Creation vs. Evolution

[6days]

Macroeveolution is a scientific fact. It's just that no one has ever observed it, tested it, developed any experiments, and it is not falsifiable. But besides the glaring lack of any objective proof, it's hard science.

YES.... As Richard Dawkins says.....

'Evolution has been observed.​

It’s just that it hasn’t ​

been observed ​

while it’s happening.'​

 

[MichaelCadry]

YES.... As Richard Dawkins says.....

'Evolution has been observed.​

It’s just that it hasn’t ​

been observed ​

while it’s happening.'​

[font=Poor Richard"]
Dear 6days,

You've said a mouthful!! That's exactly what is going on! Can't they see or read that God created the creatures {like cattle and yes, apes, gorillas, and chimps} BEFORE He separately created Man and then, Woman? Don't they have a Bible? It's written in Black and White! God will separate the wheat from the chaff. Those who believe in Him and Creation, or Darwin and Evolution, and murderer and peacemaker. Thus, it goes on.

You're One Of The Best!!

Michael

:angel: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :angel: :rapture:
​

[/font]

 

[alwight]

We can get straight to the point. Mutations occur in the transmission phase of communication within a cell. You'd agree with that, wouldn't you?

Chalk and Cheese.
Your misuse of Shannon information was just a ploy and obfuscation since it applies to where degradation in transmission quality is an expected and built in feature of the system itself, such as in telecommunications systems. (Shannon worked for the Bell Telephone Company)

Genetic transcription is pretty much the opposite since it is built upon an almost total fidelity and accuracy while telecoms equipment transmission losses have been a well understood feature long before Shannon.

Shannon Theory is a remedy, correction and a protection of data while genetic mutation is a comparatively rare side effect that isn't corrected, it either stands or falls by natural selection of the individuals involved, but not the system itself.

 

[Tyrathca]

We can get straight to the point. Mutations occur in the transmission phase of communication within a cell. You'd agree with that, wouldn't you?

No, "transmission phase" is not a term used in the description of cell life and reproduction. If you want me to agree to a technical term then please either explain what you mean by it or cite an explanation, especially if you are going to put so much emphasis on its importance (I sense a "gotcha" attempt here). I can say that given that mutations can occur at any point of a cells life (though some points more likely than others) then we can presume either a cell is perpetually in the transmission phase or mutations can occur in phases other than just transmission.

Transmission is a term which is used widely to mean different things both colloquially and within science - don't be vague Yorz.

 

[gcthomas]

We can get straight to the point.

Well, that's taken several days ...

Mutations occur in the transmission phase of communication within a cell. You'd agree with that, wouldn't you?

All over again? This approach was thoroughly dismissed as woolly YEC craziness last time. Anything new, Yorz?

 

[Caino]

Some day, the godless, random, meaningless, big bang, evolution, spinning ball, sci-fi nonsense will be looked on as one of the most absurd and ridiculous ideas ever imagined by human beings. The entire current model of life and the universe is so unfounded, so outlandish, that one struggles to comprehend how they could ever have bought into it in the first place.

We reached that point with the Hebrews creation story long ago. Scientist are simply observing the material reminents of Gods evolutionary creation events.

 

[6days]

We reached that point with the Hebrews creation story long ago. Scientist are simply observing the material reminents of Gods evolutionary creation events.

False... and silly. Scientists are not observing the past. They observe something in the present such as fossils or distant galaxies...then make interpretations about the past. Evolutionism not only is poor science, but it contradicts God's Word.

 

[gcthomas]

False... and silly. Scientists are not observing the past. They observe something in the present such as fossils or distant galaxies...then make interpretations about the past. Evolutionism not only is poor science, but it contradicts God's Word.

So when an astronomer sees a star explode 30 light-years away and so 30 years ago, they are not really seeing the explosion, just inferring it? Is that what you are saying?

Equally if you are being consistent, when I am looking at an event on my laptop screen I am not seeing that, just inferring it, since it is over a light-nano-second away and a nano-second ago?

 

[6days]

So when an astronomer sees a star explode 30 light-years away and so 30 years ago, they are not really seeing the explosion, just inferring it? Is that what you are saying?

Nope...that is not what I said.

They see the star explode now.*

 

[iamaberean]

Congratulations Michael,

The number of replies have gone over 1/2 million.

 

[gcthomas]

Nope...that is not what I said.

They see the star explode now.*

I only see my monitor 'now', not when the light left it. Does that mean I don't really 'see' things happening on the screen, by only infer them after the event?

If this is different to the astronomers, explain how?

 

[Caino]

False... and silly. Scientists are not observing the past. They observe something in the present such as fossils or distant galaxies...then make interpretations about the past. Evolutionism not only is poor science, but it contradicts God's Word.

God is a Living Word, the sacred writings were written by Holy Men.

Others have already pointed out that distant galaxies are light from long ago. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand that?????

 

[6days]

I only see my monitor 'now', not when the light left it. Does that mean I don't really 'see' things happening on the screen, by only infer them after the event?

If this is different to the astronomers, explain how?

Same as looking at a fossil.... You are looking at it now.

 

[gcthomas]

Same as looking at a fossil.... You are looking at it now.

No. Light travels 1 foot per nano-second, so you are looking at it as it was several nano-seconds ago. Only the light is entering your eye NOW. You are inferring what happened THEN.

(This is what you are insisting on for astronomy and observing distant galaxies, so unless you can point out the significant difference between the two situations, then just suck it up.)

 

[Jose Fly]

For example you were shown many times that Stripe and I agree on rapid adaptation.

Riiiiiiiiiiight....

When Stripe says "No population evolves ever" he really means "Populations evolve really, really fast".

When you say "speciation occurs rapidly", you really mean "No new species evolves ever".

When you say natural selection happens, you really mean "Natural selection never happens".

Glad we cleared that up.

Yet you keep claiming we disagree (And hardly a good argument anyway... As if evolutionists agree about much. Look at the hundreds of different 'trees' they create as an example).

I think there's a couple of orders of magnitude of a difference between "Do A and B share a common ancestor, or did B descend from A" versus "Does the earth move". :chuckle:

As explained to you often... As you were proven wrong on before... Stripe agrees but does not like rubbery words such as 'speciation'.

Oh sure....we can all see that.

 

[Caino]

Same as looking at a fossil.... You are looking at it now.

The Bible was written now also?

 

[TheDuke]

The topic was if you are qualified to talk on this subject before I'm going to invest my time talking with you. Sorry, you have shown yourself to be but a waste of time.

So, not a big surprise here. Instead of taking advantage of your golden opportunity, you just confess that you got squat.

Yes, you are indeed a waste of time, but still I'm glad I tried.

 

[TheDuke]

Hee hee
From the article... "If life is effectively an endless series of photocopies, as DNA is transcribed and passed on from one being to the next, then evolution is the high-stakes game of waiting for the copier to get it wrong.

Too wrong, and you’ll live burdened by a maladaptive mutation or genetic disorder. Worse, you might never live at all.

But if the flaw is wrong in exactly the right way, the incredible can happen: disease resistance, sharper eyesight, swifter feet, big brains, better beaks for Darwin’s finches."

I'm glad you've read the article, hope you liked it.
The passage you cite is actually a very nice analogy for understanding the basic concept of "descent with modification".

Do you reckon you understand it?

Funny / sad / strange that evolutionists believe so much that is contrary to the evidence. Mutations do not create. Mutations destroy. For ex......A mutation might give you a bigger brain... http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hydrocephalic

Mutations, as the name suggests, neither create, nor destroy --> they change!
I realize that you refuse to make use of your brain, that's a shame.
But in case you were wondering, as it turns out, the main genetic change that triggered the increase in hominid brain size was the shutting-down of a gene that counters the development of brain cancer. Pretty cool, eh

 

[6days]

*God is a Living Word, the sacred writings were written by Holy Men.

God used sinful, normal men who believed in Him.*

All scripture is God breathed.

Others have already pointed out that distant galaxies are light from long ago. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand that?????

God tells us He spread the heavens. How long do you think that took Him? Do you think God is capable of spreading the heavens faster than the speed of light? The omnipotent Creator made the stars for us to see. Surely He is capable of bringing distant starlight to earth.*

 

[TheDuke]

Time for some light entertainment

Time for some light entertainment

Here's another excellent bit of videography

Hope all our dear YECs are listening. Use your valuable and limited time in life looking in real sources for knowledge!

the science in ID