Oh look, my eyes work. Some people's don't, but that's a malfunction of the design that works. What kind of eye do you want, man? If it's not a design up to your standards, what would be?

What is an organic pain collector?

Just because God CAN stop parts of His creation from hurting other parts, that doesn't mean it's in our interest to not be hurt ever. Pain and dealing with pain often grows relationships with other humans and with God. No, it's not fun, but we lost the good life when Adam and Eve disobeyed.

"or the sudden coming into existence of a very complex entity like a Creator who then goes on to create lifeforms that eat each other and die of horrible diseases he also created?"

The world He created has a beginning and an end - not God. Eternal goes both ways for God. He INVENTED time. God was, is, and will be.

Leauki posts:



As I see it there are 3 theories held about the Origins of life as we now know it. In general they can be reduced to 3 basic beliefs: Atheistic, Theistic, and Special Creation. ONly one of these can be the truth for the 3 beliefs are mutually incompatible. the claim of each belief is providing an explanation of the origin of the universe and the destiny of human beings. Belief in either special Creation or Evolution has to be made on the basis of faith in God or faith in random chance.

Assuming that you are referring to Atheistic Evolution you mean that all present species upon the earth have evolved over a great period of time from very simple forms of life.

School science textbooks have sketches of embryos, limbs, skulls, etc. of various creatures and Evolutionists claim that the apparent similiarities are proof of descent. But these assertions aren't proven..

Above you assert that Evolution can be verified by scientific experiment.

Really? Darwinian Evolutionist believers have had a couple hundred years to verify the tale of how life got started...what say you? Is Evolution (one species changes into a higher one with new and different genetic structure) possible?

Could you provide specific details of how the mechanism of Evolution actually occurred?

How did these similiarities come about? By chance? Last I heard Evolutionists still have to show a clear pattern of descent with modification, both conceptually and from evidence of fossils. If Evolution did occur, then it should be possible to show lineages and to establish phylogeny, that is closely identified "tree" structure ancestory, but this hasn't been done.

Now with sceintific research on the pattern of life at the molecular level of proteins and genes, DNA is proving to be a real force as evidence against Evolution. It is now known with a high degree of certainity that DNA will not allow Evolution to occur.

No, it's not up to my standards:

http://denbeste.nu/essays/humaneye.shtml

The human eye is proof that we were not designed (or that if we were, the designer was an idiot, hence cannot have been G-d).



You are walking in one. It's the human body, from a design perspective.



It is not in anybody's interest that people die of AIDS or Malaria. Why did G-d create AIDS and Malaria?

If Creationism or "intelligent" design is a science, the theory should cover those questions.



Some of us did. Others did not. Why is G-d punishing some of us and not others?




Why?

Is that where the "theory" ends? The smurf made everything and there is no explanation for the smurf, so don't ask?

Is that what "intelligent" design should teach people? Some smurf created imperfect beings and lots of diseases and we don't know why and cannot find out? How is that useful knowledge?

How can I verify any of it in an experiment? How can I use the knowledge to design or invent things? I can verify evolution, I can use evolution to create. What do I do with Creationism or "intelligent" design?

What if we teach some other book instead? Like the excellent Belgian comic "Spirou et Fantasio"? It also teaches us nothing. But it has pictures.

"It was always there" is not a very good explanation for something.

OK create something..





Anybody whose read the bible knows it teaches plenty. not just from a religious aspect but on how to treat each other,love,respect for our fellow human beings, the fundamental basics on decent social behavior... But like I said earlier, as with any book people will only take from it what they choose


Just because an explanation can logically be more fitting,easier to believe and look better than others, don't make it the actual answer...

The truth is somewhere in between..

The problem with this whole 'crappy design' thing is that it's inherently flawed - ie, if we were designed badly, we wouldn't be able to survive. Therefore, the intelligent designer got it right. After all, if he hadn't, we'd be dead. And if it was such a bad design, we wouldn't have evolved into it - unless evolution is random.

the bad part with People following a "theory" like its fact ..is that all it takes is one cold hard fact disproving the theory to make all its devout followers look the fool..


All I'm saying is Don't put down Religion over Theory.. as Theory's have been known to eventually be disproved..




but were expected to believe that the materials that formed the galaxy during the big bang were? where did they come from? Creationism is not the only one to open new questions to which there are no current explanations ...

I agree "It was always there" is not a good explanation.

Big Bang <> Evolution.

Depends on the woman you are asking.

