I don't read long copy and paste articles, if you do not understand the subject well enough to discuss it (in your own words), and answer legitimate questions about it, then why should I waste my time reading it? If you want to believe a literal interpretation of the bible and ignore the scientific advances of the last hundred years, then be honest enough to admit it and quit wasting time doing cut and pastes.
Design or Non-Design, finally we know, Darwin's Doubt
by QC 371 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
marmot
Yeah, I'm still sad he hasn't answered my question about neanderthal DNA.
-
QC
cofty's diatribes against theism:
Cofty: When Newton got stuck on why all the planets travel on the same plane he abandoned science and ascribed the answer to god. You can't do science without temporarily putting your belief in theism aside.
According to cofty, Newton, the devout Christian intrigued with God’s handiwork and credited with being the impetus for modern science arguably the greatest scientist ever, if in his day he had simply switched off his theism and turned on atheism, he would have had no limits to his understanding of how planets orbit. This vitriolic rant is intended to penalize Newton because he is a Christian that became a science colossus.
Hitchens is the lead attack dog on this. He targets Newton becaus he expressed that God's "corrections" sustain the laws that govern planets, no need to worry about their stability.
A century later, Pierre-Simon Laplace, using Newton's equations of motion, applied a more precise mathematics to Newton's equations and found the Sun and planet mutual equilibrium stability that exist in the solar system (cf. Laplace's book, Celestial Mechanics). Hitchens spins a strawman argument suggesting Newton's Christianity stopped him from doing what the atheist Laplace could do.
But this clearly is a manipulation of the facts, we know Laplace wrote to his son, "I pray that God watches over your days. Let Him be always present to your mind, as also your father and your mother." Chemist Jean-Baptiste Dumas who knew Laplace well in the 1820s wrote that Laplace "gave materialists their specious arguments, without sharing their convictions." And, Roger Hahn (Laplace's biographer) states, Born a Catholic, "Nowhere in his writings, either public or private, does Laplace deny God's existence." Laplace was not an atheist. Like Newton, he was a Christian also! Like the majority of scientist of his day.
Once again, we see nonsense happens when indulgent ideologues (like cofty, Hitchen, Dawkins, the Society's GB 8, etc.) tilt to the dark side.
Fine-Tuned Laws of Nature:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGqezGP_16w (paste into browser if youtube fails:(8 min)
Nature journal: Shadows cast on Moon's origin
Our Moon is like no other. The ratio of its mass compared to the mass of its host planet is about fifty times greater than the next closest known ratio of moon to host planet mass. Plus, our Moon orbits Earth more closely than any other known large moon orbits its host planet.
Earth possesses a stable rotation axis tilt, unlike the other solar system planets, which protects it from rapid and extreme climatic variations that would otherwise rule out advanced life. The Moon also slowed Earth’s rotation rate down to the value at which advanced life could thrive and generated tides that recycle nutrients and waste efficiently.
Only recently have astronomers had any clue how such a special Moon could form. Over the past 15 years, astronomers developed and improved models that demonstrate that the Moon resulted from a collision between a newly formed Earth and a planet about twice the mass of Mars. This collision took place at an impact angle of about 45 degrees and a very low impact velocity of less than 12 kilometers per second. In addition to forming the Moon, this highly fine-tuned event brought about three more changes, each significant for advanced life: (1) it blasted away most of Earth’s water and atmosphere; (2) it ejected light element material and delivered heavy elements; and (3) it transformed both the interior and exterior structure of the planet.
Scientist Tim Elliott observes that the complexity and fine-tuning in lunar origin models appears to be accumulating at an exponential rate. The impact on lunar origin researchers, Elliott notes, is that “the sequence of conditions that currently seems necessary in these revised versions of lunar formation have led to philosophical disquiet.”
Why this “philosophical disquiet” among astronomers? There is now more than sufficient evidence for the supernatural, super-intelligent design of the Earth-Moon system for humanity’s specific benefit.
Jon Preston: Q i was wondering if youve had enough time to answer DS211's question?
