Are you psychic? Or just playing the odds?Wait till you read post #157
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are you psychic? Or just playing the odds?Wait till you read post #157
fantôme profane;2305595 said:Are you psychic? Or just playing the odds?
Im confused, this is post 143, how do you know what post 157 is going to be? Are you a time traveler?neither.
Just giving him a heads up after reading it myself.
It is as if he has not read a single post in this thread.
fantôme profane;2305608 said:Im confused, this is post 143, how do you know what post 157 is going to be? Are you a time traveler?
Well it happen whether it was expected or not.It takes enormous faith (although bias might actually be a better word) to believe that bacteria capable of eating nylon subproducts were always around, but somehow were never observed actually disgesting the synthetic material for about a decade.
It would be a most extraordinary happening, a supernatural one even. It is not even like finding a dead body that will not decompose; it is far more impressive a feat, comparable to no bodies worldwide decomposing at all for a few years. It just can't reasonably be expected to happen.
Well it happen whether it was expected or not.
Where did the bacteria come from then? How is it a big surprise?
Most of the bacteria that exist hasnt even been characterized, identified or researched. And according to wiki there is A LOT! There are typically 40 million bacterial cells in a gram of soil and a million bacterial cells in a millilitre of fresh water; in all, there are approximately five nonillion (5×1030) bacteria on Earth,[3] forming much of the world's biomass.
Cars havent been around forever either, but the wheel has, and so has other means of transportation.
Well it happen whether it was expected or not.
Where did the bacteria come from then? How is it a big surprise?
And that is why it takes a lot of faith to assume that the nylon eaters are not a new breed. There is a lot of bacteria out there, and a lot of nylon indeed. It would take divine intervention for them not to meet if they did exist at the same time.Most of the bacteria that exist hasnt even been characterized, identified or researched. And according to wiki there is A LOT! There are typically 40 million bacterial cells in a gram of soil and a million bacterial cells in a millilitre of fresh water; in all, there are approximately five nonillion (5×1030) bacteria on Earth,[3] forming much of the world's biomass.
Cars havent been around forever either, but the wheel has, and so has other means of transportation.
That is just your opinion.I'm afraid that you are still failing at grasping the basics, otherwise you wouldn't make such an out-of-place statement.
Just like this is a trolls.Still grasping in the dark for your god?
Yeah that much is understood. They came from pre-existing bacteria.They can only have come through random mutation of pre-existing bacteria.
I don’t see how you or anyone else could be an advocate or believer of evolution and find anything a surprise.LuisDantas said:The surprise is that it was possible for that specific kind of bacteria to develop.
Right because nylon never existed until man created it and like I already said in a previous post, nylon hasn’t been around forever.LuisDantas said:It could well turn out that no amount of time would originate nylon-eating bacteria, but it ended up being in fact possible.
… it came from a pre-existing bacteria like you already said. Faith has nothing to do with it. The only problem is someone wanting to call it a new breed, when it is really just all part of the same Flavobacterium.LuisDantas said:And that is why it takes a lot of faith to assume that the nylon eaters are not a new breed.
Divine intervention as in it would take a smart, knowledgeable, person, to be aware of what might happen by polluting a pond with toxic waste and turning it into a scum dump. Yeah I agree. I guess trail-and-error is a great way for some people to learn.LuisDantas said:It would take divine intervention for them not to meet if they did exist at the same time.
I wish it were. Unfortunately, it is not.That is just your opinion.
So it follows that bacteria evolve. Or if you prefer, that not all possible breed of bacteria were created at the same time.(...) Yeah that much is understood. They came from pre-existing bacteria.
Why? Admitting evolution does not grant special powers to anyone. Not every conceivable mutation is necessarily possible. Evolution is, after all, deprived of will and of imagination.I don’t see how you or anyone else could be an advocate or believer of evolution and find anything a surprise.
Correct.Right because nylon never existed until man created it and like I already said in a previous post, nylon hasn’t been around forever.
If a breed did not exist previously and exists now, how can it possibly not be new?… it came from a pre-existing bacteria like you already said. Faith has nothing to do with it. The only problem is someone wanting to call it a new breed, when it is really just all part of the same Flavobacterium.
You are not agreeing with me, because I see no sense in that.Divine intervention as in it would take a smart, knowledgeable, person, to be aware of what might happen by polluting a pond with toxic waste and turning it into a scum dump. Yeah I agree. I guess trail-and-error is a great way for some people to learn.
just because the world was created does not mean that there was not an evolution and just because there was an evolution does not mean there was no creation. this statment refutes any possible (currently existing) arguments (based on scientific means) so that means that neither side has enough evidence. THE ANSWER IS C. NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION
LOL
Taking the Bible out of the equasion is really proof that you have never read it.
There are many proofs to the authenticity of the Bible. Various accounts stated in the Bible as "facts" at first rejected from historians and later accepted because of ancient manufacts uncovered some where in the world! There are many ways to prove the Bible's authenticity. So by not considering the Bible you are not considering history and this thread has no firm grounds.
just because the world was created does not mean that there was not an evolution and just because there was an evolution does not mean there was no creation. this statment refutes any possible (currently existing) arguments (based on scientific means) so that means that neither side has enough evidence. THE ANSWER IS C. NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION
Only in the minds of those who do not understand the scientific method.LOL
Taking the Bible out of the equasion is really proof that you have never read it.
Then start a new and list them.There are many proofs to the authenticity of the Bible.
Start a new thread and present your list of unsubstantiated claims in it.Various accounts stated in the Bible as "facts" at first rejected from historians and later accepted because of ancient manufacts uncovered some where in the world!
Again, start another thread.There are many ways to prove the Bible's authenticity.
If you are unable to discuss the scientific evidence for or against evolution without dragging in the Bible, then thread is not for you.So by not considering the Bible you are not considering history and this thread has no firm grounds.
I think the newly discovered DRD4 (liberal) gene indicates that not only physically, but on a spiritual plane, we are products of natural selection. Societies require morals, and natural selection allows this to happen.
So, the question is: Did the salmon's ability to harness energy from water turbulence come about by chance? or was it designed?