Is evolution as crooked as Hillary?

[gnostic]

un huh, man can't be made from dust but the universe can spring up out of nothing. I'm listening, go on.

Strawman.

When did I ever say that the universe came out of nothing? I have not disclose what I know or believe about the universe, so that you have anything you have to say what "you believe that you think I believe in" when I said nothing about the universe, is nothing more than baseless farts coming from you.

Second, you argue that science favor universe from nothing (which there are no consensus yet with this scenario, and if you talking about the Big Bang, then you really don't know what you are talking about), when Genesis 1 is actually the one that believe in creation ex nihilo.

In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth...

This "heavens and earth" weren't there one moment, and then there in the next is an example of ex nihilo.

And some silly Christians believe in John 1 literal interpretation: Word or Logo, that can words or thoughts can create the physical word, is another example of creation ex nihilo. The whole chapter is merely an allegory or metaphor in John 1, but for some silly reasons, some Christians take it literally.

You defends a man, who done something technically legal, but is morally wrong, just show flexible you are with right and wrong.

This only reminds me that I have made the right choice of not becoming a Christian when I had a chance to be one...twice.

 

[Kemosloby]

I'll bet the fish don't share your sentiment...

Yeah but the geese do. Never seen a flock of geese moves so fast when an eagle comes around.

 

[Altfish]

It's possible. I suppose I'm trying to crack through the lie and prove evolution as a dogma attached to real science, meaningless as campaign promises. Will biology stand without Evolution theory? Can we understand a seed without understanding its origin?

If you can disprove evolution a Nobel Prize awaits you. I look forward to your paper on the subject ....but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Kemosloby]

Strawman.

When did I ever say that the universe came out of nothing? I have not disclose what I know or believe about the universe, so that you have anything you have to say what "you believe that you think I believe in" when I said nothing about the universe, is nothing more than baseless farts coming from you.

Second, you argue that science favor universe from nothing (which there are no consensus yet with this scenario, and if you talking about the Big Bang, then you really don't know what you are talking about), when Genesis 1 is actually the one that believe in creation ex nihilo.

This "heavens and earth" weren't there one moment, and then there in the next is an example of ex nihilo.

And some silly Christians believe in John 1 literal interpretation: Word or Logo, that can words or thoughts can create the physical word, is another example of creation ex nihilo. The whole chapter is merely an allegory or metaphor in John 1, but for some silly reasons, some Christians take it literally.

You defends a man, who done something technically legal, but is morally wrong, just show flexible you are with right and wrong.

This only reminds me that I have made the right choice of not becoming a Christian when I had a chance to be one...twice.

Evolution says the universe was created out of nothing, or has that changed now. Big bang theory, or is that just a tv show now? I was just saying if you can believe that why not a man made out of dust? Because there is no God in the big bang theory?

 

[Kemosloby]

If you can disprove evolution a Nobel Prize awaits you. I look forward to your paper on the subject ....but I'm not holding my breath.

Jack of Hearts has it figured out. Now if we can just get him in control of the printing press at the federal reserve bank he can write an authoritative paper disproving evolution theory, and the politicians and scientists will bend to his will.

 

[Valjean]

Evolution in the sense that all life originated from a single molecular cell and gradually changed into more complex organisms is not evident (macroevolution). It cannot be observed, tested, repeated or demonstrated scientifically in any way

Can.

 

[Valjean]

Evolution says the universe was created out of nothing, or has that changed now. Big bang theory, or is that just a tv show now? I was just saying if you can believe that why not a man made out of dust? Because there is no God in the big bang theory?

I thought it was creationists who maintained the universe was magically poofed into existence.
Evolution has nothing to say about the genesis of the universe.

 

[Kemosloby]

I thought it was creationists who maintained the universe was magically poofed into existence.

They both do but the Creation story says God did it, the evolution theory says it just happened.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

un huh, man can't be made from dust but the universe can spring up out of nothing. I'm listening, go on.

Well, in the Carl Sagan sense (we are all star-stuff) man is made of dust. The universe, which you consider so amazing (and it is) is also when looked at properly quite simple, and amounts to just about exactly zero -- so something doesn't have to come from nothing, nothing just has to reorganize itself to look like something.

But to assume a CREATOR, now, there is an immensely complex thing, full of intention and power. And yet, you have absolutely zero difficulty assuming that it -- for all its immense complexity, really could just "come from nothing" (or "always be" which isn't much different). You're just not thinking very clearly, and can't leave your magical paradigms alone.

 

[JakofHearts]

It's no secret that Hillary Clinton has lied on numerous occasions, and the number of scandals under her name are really a result of the choices she made throughout her career as a politician, and the investigations are a direct consequence. Donald Trump's running mate Mike Pence is an interesting fellow as he has been known to see the theory of evolution as nothing more than a 'theory'. And I wonder if Pence (If Trump becomes President) would be influential on the process on reviewing of the educational system.

Jack of Hearts has it figured out. Now if we can just get him in control of the printing press at the federal reserve bank he can write an authoritative paper disproving evolution theory, and the politicians and scientists will bend to his will.