DS211: Were animals supposed to live forever? if they were supposed to live forever why would he create bacteria and viruses for decay in the first place?
Salvation (living forever) is a gift only for members of the family of Adam which does not include animals. A multitude of Adams descendants understand that their being created in the "image of God" means God will fix the situation of inherited sin triggered by Adam.
This differentiation from animals, is verification that there is NO such thing as theistic Evolution. Humans and angelic creations are meant to reflect the righteous “image of God” qualities. Animals do not reflect the "image of God" intelligence.
DS211: And its a proven fact that viruses and bacteria change, they mutate, do they not? Isnt that evolution?
No that's not Evolution.
Viruses, bacteria, animals in general, and humans do change over time, yes; e.g. modern technology change in medicine, foods, and sports training, etc. to produce the change of bigger faster and more powerful athletic human specimen. And, food change, e.g. the seedless Navel orange DNA manipulation change does gives us another type of delicious orange.
But these changes are NOT Evolution; they represent the range of adaptation programming (some improvisational) within species, which speak to the ingenious adaptive and creative way God designs species variety. But NEVER do species jump out of their phyla lane (species family) to make another species family, e.g. apes don’t morph into humans, etc., EVER. All species have a programming script that makes them what they are.
So, the rabid bluster from Bill Blyth (aka cofty) and Dawkins over an Evolution common ancestry tree (coming out of the Cambrian Explosion) if it were true there would be million and million of them at the Cambrian explosion. There’s not—none, zilch, nada, not happening. Add billions of years and cool artistic renderings? Still no. It'is pure nonsense, a myth.
Cofty knows it. He's like the Wall Street bankers that dumped toxic subprime mortages on the stock market. They know they're wrong. Jackal and Hyde ideologue personalities when they're wrong the keep going because they can, and they won't pay a penalty.
Darwin admits the Cambrian Explosion is a problem that hangs over his Evolution theory; instead of waiting for this theory to be proven beyond doubt, he punts to the future:
- “I cannot doubt that all the Silurian [Cambrian] trilobites have descended from some one crustacean….The case must at present remain inexplicable [no evidence]; and may be truely urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained (Origin of Species, 1859, pp. 313 – 314).
Darwin’s Cambrian Explosion missing graduated transition fossil evidence problem is now exponentially more problematic. Darwin had no clue about DNA, the highly sophisticated instructions digital programming code prerequisite ALL life must receive before they come into existence. True, environmental natural selection and breeders (humans) can induce species variations, but species creation in the first place is determined solely by digital DNA software instructions from an intelligent source (first cause). It’s a top down bottom up creation process (DNA instructions from on high, assembly of resources below, NOT mud puddle magic bottom up blind chance, hit and miss, willy nilly evolving (abiogenesis, inorganic matter below accidental blind-chance self-assembly).
Evolution is among the diabolic ideas that attract good folks to the darkened world of hostility toward God.
LisaRose: “I don't read long copy....why should I waste my time reading it?”
Sounds like you are still a JW with your head in the sand, refusing to diligently get understanding from original sources. Substituting the ideologue cofty for the GB 8 will ends up a worse embarrassment. You are dealing with a monstous ego.
Lisa: “you want to believe a literal interpretation of the bible and ignore the scientific advances of the last hundred years…”
True the Bible is not a science book per se. But it's the only Book that thousands of years in advance that gives precise clues about physics of the universe:
It's FIRST to get the Big Bang ORIGIN of the universe right
It's FIRST to get the EXPANSION of the universe right
It's FIRST to get "let there be LIGHT" in the universe right
It's FIRST to get the ORDER of creation right
Mathematics of science shows our universe is integrated with consciousness and intelligence. DNA digital code sophisticated instructions is also evidence that supreme intelligence governs.
Slippery: “You just stated that all creatures have their DNA "custom made" which is why I specifically asked about Neanderthals. Going in with no assumptions about evolution, this species has unique DNA from modern man yet also had complex social structures (religious burial, advanced stone tool making, etc.)”
