Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty 174 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • redvip2000
    redvip2000

    The debate has raged for 1000's years.


    Perhaps, but the pendulum is certainly swinging toward enlightenment about the origin of the species, isn't it? Maybe 1000 years ago, as humans used fig leaves to clean their azz, and rubbed two sticks together to keep warm, there could be a bigger debate. After all, back then it would seem reasonable that a scary man with a grey beard in the sky made it all happen.

    Now, as evidence continues to pile on in favor of an evolutionary mechanism, why continue to insist on ignoring it, only to hold on to a belief that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, despite being based in a fairy tale?

    A few weeks ago, i had a conversation with someone, and this person told me that he believes in god, because there is room in life for dreams and hopes even if there is no hard evidence for them. At least I respect that.
  • James Brown
    James Brown

    Saintberthold

    I have to stress once again your assumptions and conclusions based on those assumptions are theoretical not scientific.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    Saintberthold

    I have to stress once again your assumptions and conclusions based on those assumptions are theoretical not scientific.

    Is that so? His assumptions might be theoretical and his conclusions scientific. And what about your belief in God? Is it scientific?

    Are there any empirical data which can be used to support the belief that God exists?

  • James Brown
    James Brown

    My belief in god is based on faith just like evolutionism is based on faith.

    Both sides twist and tear at bits of science to support their faith.

    Are there any empirical data which can be used to support the belief that God exists?

    Both sides have the same empirical data and facts.

    The conclusion is based on the interpretation.

  • cofty
    cofty
    Both sides have the same empirical data and facts. The conclusion is based on the interpretation - James B

    James, how would you interpret the data in the OP?

    So far you haven't said a single word about the topic. To be fair neither has anybody else.

    P.S. You will be pleased to know I am busy writing part 2

  • James Brown
    James Brown

    Watch Hovinds videos and quit dancing around with me.

  • Saintbertholdt
    Saintbertholdt

    James Brown, you wrote:

    I have to stress once again your assumptions and conclusions based on those assumptions are theoretical not scientific

    Its not theoretical that it takes the long way round. That is a matter of anatomy. If it was designed it must have some reason should it not? After all, man was created perfect wasn't he?

    James, not even a hypothesis?

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat
    So far you haven't said a single word about the topic. To be fair neither has anybody else.

    I guess because nobody is an expert in the topic. It would be a bit foolish to pretend.

    But it's equally foolish not to acknowledge that all statements are subject to revision, including scientific ones. History is replete with examples. We don't need to be experts in evolutionary biology to know that.

  • cofty
    cofty
    Watch Hovinds videos and quit dancing around with me - James B

    Please give me a reference for where in the 15 hours of preaching Hovind refutes Protein Functional Redundancy.

    I have listened to many hours of Hovind over the years. I have never heard him say anything interesting.

  • Saintbertholdt
    Saintbertholdt
    Watch Hovinds videos and quit dancing around with me.

    I've watched them all. What would you like to discuss about them?

    And as Cofty pointed out: Please give me a reference for where... Hovind refutes Protein Functional Redundancy.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit