Creation vs. Evolution

[Stuu]

Yes, God approves of me telling you the truth. I'm not reinterpreting it.

So you haven't added the word 'telepathically' to the part that says your god opened the donkey's mouth and caused it to speak.

Adam and Eve were on the Earth way before any Modern Latin Jacobus or King James.

So they didn't speak 17th Century English?! I am shocked.

Stuart

 

[MichaelCadry]

My dog says "Ri Ruv Ru" Does that count?
My dog before that was smarter, I asked her:

What is on a tree? "Bark"
What is on top of a house? "Roof"
What is the front of a boat? "Bow wow"
What does sandpaper feel like? "Rough"
What sound does a cat make when you light them on fire? "Woof"
(she thought that one was funny, but it bothered me. I think it is a cat/dog rivalry thing. My current cat/dog flash gang signs at each other and gang war sometimes and oddly the cats win. She's a cocker spaniel so that makes sense)
She couldn't say "Wi Wuv Wu" though. Its a toss up.

Dear Lon,

This is great stuff. I don't know how you come up with it, but it is excellent and funny!! I've got to get going for now, so will chat later!

Praise The Lord God And The Lord Jesus {and the Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand..."

Michael

 

[alwight]

Dear alwight,

Look in the mirror and see what you look like, a man or an ape? Your image is that of a human, just like God said He created man in His Image. I am growing tired of this thread, to be honest. See what happens.

Much Love & Cheerio,

Michael

 

[Hedshaker]

Dear Hedshaker,

I thought you'd understand, but you don't. How surprising.

Michael

So there is no mention of animals conversing with humans telepathically in the Bible, right? How do you know that is the case then? Or are you just making it up because it's what you think?

You're just making stuff up because you know animals can't talk.

 

[Hedshaker]

I go on how God and the angels who spoke with me did it. God told me that when you leave your earthly body, you don't have a mouth and you still talk telepathically. What language do you think the Serpent speak to Eve in? Did Eve go to first grade to learn Adam's language and vice versa? Do you think instead that they spoke English? Same with the serpent. Did the serpent and the donkey speak the same language?? This is all in my book, by the way. It's nothing new that I am making up.

It's very simple. Animals have never conversed with humans "orally", aurally (relating to the ear or sense of hearing) or telepathically. It didn't happen so the tales were obviously made up.

You making a claim that God and angels spoke to you telepathically isn't evidence. It's just a bald, meaningless claim. You may well believe it but that doesn't make it true.

 

[Hedshaker]

It could be a way of telling the story of thought processes and not necessarily talking animals

Or more obviously someone made the whole thing up.

 

[Hedshaker]

Hed,

It's not 'converse aurally.' It's 'converse orally {with the mouth}.'

Mike

Aurally - relating to the ear or sense of hearing - as of with sound, aural....... :dunce:

 

[6days]

Are you prepared to stand by that claim as we go through a few examples?
Stuart

Sure... I will stand by my claim that a designer often uses similar design in different models.
So... list some examples, then we can show how silly evolutionist claims of homology are. (homologous vs analogous)

 

[Greg Jennings]

Google "How much DNA do we share with mice/rats?" From 90 to 99%, the same as with chimps. I've read too, that we share more in common with gorillas than chimps do with gorillas and that we share more DNA in common with them than chimps, by DNA percentage.

Many of these are science websites with no indoctrinating agenda that I can tell. I've no reason to doubt them, especially when they give the reason that it is why they experiment on mice and rats. They aren't just trying to eliminate disease in the mouse and rat population. I'd think Pandas, dogs/cats, and baby fur seals take priority with animal charities, rescues, and giving (just saying, again, I have not reason to doubt the percentages given).

Will you post the site(s) here for me to examine, please? I don't think you're getting accurate info from them

 

[Greg Jennings]

Greg..... Your numbers are wrong.

Nope. But feel free to correct them with a source citation

If you do a little research you will discover that. (Its impossible to compare accurately since we have whole sequences they don't have and visa versa)

The whole sequences that we don't have in common with them would fall under the category of "differences in DNA structure." The percentage of DNA that mice DO NOT share with us is directly related to the fact that they have stretches of DNA that we don't and vice versa. That's why they are obviously less related to us than primates.

