested in your education". We gathered around that grace and became a winning team.

"The immune system is amazingly complex. It can recognize and remember millions of different enemies, and it can produce secretions (release of fluids) and cells to match up with and wipe out nearly all of them.
The secret to its success is an elaborate and dynamic communications network. Millions and millions of cells, organized into sets and subsets, gather like clouds of bees swarming around a hive and pass information back and forth in response to an infection. Once immune cells receive the alarm, they become activated and begin to produce powerful chemicals. These substances allow the cells to regulate their own growth and behavior, enlist other immune cells, and direct the new recruits to trouble spots.

Although scientists have learned much about the immune system, they continue to study how the body launches attacks that destroy invading microbes, infected cells, and tumors while ignoring healthy tissues. New technologies for identifying individual immune cells are now allowing scientists to determine quickly which targets are triggering an immune response. Improvements in microscopy are permitting the first-ever observations of living B cells, T cells, and other cells as they interact within lymph nodes and other body tissues.

In addition, scientists are rapidly unraveling the genetic blueprints that direct the human immune response, as well as those that dictate the biology of bacteria, viruses, and parasites. The combination of new technology and expanded genetic information will no doubt reveal even more about how the body protects itself from disease".

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/immunesystem/...

http://creation.com/immune-system-antibody-di...

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106005 Nov 16, 2013
MAAT wrote:
5025 Well this discussion had drifted far from creatard inbreeding/evolution. To proof that apes and humans had no common descent. Because the book says we have fish.
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't read. Even researchers admit lab experiments and nature are not evidence of an organisms ability to endlessly adapt per se ie macroevolution. Will you please start being sensible at least?
No, unlimited adaptation is NOT seen in the fossil record. What is seen in the fossil record is punctuated equilibrium. IOW, very different organisms assumed to be ancestral because they breathe.
No, unlimited adaptation is NOT seen in genomics, What is found is that apes and mankind have different molecular machinery despite a hand full of dyed enzymes being able to be hammered into a sequence bootstrapped to the human genome.
The other thing you forgot, oh smart one, is that an old scroll written thousands of years before TOE was even thought of, got the fossil record right before evoclowns had to steal it and glorify themselves with their great work. For example, with all your bluster about organic soups and rubbish, you lot ended up agreeing with that old scroll account of life starting in the sea. Amazing isn't it!. LOL!.
Thanks for requoting me and demonstrating you are an idiot.

....and yet after majority deleterious mutations and negative epistasis in relation to 'beneficial' mutations and where the lucky ones against all odds makes a major sweep, an evo only has faith holding an organism back from extinction. No research. Well that's just great folks!

Blab on and soothe your ego. We creos understand! LOL!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106006 Nov 16, 2013
Oh my. SBT does not even understand his myth of choice.

SBT, you continue to link valid sites without understanding them and invalid sites, which are nonsensical. You do realize that everything creatard.com publishes is bullshit, don't you?

One more time, we don't need to know everything about the immune system to know it evolved. You are mixing two different subjects there. Now understanding the immune system helps us know how it evolved, but it is not an absolute necessity.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#106007 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know all the reasons, I am not God. I do know e. coli is a digestive bac that is good, under control. We are living in a running down world, not the one God created originally that was "Very Good". Too understand God, we must understand that. I agree that if we look at the world today with all its health and hate problems, natural disasters etc.. It is difficult to see God in it now in some ways. But, the Bible teaches these things will come, that we are living on a timeline set by God and mentioned over and over in the Bible and by Christ.
Yes, one can say if God is so good, why doesn't He come down and fix it all. He tried - they killed Him. Pre-knowing this, God in His wisdom used that atrocity to show us real love, that is, forgivness after our hate. That amazing demonstrated forgiveness is what got me thinking. Long time ago, one of our top pilots took out the bosses favorite heli and wrecked it. He was OK, and brought back to base. He walked by Arlo once, not a glance, twice, same response, third time he couldn't stand it any longer.. "If your going to fire me, please do it now, I cant stand the silence!" Arlo looked up and said, "Son, I can't afford to fire you, I have $50,000 in vested in your education". We gathered around that grace and became a winning team.
"The immune system is amazingly complex. It can recognize and remember millions of different enemies, and it can produce secretions (release of fluids) and cells to match up with and wipe out nearly all of them.
The secret to its success is an elaborate and dynamic communications network. Millions and millions of cells, organized into sets and subsets, gather like clouds of bees swarming around a hive and pass information back and forth in response to an infection. Once immune cells receive the alarm, they become activated and begin to produce powerful chemicals. These substances allow the cells to regulate their own growth and behavior, enlist other immune cells, and direct the new recruits to trouble spots.
Although scientists have learned much about the immune system, they continue to study how the body launches attacks that destroy invading microbes, infected cells, and tumors while ignoring healthy tissues. New technologies for identifying individual immune cells are now allowing scientists to determine quickly which targets are triggering an immune response. Improvements in microscopy are permitting the first-ever observations of living B cells, T cells, and other cells as they interact within lymph nodes and other body tissues.
In addition, scientists are rapidly unraveling the genetic blueprints that direct the human immune response, as well as those that dictate the biology of bacteria, viruses, and parasites. The combination of new technology and expanded genetic information will no doubt reveal even more about how the body protects itself from disease".
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/immunesystem/...
http://creation.com/immune-system-antibody-di...
Isn't it great that evos can't explain anything with certainty and yet demand a higher level of substatiation from a creationist that an evolutionist can't present themselves.

