[_ Old Earth _] In schools

[Guest]

God made the sun also.
You have your mind made up.
I happen to believe you are in great error.
There are many who claim to be christian today who have all kinds of beliefs,and many do not take the bible literally.
I am not one of them.
I don't believe a true christian can compromise.
You are right about the Zebra Finch though. I have had a few of them.
It's great the way the male serenades the female with song and dance.
Why isn't that true of humans though?
:B-fly:

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

I happen to believe you are in great error.
There are many who claim to be christian today who have all kinds of beliefs,and many do not take the bible literally.
I am not one of them.
I don't believe a true christian can compromise.

If you are not willing to take the other sides argument seriously, then you cannot argue yourself. If you aren't willing to change your beliefs in concordance with evidence, then you have built for yourself a wall of ignorance.

Why isn't that true of humans though?

Humans are social animals, we court eachother, it's not just females courting males or males courting females. Talking makes human mating several thousand times more complicated than that of Finches.

 

[ThinkerMan]

Re: Archaeology

Eye color cannot evolve in all those shades accidently,it could not have ever happened.

Of all your supposed facts, I will only address this one.

Careful now, beware for I will be speaking in the tongue of the devil! AKA Science.

First, you must assume that genetic mutation happens. This is a leap pretty much 99% of the world, including avid creationists believe. That is to say, you are not an exact carbon copy of the genetic code of your parents. Certain "mistakes" were made in the copying of your code, you have slight variations throughout your genetic makeup. FACT.

Second, the color of the eyes. The eyes are colored, much like the skin, to protect them from the sun. Albinos, who have not pigment, are at a genetic disadvantage because of the lack of pigment.

This pigment is determined by a very simple set of genes. These genes determine how much melanin there is, the pigment. The very same pigment that makes skin color (although the genes that determine that are more numerous). A simple copying mistake (any one of the trillions of times humans and our ancestors have made babies) and voila! More or less pigment making darker or lighter eyes. Or, in the case of an albino, no pigment.

It can be witnessed today in a variety of ways. My buddy has four fingers on his left hand. Perfectly normal looking, except no pinky. His parents and all his ancestors have a full hand of fingers. His DNA messed up, and voila! Four fingers.

Now please, if you disagree with the argument I have made, simply note the errors I have made. No blanket statements, no sweeping generalizations.

 

[Barbarian]

God made the sun also.

God made all things. I just know a little more about the way He went about it.

You have your mind made up.

Evidence is overwhelming.

I happen to believe you are in great error.

There are many beliefs. Only one reality.

There are many who claim to be christian today who have all kinds of beliefs,and many do not take the bible literally.

Orthodox Christians know that much of the Bible is not literal.

I don't believe a true christian can compromise.

You don't have to. Science and our faith are perfectly compatible. How could it be otherwise? God is the Creator, after all.

You are right about the Zebra Finch though. I have had a few of them. It's great the way the male serenades the female with song and dance.

The dance and the color are for the female to make the male more attractive to her. The song however, is a warning to other males to back off. Of course, some females like that kind of thing, too.

Why isn't that true of humans though?

I think it is. Male display for monogamous species says something like:

"See how fit and strong I am! I have great genes, and I will be able to provide for my offspring. I am a very desirable mate."

 

[Guest]

total ignorance

:B-fly: I will argue that liberal science is in no way true science.
Your liberal way of understanding is not good enough to call evidence.
I know there are many scientists who would and do disagree with you.
You have the nerve to call your interpretation evidence!
Thats very aggressive and very brave on your part,but it is in no way evidence.
I know that you really think you can convince people that you are right,but if they do believe your claims,God already knew about it and those who are lost choose to be lost. God has his children.

 

[Guest]

Re: Archaeology

Thinker,you need to think again!
Mutations don't help life they hurt life. No one has ever been able to mutate a fruit fly with success much less any other living creation.
Mutations cause defects and even death,not life. mutations impare life.
Creation scientists are not fooled by your interpretation and no other intelligent people would be either.
Why would anyone want to put their soul on the line for a hoax?
Some people may think they can sit on both sides of the fence but they will learn.
God's word gives a clear explanation for life,and the only one that makes perfect logic,amen.
Those who say that the idea of evolution doesn't conflict with the holy bible are just kidding themselves. True christians don't compromise!
You cannot dismiss the bible account if you are truly a child of almighty God,amen. :Fade-color
Your understanding is not the understanding of most scientists,you just tell people it is,but they can find out for themselves what science is and is not,and I for one hope they do!

 

[Guest]

If you are not willing to take the other sides argument seriously, then you cannot argue yourself. If you aren't willing to change your beliefs in concordance with evidence, then you have built for yourself a wall .

:angel: It's hard to believe that you would expect to be taken seriously,especially by christians.
Of course I don't take you seriously!
God doesn't believe in atheists or evolution and I don't either.
I believe what the bible says about your kind of people. It's all true,every single word of it,amen.