BUT..... Even if they are right, wouldn't a designer use similar blueprints to create similar structures. Wouldn't a manufacturer use the same or similar information system, to perform same function in different models?

Probably, yes. But in his infinite wisdom he would never utilize the poor method of creation found in the Genesis narrative. Why would you make things that are helpless when an extinction event happens? Why wouldn't you make organisms that have the ability to adapt and evolve to ANY environment so that only one original creation is necessary?

Your method implies that God put everything that is alive on Earth in a relatively static state: they can only change a little. Because of that limitation, if an asteroid struck tomorrow, all life would go extinct because organisms (under your model) can't adapt to the point of evolving into new organisms that can survive and thrive in the post-impact world.

You are saying that God is a massive idiot who either didn't or couldn't see the certainty of a cosmic impact at some point in time that would cause an extinction. Because in your method, life dies and God fails. So on top of the fact that the evidence is telling you that you're wrong, you're also trying to dumb down the being that you claim to revere

 

[Greg Jennings]

Greg... That might be fun. You could start a new thread with your topic. Then, If I or others are inclined we could participate. Meanwhile you could discuss how the evidence shows life comes from life... after all, that is what we were talking about.

You still don't realize that has no impact of the theory of evolution, do you? It makes no difference whatsoever.

Evolution is about what happens after life arrives. It doesn't matter how it got there

 

[Lon]

Will you post the site(s) here for me to examine, please? I don't think you're getting accurate info from them

Literally Google "How much DNA do we share with mice?" On the top of the list is a Q/A site that lists 99% while asking if it is accurate. Like you, and oddly, there are people who immediately ask for links, though the 'way' we got the information is already given with clickable links from 2002 to today.

 

[6days]

Mice share ~90% of their DNA with humans.
Chimps share ~98% of their DNA with humans

Greg..... Your numbers are wrong.

Nope. But feel free to correct them with a source citation

Save yourself some embarassement by not relying on outdated info from atheists. Greg ...Do research!!! You could have easily found info like..."It is now clear that the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees are far more extensive than previously thought; their genomes are not 98% or 99% identical"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3386880/

If you do a little research you will discover that. (Its impossible to compare accurately since we have whole sequences they don't have and visa versa)

The whole sequences that we don't have in common with them would fall under the category of "differences in DNA structure." The percentage of DNA that mice DO NOT share with us is directly related to the fact that they have stretches of DNA that we don't and vice versa. That's why they are obviously less related to us than primates.

Ha.... Save yourself embarrassment.... Research Greg...do a wee bit of research.

BUT..... Even if they are right, wouldn't a designer use similar blueprints to create similar structures. Wouldn't a manufacturer use the same or similar information system, to perform same function in different models?

Probably, yes.

So you agree then that similar DNA performing similar functions in similar creatures would be evidence of a common designer! And that's why you are arguing that chimps and mice have a lot of similar DNA?

But in his infinite wisdom.....

Greg... You don't understand genetics..... So now you are trying your hand at theology?? I don't think you are in any position to mock His wisdom.

 

[6days]

Literally Google "How much DNA do we share with mice?" On the top of the list is a Q/A site that lists 99% while asking if it is accurate. Like you, and oddly, there are people who immediately ask for links, though the 'way' we got the information is already given with clickable links from 2002 to today.

haha... Yes simple google search would help him lots. Greg seems to be stuck with 15 year old evolutionist arguments that science has since disproven.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Save yourself some embarassement by not relying on outdated info from atheists. Greg ...Do research!!! You could have easily found info like..."It is now clear that the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees are far more extensive than previously thought; their genomes are not 98% or 99% identical"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3386880/

From the article: "One consequence of the numerous duplications, insertions, and deletions, is that the total DNA sequence similarity between humans and chimpanzees is not 98% to 99%, but instead closer to 95% to 96% (41, 48, 49)"

So humans and chimps share 95-96% of their DNA while mice share 90%. The same pattern still exists. What do you think you've disproven?