Zoo says:

Evolution theory holds up again. 150 years and still going strong. It scares me that a religion only 2000 years old thinks that they know everything.

150 years vs. 2000 years. Hmm. Sorry, just had to put that in there.

But let's try a different approach. To all the die-hard creationists:

Let's just pretend that you believe in a little something called mutation. By mutation, I mean stuff like blond hair and blue eyes, which, believe it or not, is a genetic mutation. Additionally, mutation has been scientifically proven. So, if you take something like blond hair and blue eyes, and cross it with something else, that mutation is carried into the next generation through the offspring's genes. So even if you don't believe in the big bang theory, you have to give this to the evolutionists, IT IS POSSIBLE. With enough mutations and cross breeding, over a long enough time, can you really deny that a new species could, in fact, come into creation?

BTW, some of you spouting off should simply say "I didn't watch the program" rather than repeating weak arguments that were thoroughly crushed on the program.

Incidentally, theories aren't facts and facts aren't theories.

Personally, I don't care if people believe in evolution or creationism or little green men planting us.  But evolution is a pretty strong theory.  Creationism/Intelligent Design is simply a hypothesis without a way to test it. It's no stronger than me claiming ath magic fairies planted us here 20 seconds ago with the memories we currently have.

The only two materials needed for the Big Bang is hydrogen and helium.

These two elements formed the first stars. When those stars went super nova, they created the other elements (this is a pretty well known fact btw -- how other elements were formed).

Creationism doesn't have "questions". It's simply a hypothesis.

The Big Bang theory is just that - a theory. It is testable (as all theories are).  And since its conception, many predictions it required to be true to be valid have been shown to be true. The same is true of evolution (for example, evolution predicted that things such as genes and DNA must exist as well as fossils showing intermediate forms).

When evolution was first being proposed, we didn't even know about different blood types let alone genes, mitochondrial DNA, RNA, chromosones, etc.

For example, in the program, they show that chimps and other apes have 24 (pairs) choromosomes while humans only have 23. For evolution to be true - that we descended down that line then we have to explain where the missing chromosome went.  When genes combine, there's a marker in the gene that shows where the two combined. Sure enough, now that we can look closely at DNA, they found the fused chromosome in humans that explains where the missing chromosome went.

By contrast, creationism has no such tests. It simply says "Magic super being made everything". That's not science.

Creationism/Intelligent Design is simply a hypothesis without a way to test it.

That is the beauty of Faith.  It cant be tested.

Magic faeries may have just planted us here. Since there's no way to tell, regardless of whether evolution is happening or not, I refuse to let anyone tell me that evolution voids my beliefs.

magic Fairies? More power to you! (or your Fairies)   

Cedarbird posts:

I agree mutation is a real scientific thing. It seems to be a crutch for Darwinian Evolutionists. Mutations figure prominently in the Evolution story. Mutations are the only known means by which new genetic material becomes available for Evolution theory. The problem is rarely, if ever, is a mutation beneficial to an organism in its natural environment. Almost all observable mutations are harmful; some are meaningless, and many are lethal. No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having greater complexity and viability than its ancestors.

For sure the fans of Higher Criticism would love all to believe Genesis is a fairy tale myth.

Here's a fairy tale, a frog + a kiss = a Prince. In Evolution, a frog + time = a Prince.

I am the kind of person who looks at both sides and takes what I feel is the best of both..

I do not discount Evolution any more than Creationism. I still believe they walk hand in hand.

There is no evidence to disprove my beliefs and so I will believe as I wish

It just bugs me to see some follow a theory as a fact and act smug to those believe different..


To push a scientific theory as fact and try to force others to believe it must be the only answer. Is nutz. Even as we speak an unforseen discovery could alter your theory to the counter..Why ? because it is still not absolute fact.

Exerpt from the NSTA site.


"At present, students and nonscientists still believe that a "theory" is just a mere hunch or a guess and that science is absolute. In this article, the author discusses that it is now time for teachers to correct these misconceptions. Teachers must explain to their students that the facts printed in science textbooks just happen to be the best theories at the moment and they are tentative and open to challenge. The author also urges teachers to remind themselves and those they mentor that a hypothesis is never proven correct and that no amount of experimental testing or evidence can prove anything in science. It is only when the scientist's results match his or her prediction that a hypothesis is supported."

http://www.nsta.org/



While Science strongly supports evolution.. It does not prove a divine creator does not exist.

