I am not interested in your religious affiliations . That is entirely your own affair.
But you said , among other things, that there is no evidence to support evolution. That is wrong. I asked you for some examples to support your view.
What is Christianity's Weakest Link
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
I am not interested in your religious affiliations . That is entirely your own affair.
But you said , among other things, that there is no evidence to support evolution. That is wrong. I asked you for some examples to support your view.
Never mind Myles, what's the deal with the blood?
John,
But we can see how evolution could be true, my point is that there is no evidence to show how something supernatural could be true. It has no precedent.
I think you are talking about abiogenesis. Evolution is fact, it is the proposed processes of evolution that can be controversial.
But we can see how evolution could be true, my point is that there is no evidence to show how something supernatural could be true. It has no precedent.
Thanks Chris. I appreciate the honest response. At least you are capable of understanding and acknowledging the problems. This is where belief comes in and of course i respect your beliefs. I am lucky that this stuff is not forced on me, there are people here who have no real interest in science and they beat people over the head with this BS.
If you are talking about the definition of evolution then it is factual.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...volution&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
Of course the problems are obvious and i know until these issues are resolved then we obviously dont have an answer.
The first issue to resolve, for the sake of this thread, will be blood.
The second issue will be the transformation from simple lifeforms to complex. In actuality they are related but we can view them in an individual context.
Can you show me the natural cause\precursor\reason for the creation of blood?
Well then you and spidergoat adhere to evolution but spidergoat is a shoe maker (it's true) and you are what?
The blood cell is a specialized cell that transports oxygen through a system. There are bacteria that specialize in iron. I am sorry, Myles, I thought John had some biblical explanation in mind, some little known factoid about Christianity and blood.
There are no "weak links" in the Theory of Evolution, nothing that could contradict the basic theory. There are some details for which we only know what is most likely to have happened. Contrast that to Christianity, which merely has... a book.
There are no "weak links" in the Theory of Evolution, nothing that could contradict the basic theory. There are some details for which we only know what is most likely to have happened. Contrast that to Christianity, which merely has... a book.
What is the relevance of that question ? You say spider is a shoemaker. So what ? I judge posts based on their content, not the occupation of the poster.
" Go thou and do likewise ! "
We evolved from simpler organisms that resembled bacteria. There is nothing irreducible about having blood. It's no more difficult to evolve than an eye, or skin.
Jesus didn't write the Bible, but even if he did, it would all still be heresay. The Theory of Evolution has evidence that is observer independent.
I do not believe Jewish beliefs, I'm only ethnically Jewish.
Jesus didn't write the Bible, but even if he did, it would all still be heresay. The Theory of Evolution has evidence that is observer independent.
I do not believe Jewish beliefs, I'm only ethnically Jewish.
John has an interesting view on the stains on the Shroud of Turin.
You do ask some silly questions. Of course bacteria created humans. It was agreed upon at the general synod of small things and the vote in favour of creating humans was carried by a majority.
Christians haven't got Jesus though they like to think they have, They have a belief in a Jewish prophet called Jesus whose existence is doubtful.
Christianity was started by a nasty epilectic called Paul who had a fit and fell off his donkey. He attributed his "vision" to god. That' what Christians have and they are welcome to it.
The thing is that it makes absolutely no sense. Cant you see that? Bacteria do not create or specifically show me where has this been observed? The confusion stems from the fact that they they allow life to exist. Bacteria do not do anything but what they were designed to do. I know full well that bacteria sustain life. This is a big difference from creating all the diversity we see simply because of some belief that they wanted to or for what reason exactly?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_eel
It looks to me like there was a real, physical "super scientist" somewhere.
There can't have been a super scientist. As any born-again twit will tell you , all scientists are atheists. Keep away from Kansas.
You say it makes no sense, because you don't understand it. Simple organisms don't set out to create new things, but they can't help it. The replication process has errors. These errors are sometimes advantageous, and become more numerous. Evolution is trial and error. The errors die to a greater degree. The successes go one to build on that success. This causes such wonderous structures as electric eels. You are starstruck by the cult of science. You think only human scientists can create incredible things, (and by extension some super-scientist in the form of God), but their achievements are almost always outclassed by nature- a blind stupid process only slightly more intelligent than total randomness.