I'm still sad he hasn't answered my question about Neanderthal DNA.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg-6s8q6Ylg
Don’t be sad, be happy:
The problem with Evolution zealotry is it's filled with hoaxes. First we’re told Neanderthals are creatures with large-skull-no-forehead-protruding-thick-brow-erect-walking-squatty-apes. Now the latest consensus says, nope, Neanderthals are simply humans that became extinct like the Philistines; they are similar to the squatty Eskimo tribes that are 100% human.
What other science flip flops the way Evolution does, it's unprecidented. That's a warning that something is seriously wrong with it.
Because Evolution theory has never been scientifically grounded in law, it’s constantly in flux, there’s always some controversial revision retreat or “cooking” of data, attempting to spin a more convincing argument. That’s why it's considered a secular religion, it's a philosophy, it's an ideology with dogma. It can’t be challenged because it’s folklore in the ether of the world, it's an elevated material idol of atheism.
It will blow over like a storm. Light of science will bring it to its death.
Soon!
Familiarize yourself with some the Evolution gimmicks: the Hahnhöfersand Neanderthal, the Piltdown Man, Piltdown Turkey and archeologist fraud, e.g. “God’s hand” fraud:
-
cofty
Evolution theory has never been scientifically grounded in law
I didn't read all of your waffle but I did notice this gem.
By the way, the majority of christians accept the fact of evolution. Evolution is not synonymous with atheism.
Its only willfully ignorant fundamentalist christians and crazy Muslim clerics who have a problem with it. You are in good company QC.
-
QC
Relax cofty.
You have time to change your mind.
We all make mistakes. Question is, what ar you going to do about it.
-
cofty
QC - On the side of evolution we have a growing mountain of evidence from geology, paleontology, biogeography, embryology, comparative anatomy and especially genetics and developmental biology.
There is loads still be discovered. I am reading a book right now about the origins of the eukaryotic cell and the evidence of how it evolved from a chimera of free living bacteria and archaea. The evidence is astonishing.
On your side you have nothing except personal incredulity.
Stop being such a dullard and read a book.
-
QC
Clarity is wonderful!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHX8iF77zPgs 2 min. (paste link into youTube if video fails)
An x-dub must see: Darwin’s Dilemma, Cambrian explosion up close, you are there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxh9o32m5c0 (paste link into youTube if video fails)
-
marmot
Neanderthals are like "squatty eskimos" who are "100% human"? Are you for real?
They have sequenced Neanderthal DNA from bone samples and it is not h. sapiens sapiens. Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA differs by 202 base pairs compared to modern humans.
That's chemistry, not conjecture.
(Also, the word is Inuit, not "Eskimo" and they are by no means "squatty" you ignoramus. Their traditional clothing is bulky to keep warm but I've worked with and gone to school with Inuits and they're just regular people, as proportioned as you and me. I mean seriously, you sound like you're from the 19th century.)
-
Jon Preston
Qc-lets simplify it
noun 1. any process of formation or growth; development: the evolution of a language; the evolution of the airplane. 2. a product of such development; somethingevolved: The exploration of space is the evolution of decades of research. 3. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift. for instance: The scientists showed for the first time how the virus called "Lambda" evolved to find a new way to attack host cells, an innovation that took four mutations to accomplish. This virus infects bacteria, in particular the common E. colibacterium. Lambda isn't dangerous to humans, but this research demonstrated how viruses evolve complex and potentially deadly new traits, noted Justin Meyer, MSU graduate student, who co-authored the paper with Richard Lenski, MSU Hannah Distinguished Professor of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics. ....now did God make a happy virus that didnt hirt anyone? Just made the girus to kill animals until man sinned? Because if it changed from animals to humans then some forM of evolving took place.....but alas i feel im spinning tires with you..
-
QC
Yes Jon, you are spinning.... Eventually you will stop, look around, and see Evolution is done. Lenski, semantics, grad students, etc. won't help.
Slip, it doesn't matter what Evolutionist claim about Neanderthal DNA. That’s a moot point, insignificant. The Evolution paradigm has anomalies that cannot be fixed.
“Darwinian Evolution” is a failed theory. Sorry guys.
