still spout the same nonsense about how it's all just a conspiracy and no matter how much proof you provide it still comes down to 'Gawd done it'?
2007-08-30 13:52:17 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Gratvol - Good point.
2007-08-30 14:02:13 · update #1
You know these people get confused when you present them with physical reality. They short circuit by saying stupid things.
Witness General Custer. He just told us all that physical reality isn't real.
2007-08-30 14:09:03 · answer #1 · answered by Shawn B 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The transitional fossil argument is advanced only by people who do not know how mutations work. Genetic information is stored in digital, not analog, form, so a one-bit change in the code will cause a minimum change. But there is no maximum: a one-bit change can activate all or part of an intron, or de-activate all or part of an exon, causing a change which is arbitrarily large. Hence, a supposedly missing transitional form may simply never have existed. Evolution is now a proven fact; proof details are available on request. (Please provide an e-mail address.)
2007-08-30 16:17:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, they would say fossils were arranged by "more complex, and alledgedly more recent extinct species" making it to the high ground the first days of the flood, and then the flood itself rearranged the strata to appear aged. And then they say that order cant come from disorder to disprove the primordial soup thingy. That is hypocresy at its best: Once I read about a cretinist saying "Order cannot come from disorder without information, like when a hurricane strikes a house, it doesnt leave the dishes washed and the floor vaccuumed" What is more comparable with a huge flood? primordial soup or a hurricante, cretin?!?!?!?
2007-08-30 14:11:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No matter how far back you go...you never approach the logical "prime mover" question. While the question itself is logical, the open mind it takes to try and answer it seems to be out of your grasp. This game can be played ad infinitum. God can neither be proved or disproved. It takes faith either way and the contempt that atheists have for theists is always palpable...almost inviting a fight rather than any attempt at civil discourse. There are "fundies" that are equally vitriolic, but they deny their faith by their actions, so they don't truly represent. Even your question betrays any desire for a reasonable response by saying "gawd". Nice poem, though.
2007-08-30 17:31:18 · answer #4 · answered by Salsa Shark 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I know of how some scientists have filed down skulls to make them LOOK like an ape skull.They are SO very desperate for "evidence" for the evolution fairytale.
Bones and Fossils cannot make new animals.Bones and Fossils only show you that something died.And the bones and fossils cannot be that old,because it would turn into oil before it got so "old"
2007-08-30 14:15:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Very few Christians today have a problem with evolution as such. Bring on the fossils. Where we have a problem is the limited, lock-step mental process that says life on earth is a complete accident and that human beings progressed in a straight line from day one. Scientists are now beginning to see that that is apparently not so. And just because we know how something happened, that doesn't mean we know why it happened.
2007-08-30 14:02:33 · answer #6 · answered by babbie 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
So, provide the list !!! According to Darwin, you would need millions of transitional fossils that show the evolution of all lifeforms. From what I have heard from evolutionists themselves, all the purported transitional fossils from ape-like ancestor to humans can fit in a coffin. If horses had wings ......
2007-08-30 14:14:11 · answer #7 · answered by flandargo 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am a Christian but not a creationist. Nor do I believe that evolution happened all by some strange twist of fate.
Just as I have to trust and have faith in God, I trust and have faith that we are here for a reason. I really do not think it matters how we got here...just that we are here.
2007-08-30 14:22:57 · answer #8 · answered by homeschoolmom 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He he, that's a funny typo! Cretinist (cretin: a stupid, obtuse, or mentally defective person) instead of Creationist is a pretty funny Freudian slip.
Yes, I wouldn't be surprised if Creationists offered another ridiculous, nonsensical "gawdunnit" explanation.
2007-08-30 14:03:50 · answer #9 · answered by eV 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
... it's all just a conspiracy and no matter how much proof you provide it still comes down to 'Gawd done it'?
(Don't worry... I haven't turned on you. I'm spending the day as a Creationist, so I can see what it's like to be droolingly stupid,)
2007-08-30 14:00:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
It took Christianity almost 500 years to universally accept that the world was round.
So far in the last 100 years the majority of Christians have accepted evolution as a scientific reality.
I call this progress, though it make take another 100 years to get all the fundes in.
2007-08-30 13:59:42 · answer #11 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 7⤊ 2⤋