Doubtful. Like in the mainstream media, (such as CNN) there are clear biases, and in the scientific community it's no different. The theory of evolution has been an established 'fact' for many decades and the mere mention of a view or evidence that is remotely against evolution, people lose their jobs. Mark Armitage is a good example. Others recognize the conundrums of evolution but to be a molecular biologist and reject evolution for instance, all government work, research grants, papers, big college lectures—everything would stop. Out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where they couldn’t earn a decent living. The work these scientists do in genetic research is honorable. They will find the cures to many of mankind’s worst diseases. But in the meantime, they have to live with the ‘elephant in the living room’.
These are very real instances that go on in the scientific community, I believe, and the only reason the theory of evolution is still considered a scientific fact.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

But humans and other animals do the same thing, by the same mechanisms. The resistance is heritable.
Disease virulence typically diminishes over time as percentages of resistent individuals increase. When plague first appeared in Europe, for example, it was much more deadly than it is today.
The percentage of people with resistance genes is measurably higher in exposed populations.


Sorry. I'm saying that in any population of microbes there is variation due to mutation. When a particular mutation, by chance, happens to increase the reproductive fitness of a particular animalcule -- such as an antibiotic resistant mutation in an antibiotic rich environment -- the resistant individuals will survive and reproduce more successfully than the susceptible population. Their percentage of population will increase.
I'm also saying the same thing happens in humans. Some individuals, through mutation or sexual variation, have more resistance to X disease than others.

So how do I seem to be denying it exists? (You haven't read many of my posts yet, have you? )

Okay, apparently I was wrong. Everything you just wrote is a complete acceptance of Evolution, pretty much as Darwin described it and modern science accepts it. You just don't seem to want to use the name of the theory, for some reason. But what you describe IS ToE.

 

[Kemosloby]

Well, in the Carl Sagan sense (we are all star-stuff) man is made of dust. The universe, which you consider so amazing (and it is) is also when looked at properly quite simple, and amounts to just about exactly zero -- so something doesn't have to come from nothing, nothing just has to reorganize itself to look like something.

But to assume a CREATOR, now, there is an immensely complex thing, full of intention and power. And yet, you have absolutely zero difficulty assuming that it -- for all its immense complexity, really could just "come from nothing" (or "always be" which isn't much different). You're just not thinking very clearly, and can't leave your magical paradigms alone.

Maybe we're all just on acid and none of it's really here.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

They both do but the Creation story says God did it, the evolution theory says it just happened.

Wrong again -- evolution, as a science, is 100% silent on the origin of the universe. In fact, it is 100% silent on the origin of life, too. The would come under the heading of abiogenesis, which is not included in the ToE.

 

[Kemosloby]

Wrong again -- evolution, as a science, is 100% silent on the origin of the universe. In fact, it is 100% silent on the origin of life, too. The would come under the heading of abiogenesis, which is not included in the ToE.

Evolution theory used to claim we came from a primordial ooze a quadzillion years after the big bang. Seems evolution theory evolves as much as Hillarys' private server explanations. What gives??

 

[Valjean]

They both do but the Creation story says God did it, the evolution theory says it just happened.

Evolution theory says nothing about it.
Physics is actively researching it. A great deal had been learned, but the process is not yet understood.
Creation says it happened by magic, which is really no explanation at all, is it?

 

[Kemosloby]

Evolution theory says nothing about it.
Physics is actively researching it. A great deal had been learned, but the process is not yet understood.
Creation says it happened by magic, which is really no explanation at all, is it?

By miracle, power of God, The Holy Spirit moved on the water. A miracle is any great and wonderous thing we can't explain how it happened, so until such time as you get it figured out, it happened by miracle.

 

[Valjean]

Okay, apparently I was wrong. Everything you just wrote is a complete acceptance of Evolution, pretty much as Darwin described it and modern science accepts it. You just don't seem to want to use the name of the theory, for some reason. But what you describe IS ToE.

LOL.
If you're ever really, really bored, go back over my posting history on the topic. I've been an ardent proponent of evolution for more than a decade..
Can't figure out how anyone could miss that...

 

[Valjean]

By miracle, power of God, The Holy Spirit moved on the water. A miracle is any great and wonderous thing we can't explain how it happened, so until such time as you get it figured out, it happened by miracle.

Quite so. This is exactly my understanding of the creationist position. It explains who, but not how.

 

[gnostic]

Evolution says the universe was created out of nothing, or has that changed now. Big bang theory, or is that just a tv show now? I was just saying if you can believe that why not a man made out of dust? Because there is no God in the big bang theory?

Again, more demonstration of your ignorance.

Evolution is only a study about life on Earth. It say nothing about life outside the confine of Earth, like everything else in the solar system, Milky Way or the rest of universe.

And likewise, the Big Bang talk of nothing about life, let alone life on Earth. The Big Bang explained how energy and particles formed into matters, like the elements, and then how these matters form into larger matters such as stars and planets.

Both Evolution and the Big Bang focused on different and very specific areas.

Sure astronomers want to know about if life exist in other planets in other star systems in other parts of the galaxies or the universe, but so far we have neither technology or capabilities to study other extraterrestrial life. But astronomy is a large field, which they can work on, while the rest are just theoretical or hypothetical.

Biologists, on the other hand, more frequently focused in area that they can actually investigate...here, on Earth.

And as to making man out of dust.

It is impossible to make a fully-grown living human from dust. Dust is a byproduct waste, not a living matter. Although, our bodies produce wastes, which eventually turn into dust, when the waste decompose, the molecular properties will change from organic into inorganic, hence (when it become dust) it is no longer living matters.

Dust become living human is pure myth, and oversimplification, in which the author(s) had no understanding of physics, chemistry and biology.

 

[Kemosloby]

Quite so. This is exactly my understanding of the creationist position. It explains who, but not how.

At least we've got who.