Ha.... Save yourself embarrassment.... Research Greg...do a wee bit of research.

Embarrass me, please. I'd be grateful if you actually showed some scientific knowledge, even if its use were to come at my expense. So by all means, embarrass away

So you agree then that similar DNA performing similar functions in similar creatures would be evidence of a common designer! And that's why you are arguing that chimps and mice have a lot of similar DNA?

If you go back and look at my posts, you'll see I entered this mouse genome convo by correcting Lon's statistics on mice-human-chimp DNA similarities. I wasn't claiming that was evidence for or against anything.

Greg... You don't understand genetics..... So now you are trying your hand at theology?? I don't think you are in any position to mock His wisdom.

So yes, you think your infinite God is a complete moron. Funny way of revering Him.


Still never got an answer to this: Have you ever taken a college level natural science course?

 

[Greg Jennings]

Literally Google "How much DNA do we share with mice?" On the top of the list is a Q/A site that lists 99% while asking if it is accurate. Like you, and oddly, there are people who immediately ask for links, though the 'way' we got the information is already given with clickable links from 2002 to today.

Lon, go to real sites for info. Q-and-A forums are not run and edited by experts. They're just people like you and me commenting on stuff they don't know about. Go to sites that are .edu or .gov affiliated if you are actually interested in looking for accurate information

 

[6days]

From the article: "One consequence of the numerous duplications, insertions, and deletions, is that the total DNA sequence similarity between humans and chimpanzees is not 98% to 99%, but instead closer to 95% to 96% (41, 48, 49)"

Greg.... You need to learn when to just admit you were wrong, and that you didn't know what you were talking about.
I told you that your 98% figure was wrong and you replied "NOPE". Now you are saying 95 to 96% is correct??
So was your 98% and your "nope" wrong?

 

[Greg Jennings]

Greg.... You need to learn when to just admit you were wrong, and that you didn't know what you were talking about.
I told you that your 98% figure was wrong and you replied "NOPE". Now you are saying 95 to 96% is correct??
So was your 98% and your "nope" wrong?

As you know, the 95-96% figure is from your article that you posted that you took a quote from, attempting to use it to say that humans and chimps are very unrelated. If you get mad when someone catches you using quotes out of context then don't do that. I know quote-mining is sort of your thing, but it's far from honest.
I thought you understood from my reply that I was conceding that the more accurate number is 95-96% rather than my original of 98%.
The number however doesn't change the pattern. Humans are more related to chimps than mice. Again, what do you think you're disproving?

Also, weren't you about to embarrass me with your genetics knowledge? What happened to that? I was excited.

Attempt #2: Have you ever taken a college level natural science course in your life?

 

[Lon]

Lon, go to real sites for info. Q-and-A forums are not run and edited by experts. They're just people like you and me commenting on stuff they don't know about. Go to sites that are .edu or .gov affiliated if you are actually interested in looking for accurate information

Yes, but again, links were given from that forum, and it was only just one of about 15 I looked up from that google search (page 2 lists a lot of 99% of genome between men and mice). I'm a little sad I have to be this pedantic

 

[MichaelCadry]

It's very simple. Animals have never conversed with humans "orally", aurally (relating to the ear or sense of hearing) or telepathically. It didn't happen so the tales were obviously made up.

You making a claim that God and angels spoke to you telepathically isn't evidence. It's just a bald, meaningless claim. You may well believe it but that doesn't make it true.

Dear Hedshaker,

Come on, you meant 'aurally' to mean 'orally.' It's kind of hard to hide. You may well believe it but that doesn't make it true. Who goes around saying 'aurally' anything?? Also, the Lord and angels did speak with me telepathically. What's it to you? It's how it is when you leave this land of lips. What is with you guys and these 'bald' 'assertions', 'claims,' etc. Bald this, bald that. What gives?

None of your evolution stuff is true either. You may well believe it but that doesn't make it true. See how that sounds? Coming right out of your lips or mine?? The exact same words coming from you in your last sentence in your post above.

Michael