Predictions and Evolution

[Bread_of_Life]

horizoneast

I'm pretty sure there's been a miscommunication by me here, I'll explain it:

If you would have said SOME Creationists misuse, ignore, etc then we finally could have agreed on something. But no

[Botz]

Hi SA

Fair enough. You default to the bible, so whilst you understand that some creationists are deceptive, you are automatically suspicious of all scientists who say anything other than what's in the bible.

Not exactly...You understand that I believe the Biblical account as it is written...and in the case of Genesis I do not think it is allegorical or a creation myth but a brief overview which contains a truthful framework that man can use to try and fill in the information that is not provided.

Therefore if a Scientist who is a Christian or otherwise happens to write something that seems removed from what I believe the Bible clearly indicates...then I automatically look at it from the point of view that either my understanding of the Biblical account must be slightly adrift or that what is being promulgated has not taken some important factors into account.

Therefore, not fully understanding either side's scientific arguments, you fall on the side of the bible. That's fine, because it's just a matter of learning. The more you see of the scientific community, hopefully the more you will become convinced that it is not an atheist conspiracy for evolution or against the bible. The more you see of the evidence, the more familiar you will become with it, and therefore the more equipped you will feel to make a judgement on the evidence yourself.

That is a good synopsis Nikolai...I would also very boldly put my head on the block and say that from what I have come to understand and believe...nothing in Science should ever contradict the Biblical framework that has been provided in Genesis and if it does then it has probably wandered into an area that has more to do with the speculations of men (howbeit it scientific) than the revealed works of G-d...

That is why when you were talking to me about ERVs etc...even though I found it very difficult to understand I could see that your conclusions seem to indicate to you that the earth was of a vast age and that mankind is no more than an evolved species...so I can't really comment on your conclusions from a Scientific point of view...but to me from my frame of reference they are mistaken.

However, there's a couple of things I would take issue with:

but Evolutionists have faith in the Creative element of the Big Bang and the unprovable theory of 'common ancestry'.

After all you've seen here, how can you say it's "unprovable". Surely I have shown you here a class of evidence that doesn't require a trip into the past to confirm or deny evolution? Even if you're not sure about this particular evidence, surely you now understand that evolution really can make testable predictions about the evidence, and therefore is both provable and falsifiable? That it's not all just a case of scientists having faith because they can't travel into the past to confirm it all happening?

Well my eyes have certainly been opened to some of the other methods that are now used to determine evolutionary theory...and it is provable/reasonable in that it works when related to the evolutionary framework...I can see this. It is what you set out to show me from the onset...and you were successful...you have been true to scientific exactitude and your own convictions about what the results show in conjunction with the predictions and the diagram you referred me to.

I took your point about not all of the people that Horizoneast mentioned being Creationists etc...I found your dialogue very interesting and I follow what you guys say to each other.

Now, you've made it clear that you'd be happier talking about the flood, or dinosaurs dying out, so fire away, start a thread on one of them (or both, because I guess to you they are related right?) and we'll discuss it.

I will do so in a week or two...I have a good friend who is a geologist and we used to have some very interesting conversations about these things...that is why I would be more comfortable as it is slightly more familiar territory...I will be very interested in your point of view...but now that you have started me on micro-evolution I will continue to read up on it when I get the inclination...and instead of flipping over the page when I see it mentioned I will be interested.

Regards. Botz.

[JLW001]

SA, the mere fact that virus implantation occurs in DNA, shows that it is a chemical process. Now, a chemical process is determinant. I don't have to do experiments to prove that chemistry is detterminant. That has all be done for hundreds of years before me. Now, virus WORD implantation must require a certain chemistry take place. It will not be random because the DNA is not random and the chemistry which governs the interactions of the virus WORD and the DNA.

You have stated that chimp DNA is only 1% different than human DNA. What is the maximum difference in DNA found in animals? I believe its between 2% and 3%. This means that most of the DNA molecule is the same for all animals. How different are these viral implants from animal to animal. How many of these viral implants do we have in common with buffalo? If we have none or very few, then that means the viruses attack only those areas of DNA that contain the information that make major differences from specie to specie.

If the viral implants attack only these specific areas, then we have very specific chemistries going on...Not random processes. We don't have to do experiments to determine if its random or not. If they were random, then we would see these viral implants all over the molecule and not just in the regions that make an animal different from another animal.

[Gerioke]

A wise scientist would say " This is what we believe based on the evidence we've been given."

A wise christian would say " I'm not as smart as God so why don't you take it up with him."

At least thats what I am lead to believe based on the evidence I've been given.

Has anybody figured out that caramilk thing yet?

[JLW001]

Gerioke,

I believe they use a process of either injecting the caramel into the bar, maybe making the bar of a top piece and a bottom piece, or they use Scotty's transporter from Star Trek.

I believe that there are things in the universe that we humans can not understand, but those things we can understand only prove God's glory and existence. Why? Because His whole creation has His signature upon it. All of this creation came from God.

As a Christian I know this because it is written in His Word. As a scientist I can see it in detail. There are those scientists who "can't see the forest for the trees", but the natural world can convince us of His presence. This is what Horizoneast told us about with Antony Flew. The wonderful information storage and transfer that happens with DNA is truly astounding. However, it is remarkable that one of the scientists involved in its discovery thought that DNA proved that God did not exist. Of course he probably did not have a good concept of information entropy. No I don't mean information about "what ants had for breakfast"!

[Bread_of_Life]

horizon,

sorry I've been off for so long. Quit my job, preparing for a new one, planning a trip to see my parents, buying a new car for the new job, tying up loose ends on the old job, having birthday celebrations etc. I promise I'll get back to you, just to let you know I havn't forgotten.

[nebula]

I found an interesting essay.

The Discovery of Geological Time <<--LINK

Religious and philosophical inputs to geochronology

by: David J. Tyler

If you have time to read it, the essay puts an interesting perspective on the history of scientific thought and how it's been influenced by religious and philosophical positionings.

But you have to read the whole thing to really understand what it is saying (no matter waht you agree or disagree about it).

[Gerioke]

What do you mean "no leprechauns"?

[Botz]

Foglight...

I wonder if I could get away with such contemptuous and acrimonious attacks on a Christian here... I guess it's acceptable for Christians to be rude and insulting as long as it's directed at a nonbeliever. 

Most High...

I have only been here a few days exploring this site but I don't think I'll be staying, not if people are allowed to treat others this way. I will pray for you because you are in desperate need. I can see you hate this person FogLight and take advantage of every opportunity to be nasty towards him. I certainly haven't read every message on this board but from what I've seen in the last five or so days shows there is a distinct lack of Gods good grace. Your message above is one of many examples I've seen around here and is nothing but mean spirit and baiting a fight. This FogLight didn't even say anything to you and you attacked him.

This person has been sent here by God for a reason and some of you wish to run him off. Shame on you and shame on the moderators for allowing such behavior.

Just for the record I think both Foglight and Most High are correct in their observations.

[Trinity]

Read up on Hebrew History Then you will see my God at work