Who Is Your Creator message forum

 

Index > General > Who Is Your Creator message forum > You guys are confused again
Forum: Who Is Your Creator message forum
This forum is locked and posting is not allowed
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
You guys are confused again

In regard to your comment:

"First of all, even if Brian or someone else were to answer AS a hypothesis, you would very well jump down their throat for the research papers to back it up, etc etc. I certainly wouldn't oppose that request, but the simple fact is that there are no papers for these specific questions yet, so answering from a hypothetical nature serves this debate none."

1. So, you don't think that we should be able to closely examine each process to assess if its genetically possible/probable with what we know today?

2. No, the simple fact is that the evolutionary premise being a reasonable explanation for novel and more complex traits to appear is utter nonsense.

3. The definition of a debate is to discuss or examine a question by presenting and considering arguments on both sides. So, if you can't answer THE very question of how evolution actually works, there is no real debate (as we are seeing here).

In regard to your comment:

"Secondly, you are assuming that because these answers are not currently known that they CANNOT be known and that they will NEVER be known. That, unfortunately for you, is a false conclusion. You are speaking like the Greeks or Romans with respect to lightning bolts - "we don't know how that works! we'll never know how that works! the gods did it!". You belittle the human race by saying "it can't be discovered"."

1. Since you admit that no one knows yet how evolution works, then explain to all of us why evolutionists feel the need to indoctrinate students into believing such nonsense as absolute fact?
(See http://www.whoisyourcreator.com/evolution_indoctrination_in_education.html)

2. No, unfortunately for evolutionists, the complete lack of evidence will be their downfall.

3. How interesting that it always come back to God.

In regard to your comment:

"Thirdly, you are asking for detail that is simply impossible at this point. Are you asking for the numbers and positions of the changes in a DNA strand that would cause these effects? Do you realize how unrealistic that question is given today's technology? Are you going to be OK with the answer when it DOES come within your lifetime (assuming you've got 20-30 years left or so [my personal estimation])?"

1. First, you claim that asking for detailed explanations of how evolution might possibly occur is unrealistic.

2. Then, you ask if we are ready to receive them when they come? Interesting argument ...

In regard to your comment:

"Thirdly, supposing that evolution doesn't work this way, and we are instead to study creation, could I pose simpler, even more dramatic questions to you that YOU should be able to answer as well? I will not *officially* pose these questions for you to answer, simply because this board is about evolution and not creation, but IF the tables were turned, would one be valid in asking these questions:

Using known research and known sources, including the Bible:
1. The first chemical reactions God used to create flesh and organs from dirt
2. The first few processes God used to create plants/animals from nothing (you must take the conservation of energy law into account)
Unless these two basic "where do things come from" questions are answered, we have less answers about the origin of things than ToE, even though IT is not complete.

You tell me, which is more practical?"

1. Did you know that science didn't and doesn't need an evolutionary foundation in order to understand its mechanisms? I personally think both evolution and creation should be covered under the subject of philosophy, not science.

2. Did you know that research produces more accurate outcomes without a false underlying presupposition?
See "What has the Presupposition of Evolutionary Science Done for Research on ERVS?" on
http://www.whoisyourcreator.com/endogenous_retroviruses.html

3. Do you believe that all supernatural phenomena must be ignored and only "practical" theories, even those without any evidence, should replace them and be elevated as fact?

Example:
http://www.physics.ucla.edu/Sonoluminescence/page2.html

Because sonoluminescence cannot be explained, the logic in the above would dictate that you MUST come up with a "practical" explanation.
Think one up and then we'll teach it as fact.

This is the very philosophy behind the theory of evolution.

Email  
Re: You guys are confused again - by akg41470 - Jan 25, 2008 12:19pm
Your rebuttal is weakening - by akg41470 - Jan 26, 2008 10:13pm
Apparently I need no help - by akg41470 - Jan 27, 2008 2:11pm
What did we miss? - by who is your crea... - Jan 27, 2008 7:40pm