Can anyone explain the origin of any gene? Can anyone explain how all the new genes came into being with evolution?

[Subduction Zone]

James webb has not produced a single piece of evidence refuting the Big Bang .. you have no idea what you are talking about .. just because some of the Big Bang hypothesis is shown wrong .. does not mean the theory if refuted .. and redshift does not refute anything but your own false beliefs

What may be wrong, and I am not an astrophysicist so I could easily be wrong myself, is not the Big Bang, but rather hypotheses of star and galaxy formation. All of the discrepancies found are well after the Big Bang itself.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

What may be wrong, and I am not an astrophysicist so I could easily be wrong myself, is not the Big Bang, but rather hypotheses of star and galaxy formation. All of the discrepancies found are well after the Big Bang itself.

No. But it is a good try.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. But it is a good try.

It is actually quite accurate. You have to use lying sources. For example your recent video, that does not count as evidence by the way, openly lied about scientists. It falsely claimed "unease" and "dismay". It is quite the opposite scientists are excited about the findings of the James Webb Telescope. When one uses clearly lying sources one ends up looking like a liar themselves.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

It is actually quite accurate. You have to use lying sources. For example your recent video, that does not count as evidence by the way, openly lied about scientists. It falsely claimed "unease" and "dismay". It is quite the opposite scientists are excited about the findings of the James Webb Telescope. When one uses clearly lying sources one ends up looking like a liar themselves.

Not me.
You have no science at all in your post .
Address all the evidence in the video.

 

[McBell]

You have no science at all in your post .

Neither do you.
But since this has never been a science thread, what difference doe sit make?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not me.
You have no science at all in your post .
Address all the evidence in the video.

There was no "science" in the video. I need to remind you that you do not even understand the concept and you run away from discussing it. You used a video by liars. Why should anyone be convinced?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Can anyone explain the origin of any gene?

Here is an article that explains it.

Can anyone explain how all the new genes came into being with evolution?

No, the only theory that explains genes changing as they do is evolution.

 

[Brian2]

How exactly will injecting god into the equation make science produce more accurate answers?

I don't know.
But that was not the point of what I said.
Why is God ignored over educated guesses?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know.
But that was not the point of what I said.
Why is God ignored over educated guesses?

Because we can test educated guesses. How would we test your God?

 

[Brian2]

Why do people make this sort of claim? It's simply not true. There is solid evidence.

Solid evidence does not turn the educated guesses into anything more than educated guesses.

Many people who accept the evidence also believe in God, so this is also wrong.

There are still many people who prefer the educated guesses to God and some see the educated guesses as the way God did things.

 

[Brian2]

Because we can test educated guesses. How would we test your God?

Educated guesses remain educated guesses even if some can be said to be more certain in science.
But you cannot test God in any scientific way.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Solid evidence does not turn the educated guesses into anything more than educated guesses.

There goes another irony meter. Think about it.

There are still many people who prefer the educated guesses to God and some see the educated guesses as the way God did things.

I think that you are abusing your God belief. You are taking the Bible too literally. At best the Bible only says what God did, and it was not always accurate when it comes to that. It never says how he did anything with any degree of detail.

 

[Soandso]

I don't know.
But that was not the point of what I said.

Then why bring up the fact that God isn't brought up in scientific endeavors?

Why is God ignored over educated guesses?

Because we are talking about scientific matters. Injecting god into the topic only ads another unnecessary layer to the process that hinders the pursuit of truth. We want results. "Goddidit" and walking away from the issue doesn't get us anymore closer to that truth and only instead prevents us from asking more questions. What happens when the evidence we uncover leads away from God? Do we stop and try something else like the YEC "scientists" do?

As for "educated guesses," we can test those and throw out the ones that don't hold water. That's how science works. Educated guesses or predictions are foundational to the testing we do to find out what is true and what is not

 

[Subduction Zone]

Educated guesses remain educated guesses even if some can be said to be more certain in science.

No, it was an educated guess before it was tested. Afterwards it is either confirmed or refuted.

But you cannot test God in any scientific way.

And that is why God beliefs are worthless in the sciences.

 

[Watchmen]

Oh look. Another, “I’m a religious zealot who ignores actually evidence and doesn’t have a clue about the origin of life and evolution, but I’m trying to use big words to sound smart” thread.

 

[ratiocinator]

Solid evidence does not turn the educated guesses into anything more than educated guesses.

Wrong. A 'guess' confirmed by solid evidence is called a 'theory'.

 

[Brian2]

Then why bring up the fact that God isn't brought up in scientific endeavors?



Because we are talking about scientific matters. Injecting god into the topic only ads another unnecessary layer to the process that hinders the pursuit of truth. We want results. "Goddidit" and walking away from the issue doesn't get us anymore closer to that truth and only instead prevents us from asking more questions. What happens when the evidence we uncover leads away from God? Do we stop and try something else like the YEC "scientists" do?

As for "educated guesses," we can test those and throw out the ones that don't hold water. That's how science works. Educated guesses or predictions are foundational to the testing we do to find out what is true and what is not

Educated guesses remain educated guesses for the origins of life and the universe, no matter how many tests are done.
How can the origins of life and the universe be tested?
I don't think that the thread is strictly about science and that the existence of God is not to be brought up in this thread.
I don't think that any evidence leads away from God even if it leads away from the ideas that YECers have.

 

[Brian2]

No, it was an educated guess before it was tested. Afterwards it is either confirmed or refuted.

And that is why God beliefs are worthless in the sciences.

No, testing does not confirm the origins of life or the universe.
Testing is good and necessary in science but testing cannot confirm or negate any naturalistic answer to origins.

 

[ratiocinator]

No, testing does not confirm the origins of life or the universe.

The original statement was about the origin of new genes. This is a well tested part of evolution.

 

[Brian2]

Wrong. A 'guess' confirmed by solid evidence is called a 'theory'.

I'm sorry if you have a headache. I should have said "Solid evidence about origins does not turn the educated guesses into anything more than educated guesses".