Immunity is yet another irreducibly complex system that must have created itself in expectation of an organism becoming infected by another organism yet to evolve, according to evos. Mmmm!

SBT
Level 2

Since: Jun 13

United States

#106008 Nov 16, 2013

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#106009 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
For one the Bible. I read it through before I started really considering the reality of God acting in human events. I knew something unexplainable had acted in my behalf a number of times also. I was perplexed how people of faith, especially couples and their children, were stable and happy Vs others I knew (including my family), and I didn't want to fail in marriage and couldn't figure out the formula to make it work. So after another crash I walked away from (I working in heli aviation in Alaska) I felt this strong force telling me to decide now, so on the trip out I prayed and something very unique happened, they call it "born again", pretty good description I will say. Found out later alot of folks were praying for me that week,(they told me later). So there was reason and logic involved in part but in the end there was a greater force involved I didn't understand then. That's when my eyes were opened and I had real peace. So I then questioned how I had got so deep in my faith in evolution, went back mentally and let the two fly at each other. Creation won handily on the facts.
Your personal belief, no matter how sincere is not a basis to refute science.

Discovering that high risk occupations can lead to death faster than posting on Topix is also not a basis to preclude the entire body of scientific research, evidence and insight.

It is understandable that your personal experiences and education have lead you to look for answers, but you are using your gut and not your intellect to draw conclusions.

“Don't be mad at me.”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I'm just a little bunny.

#106010 Nov 16, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, I get your point. I used to trap and skin animals, I trapped the entire weasel series. With the skin off there was almost no difference except size, weasel to wolverine. Skin on and habitually - major differences. God made them. Jump out of the weasel series to bears. Big split, no scent glands for one, nothing in between. Skin off, little difference in general, just much much larger. So we have commonality in the maker, not evolution. Where and when did evolution start or stop? This concept must be going on today and observable in nature but it is not. We have gaps everywhere and utter opposition in the DNA and cell mechanisms. They watched ecoli for 20 years and 40,000 generations and in the end, got the same e.coli. Same with fruit flys. If evo worked it should have shown up in either study but it didn't. Now that we have bigger microscopes we know why, cell design and operation clearly controverts the theory. So if we can't observe it in scientific study, don't see it happening in the field and cell operation and complexity stand against it, the only answer left is some level of ID, just like Crick asserted once he completed his work 50 years ago. So now we take that framework to the fossil beds to the chip-human issue, that is only reasonable.
I posted this question to D.Collin Patterson 20 years ago before he passed away, one of the worlds greatest Zoologists. This is a guy that spent his entire life dedicated to the study of bone structure and anatomy. His head was a catalog of parts, encyclopedic. He said of my observations above; "my colleges from the tropic's tell me the same thing". When you read his stuff he was questioning the whole matter in his last years.
This goes for the primate series. You have a constellation of unique tree climbers and a small group of upright walkers; one with with a U-jaw and walking anatomy, and the other with curved appendages and a V jaw. Watch their behavior with the skin on and you have a big gap is my point. An assembly relating to this summary -
http://www.genesisalive.com/2013/09/the-quest...
I think this is the best new video series out, one short clip, with Dean Kenyon's journey I think is pretty good -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =gdBJt6sdDfIXX
Evolution is observable in nature and it is telling that you make such a comment that it isn't. It shows that you only post on here to preach your message and not learn. For if learning were part of this, you would have seen the many examples and explanations about observable evolution that have been posted on here.

We discussed Dr. Patterson in the past and whether you actually talked to the man or not, there is no evidence to support that his support of evolution ever wavered. In fact, the evidence shows that he accepted and supported the evidence of evolution to the end.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Kalderash descend from Pharaoh Ramesis II who m... (May '12) 3 min R-Jacquet 8
Thinking Out Loud....Feel Free To Say What's On... 4 min Aka - Alias 19
Word Association (Jun '10) 7 min Mega Monster 26,975
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 8 min wichita-rick 159,901
News New Hampshire senator resurrects kids' hawk bil... 18 min Abrahamanic Relig... 1
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 19 min Rock626 10,261
Post Partially Exposed Breasts Only (no total n... 22 min Spotted Girl 2
Poll Can single Men be friends with Married Women? (Jun '12) 29 min Rock626 199
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 3 hr Mega Monster 18,002
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 3 hr Mega Monster 39,994
More from around the web