Jose Fly
New member
Except for all those times when it does, as we so often observe.
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Except for all those times when it does, as we so often observe.
6days
New member
I think genetally when someone uses 'consensus' as an argument, they are trying to sell you something. Nobody uses 'consensus' as an argument for the distance of the moon. It is solid science that measures the distance to the moon, therefore tbe consensus argument is not used.*Yorzhik said:
6days
New member
False.
Mutations destroy pre-existing info and corrupt messaging with duplications. Having 3 eyes is not an example of mutations creating.
Jose Fly
New member
So if you were shown examples of mutations increasing the number of nucleotides, and resulting in a new trait or ability, would that constitute "mutation creating something"?
Or are you going to dodge this question?
6days
New member
more nucleotides is definetly not increasing information. You can add all kinds of copying mistakes and add extra pages to a book but you have not increased the meaningful info....you have corrupted it.
New trait....hmmmmm There are some rare mutations that have given a beneficial outcome. But in almost all... if not ALL, the beneficial outcome is the result of a LOSS of pre-existing info. (For example a loss of specificity to an enzyme may result a benefit)
But in any case the deleterioous mutation rate accumulates in our genome at a far higher rate than the rare beneficial mutation. Geneticists KNOW our genome is deteriating. This is consistent with the Biblical model of perfect creation and then the fall.
alwight
New member
I'd say that you believe in a very specific creator, not just any creator, because you adhere literally to Genesis regardless of science and the evidence.
You are of course entitled to believe in whatever nonsense floats your Ark 6days.
Lon
Well-known member
You need to watch the video (for the first time or again).
Jose Fly
New member
What about additional nucleotides that result in a new trait?
6days
New member
You mean like a duplication error? That simply duplicates existing information. Additional mutations can alter or corrupt it. Mutations simply are incapable of creating a protein...creating a cell.... or creating biologists from baboons. Mutations destroy. Genetic burden is real..... genomes deteriorate. Common ancestry beliefs reject the evidence.
John Sanford, internationally known geneticist and author of 80+peer reviewed articles says " It must be understood that scientists have a very sensitive and extensive network for detecting information creating mutations, and most geneticists are diligently keeping their eyes open for them all the time. This has been true for about 100 years. The sensitivity of this observational network is such that even if only one mutation out of a million unambiguously creates new information (apart from fine tuning) , the literature would be overflowing with reports of this happening. Yet I am still not convinced there is a single crystal clear example of a known mutation which unambiguously created information. There are certainly many mutations which have been described as beneficial but most of these beneficial mutations have not created information but rather have destroyed it."
iouae
Well-known member
Let us see what creationism has contributed to science.
Why is it that the closest creature to humans is chimps/bonobos?
Would this fit the evolutionary tale or creationist tale?
Why are Neanderthals, H. erectus, H. naledi, H. heidelbergensis, H. habilis and all the other Homo's not around today? As far as I know, evolution does not have an answer as to why these died out.
But the Bible starts with a mass extinction before Adam and Eve, and a mass extinction called the flood, both of which would have killed all the other hominids.
And the creation story says God created all the animals and man. Man was made in God's image (including language, religion) and the others not.
Thus, what we see today far more perfectly fits the creation story than the evolutionary one. Man having dominion over animals. And never the twain shall meet on some Tree of Life. And even the apes are not at all like man in their thinking. Certainly speech makes a difference. This is but one way in which humans and apes show a huge divide, as explained by the Genesis account, not the evolutionary one.
Why is it that the closest creature to humans is chimps/bonobos?
Would this fit the evolutionary tale or creationist tale?
Why are Neanderthals, H. erectus, H. naledi, H. heidelbergensis, H. habilis and all the other Homo's not around today? As far as I know, evolution does not have an answer as to why these died out.
But the Bible starts with a mass extinction before Adam and Eve, and a mass extinction called the flood, both of which would have killed all the other hominids.
And the creation story says God created all the animals and man. Man was made in God's image (including language, religion) and the others not.
Thus, what we see today far more perfectly fits the creation story than the evolutionary one. Man having dominion over animals. And never the twain shall meet on some Tree of Life. And even the apes are not at all like man in their thinking. Certainly speech makes a difference. This is but one way in which humans and apes show a huge divide, as explained by the Genesis account, not the evolutionary one.
Good post, that proves creationists have contributed to science.
6days
New member
Ha..... Of course!
Actually, modern science is rooted in Biblical creation. Many of the fathers of modern science believed that if the Bible was true, then God would have created an orderly creation that could be discovered. This was a new and different approach from the Aristotolean system that had ruled up to that point.
Loren Eiseley, evolutionary anthropologist said "The philosophy of experimental science … began its discoveries and made use of its methods in the faith, not the knowledge, that it was dealing with a rational universe controlled by a creator who did not act upon whim nor interfere with the forces He had set in operation… It is surely one of the curious paradoxes of history that science, which professionally has little to do with faith, owes its origins to an act of faith that the universe can be rationally interpreted, and that science today is sustained by that assumption."
6days
New member
Good post other than adding stuff into God's Word.
The Bible actually starts with... "In the beginning, God created...."
Your mass extinction before a creation is anti-biblical and gospel destroying.
iouae
Well-known member
Explain to me why Cambrian rocks only contain Cambrian fossils, and Cretaceous rocks contain Cretaceous fossils?
Oh, right, you cannot.
So every time you cannot explain stratification, you deny science, and make a fool of yourself. YEC has turned scientists, who may have been open to the Bible, away from the Bible, because they KNOW that earth and the cosmos are older than 10000 years.
And I laugh at your ridiculous assertion that dinosaurs were taken onto the Ark, only to all go extinct after the flood.
First off, they lived 65 million years before the flood, and they could not have fitted onto the Ark, and why would God bring them to the Ark to be saved, if they all ended up extinct. Nuts!!!
Dear 6days,
You might want to know that our health does also hinge upon the length of our telomeres, which are at the end of your DNA. Telomeres are protective caps on each end of our DNA strands and they control aging. Every time our cells divide, our telomeres get shorter. As a result, our body produces cells that are older, weaker and more decrepit. Anyway, I thought you might want to know about this. It's a new discovery, to say the least. I got the info from an article by Al Sears, MD, CNS, in a booklet called Center for Health & Wellness; Royal Palm Beach, FL.
If you want more info, let me know. A study was done by Dr. Ronald DePinho, professor of genetics, conducted at Harvard Medical School, regarding this. Let me know what you think!
Much Love And Blessings Coming Your Way!!
Michael
:angel: :angel: :angel: :cloud9: :cloud9: :guitar:
6days
New member
You easily forget things that contradict your beliefs. I showed you before things like modern birds found in dinosaur layers. It was explained previously to you why rabbits are not buried with trilobites.
That is Bible denying evolutionism. You are uninterested in the thousands of PhD scientists who believe God's Word and say the cosmos CAN'T be millions of years old. Are you interested in the numerous PhD geologists who explain stratification supports the Biblical flood model?
Are you interested in answers from God's Word?
iouae
Well-known member
Where?
Absolutely, good points, good post !
iouae
Well-known member
Some birds were contemporary with dinosaurs, so that does not impress me at all.
http://www.natureworldnews.com/arti...t-ancient-birds-flew-over-heads-dinosaurs.htm
You need to explain why all fossils are sorted in layers.
Last edited:
- Status