DRAGINAL POSTS:

When you say, "for evolution to be true that we descended down the line.." just so we are clear by Evolution you mean man has by chance somehow evolved slowly and by some hypothetical process over mythical millions of years from primitive gas to slime to apes and through brute animals to what he is today.

Here you state some facts which are correct but you add assumptions which are really only suppostions----I can just as easily say that from the beginning God created chimps and apes with 24 pairs of chromosomes and humans with 23 with one pair fused. No "missing" chromosomes at all. That's simply the way we were created each to his own "kind".

Did the program explain that the genetic information in chimps, apes, orangatans, is read in one direction, while the fused chromosome in man is read in the reverse direction? The reading in the chimp gives one sense, the reading in man a completely different significance.

And there is no argument from anyone on the ID/Creation side about genetic variation. The argument is about the LIMITS of variation. No question, no doubt that variations WITHIN LIMITS has produced races of men, breeds of dogs and varieties of pigeons.

Darwin was taught at Cambridge that species never change. On the Galapagos Islands he saw variation within certain species, but supposing that variations were by chance, overreacted and extrapolated observed variation into imaginary variation across barriers of species into a hypothetical world of Evolution of lower kinds (species) evolving into higher kinds (species).

Darwin and his true-blue believers propose that complex plants, animals and man evolved from hydrogen gas to thinking man by a process of change and natural selection. This idea has become a world-view, a philosophy, one that the biased media, like global warming pump up every chance it gets. So does academia. Evolution requires unwary students to believe that random molecules assemble themselves into organized and increasingly complex systems. It requires hydrogen gas to evolve into man. Look at the array of photos in science textbooks..jellyfish becoming elephants, bears becoming whales, and sea anemones ending up as Beethoven.


For Evolution Theory to work, there must be no limits in genetic barriers..Today, with the science of genetics, that microscopic genes in the cell control the variations of individuals within the species or kind. The genetic blueprint allows great variety within a species, but none further. There is a genetic barrier which prevents change beyond that. All genetic scientists that don't have an Evolutionists agenda boss-man to answer to know that the genetic process cannot break this barrier. Empirical science has proven that mutations of genes doesn't cut it. This is why man can never have "descended down the line from chimps or apes..

I know the media ignores and does their best to discredit Creation scientists, so I'm wondering if you have ever read any of their studies, literature or books?

They ask plenty of questions...working on finding the answers too.

How do stars burn?

Is there any scientific justification of gravitional shrinkage?

What does the amount of meteorite dust found on the moon tell us?

Questions are for Hypothesis. But not for conjecture. I know we share a common faith, but we do not share the same beliefs. I know - as in faith, not fact- that creation is a parable. I have always accepted it as such, and that will not change.

I hold out the belief of Intelligent Design. As in another species mixed our goo to get us. That is possible. But that extends the question of who stirred their goo?

When it comes down to it, I am not going to disagree with the random goo people because their starting point is gooey. So what started it all will remain an answer to those who build on our empirical knowledge.

Then what of Adam and Original Sin? Did many ape-men (polygenism) take his place?

No known mutation? There are lots of known mutations that result in mor ecomplex life in the existing genetic record.

Do you mean that no mutation that has occurred in the past 150 years has produced a more complex or viable life? That's probably true.  However, with billions of years, mutation can get it wrong 99.99999% of the time.

As for crutches, glass house alert, you're the one whose belief is based on a magical, invisible super being.  Mutation, by contrast, is reality. Genetic mutation, incidentally, was one of the things evolution predicted (again, in the 19th century, we had no knowledge on genetics).

I would love for Genesis to be true.  I would love to be able to believe that after we die there is heaven.

Evolution isn't an emotionally appealing theory. It simply is a theory.

Let's be clear: If a theory can't be tested, it's not a theory, nor is it science. Therefore, there is no such thing as "Creation scientists".

Replace "Creation" with "Peope who believe that faeries making us".

It's hard to take anyone scientifically seriously when their fall back position is to say it's magic (God) doing it.

Look, if you want to believe in magical super beings then be my guest. More power to you.  But you'll have to forgive me if I don't find "God did it" a compelling argument. Next time you're eating your genetically modified food or hear about some new medical technology ask yourself whether the actual scientists producing these things are "Creationists" or believe in natural selection.

My genetically modified food and new medical technology came with an increase in diabetes and cancer. I haven't studied them, but I'm just hypothesizing here. Not even a theory yet.

All just parables. There may have been an Adam, but he did not rise from clay. And original sin is very original. Man (note the capital) did sin against God and God punished Man for that.