don't get started on that. i site the end of the thread "iraqi protestetors" for my reference. me, johnny, bob, and others had a lot of fun with this a year or so ago.
Type: Posts; User: sik-m-boi; Keyword(s):
don't get started on that. i site the end of the thread "iraqi protestetors" for my reference. me, johnny, bob, and others had a lot of fun with this a year or so ago.
that is not true. one can believe in an intelligent designer without espousing a religious belief. i direct you to arthur c clarke. not that he is either a scientist or a theologian but he thinks...
this is a response to a couple of your posts:
first: all "id people" aren't on the same page. belief in an intelligent designer does not even require a person to believe in a god...it simply says...
that was your term...not mine. and i asked no question in my post so, by default, no, that was not my question. as far as evidence of evolution vs evidence of id: there is a fossil record of...
but the intricacy of creation does not indicate chance either.
as to your second statement: no, evolution has not been disproven, nor has it been proven, but whether or not evolution is ever...
i didn't say the force had to be supernatural...i even reference aliens in an arthur c clarke novel. as far as the second statement you made...i don't see the logic...elaborate, please.
i don't see ID and evolution as necessarily mutually exclusive. the odds of a pool of primordial ooze experiencing just the right circumstances to cause it to form into living organisms are...
here's the pic.
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/vertebrates/tetrapods/amphibiamus.jpg
what bothers me is that i think this is the only field in science where you can find one fossil (never find another like it...ever) yet claim "these creatures" did this or that. where do they get...
some would say that ghosts are biblical. in one of the books OT (one of the "samuels" or one of the "kings" i can't remamber) saul goes into the desert to find a which who summons the spirit of...
dd- thanks for taking the time to put together such a well thought out response. here are some points i'd like to make:
i can buy that but that doesn't necessarily invalidate my point. a and...
bob- thanks, i appreciate the compliment.
dhuss- i was sad that no one responded. i did think it would be more inflamitory than it was...oh well. :D
it's no fun if you agree, huss. :D
what, nothing? i thought that statement would get somebody fired up enough to get them into a debating mood.
but that begs the question: what is God's image? is it a physical structure and if so why are some people deformed or riddled with genetic defects? does God spend His days with 2 arms 2 legs 2...
i we already talked about the literal vs. the allegorical interpretations of genesis...either of which, imo, can be a benefit to those who treat it as God's word to us. genesis is the most disputed...
no argument from me, bob. my post before the one you quoted voiced my frustration with scientists making jumps from fish to humans. i'm not buying into evolution but i'm not ruling it out. i just...
td-
i don't think it is possible to refute science with faith. if God did not design the planet and humanity to work in the way represented by evolutionist theory, then it will prove (eventually)...
this is what bothers me about this article from boston.com:
"The fossils are especially interesting, they said, because they show the beginning of the basic human body plan: Over the course of...
still, it seems aheck of a lot more likely than a huge boat remaining intact on top of a snowy, avalanche-prone mountain for thoussands of years. it also is on a much flatter plain which would be...
yeah, CHC, i've seen that one too. it's not the ararat anomaly, though. the anomaly is way up on the actual mt ararat and some say that the wood is still relatively intact.
...
the bible technically says the "mountainS of ararat." i've seen the satellite pics too (history channel, i think)...it does take some imagination to see the "ararat anomaly" as a boat...but i can't...
oh, okay...i don't believe that either.
db-
just a quick question. is the brand evolution you believe in the one you posted earlier (ie: gradual change over a long period) or a series of sudden mutations?
in my opinion, if evolution from one viable species to another viable species exists, it is a sudden process...not a gradual one. this possibly results from some sort of mutation (due to biological...