 

[SavedChild]

No

I am reading a book right now that has a tone more FACTS about Creation in our history and scientifically than evolution. I think that it is unfair for them to be able to teach about evolution but not about Christianity. If they are goign to teach one then they need to be willing to teach others. They try to confrom us to become closed minded like they are. The sad thing is a lot of teachers don't really want to teach creation because it is against their beliefs and they though must follow curiculum or face severe punishment.

SC

:morning: :olympic: :silly: : !:

 

[Barbarian]

I will argue that liberal science is in no way true science.

There is no "liberal science"; there is only science or not science.

Your liberal way of understanding is not good enough to call evidence.

Evidence is what scientists use to understand nature. The reason that scientists overwhelmingly accept evolution as a fact is that the evidence is overwhelming. Would you like to learn about some of it?

I know there are many scientists who would and do disagree with you.

Not many. And those that do, have a religious, not scientific objection.

You have the nerve to call your interpretation evidence!
Thats very aggressive and very brave on your part,but it is in no way evidence.

Do you understand what "evidence", "hypothesis", and "theory" mean in science?

I know that you really think you can convince people that you are right,but if they do believe your claims,God already knew about it and those who are lost choose to be lost. God has his children.

And most of us accept that evolution is consistent with His creation.

Re Mutations:
Most mutations don't do much of anything. A few are harmful. And a very few are useful and actually make the organism more fit. Natural selection tends to remove the harmful ones and preserve the useful ones.

"Fitness", remember, only applies in terms of the particular environment. What is fit in one might not be so in another.

Does all this mean you are going to Hell if you are a creationist? No. Your salvation does not in any way depend on your beliefs on creationism or evolution.

So it's not a reason for Christians to divide themselves into warring camps.

 

[Guest]

Re: No

I am reading a book right now that has a tone more FACTS about Creation in our history and scientifically than evolution. I think that it is unfair for them to be able to teach about evolution but not about Christianity. If they are goign to teach one then they need to be willing to teach others. They try to confrom us to become closed minded like they are. The sad thing is a lot of teachers don't really want to teach creation because it is against their beliefs and they though must follow curiculum or face severe punishment.

SC

:morning: :olympic: :silly: : !:

:B-fly: have you also noticed what it's like today sending our children to these war zones called schools?
No civilized teacher wants to be in these public schools today,and what we have now are mostly liberals with their agenda whatever it might be.
Evolution has no right to be in public schools!
There once was a time they say when families,schools and churches stood up for one another and helped each other,but thats not true at all anymore. Teachers have to fear being in a public school now almost as much as the students so now we get just anyone in who will teach. They say most teachers today are not really qualified to be teachers and I heard that Bush wants to have them all re-tested to make sure they should be teachers, and I am for that 100%.
They won't teach creation from the stand point of the bible because all the liberals won't let that happen without a big fit.
Yet,no matter how hard they try,they cannot ever get rid of Almighty God,amen.
Bless you always in Jesus Christ Our Holy Lord,amen.

 

[Guest]

:o I'd love to see you tell this mess to christian and non-christian scientists who do not agree with you.
When you twist God's word to fit your life instead of change your life for him,then you have a serious problem. You may denie it,yet it's the truth no matter how you handle it.
Did God ever tell you his word is not the truth 100%?
No,he did not. You cannot twist God's words or what true science really teaches. In fact,science has very little to do with evolution.

 

[Barbarian]

have you also noticed what it's like today sending our children to these war zones called schools?

Did you know that the incidence of injury and assault for children in schools is less than it is for an equal amount of time in their homes? Schools are generally safer than homes.

'"The 2002 "Indicators of School Crime and Safety" report from the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice indicates that overall crime rates in schools have declined since their peak in the early ’90s. Between 1995 and 2001, the percentage of students who reported being victims of crime at school decreased from 10 percent to 6 percent. And the report also points out that in 2000, students were more than twice as likely to be the victim of violent crime away from school than in school."
http://www.edweek.org/context/topics/is ... .cfm?id=39

Thanks be to God.

No civilized teacher wants to be in these public schools today,and what we have now are mostly liberals with their agenda whatever it might be.

Sorry about the schools where you live. They sound dreadful. Most American schools are not like that, however.

Evolution has no right to be in public schools!

It's science, and it has to be in science classes. If it's not, the problem is pretty much self-correcting. Kids who don't learn, get left behind.

There once was a time they say when families,schools and churches stood up for one another and helped each other,but thats not true at all anymore.

Works in my town. Sorry about yours.

Teachers have to fear being in a public school now almost as much as the students so now we get just anyone in who will teach. They say most teachers today are not really qualified to be teachers and I heard that Bush wants to have them all re-tested to make sure they should be teachers, and I am for that 100%.

I don't see anything wrong with that. Most states already have recertification requirements, continuing education requirements, etc. It's a good thing, and I would be rather upset if my state didn't have them.

They won't teach creation from the stand point of the bible because all the liberals won't let that happen without a big fit.

It's that pesky religious freedom clause in the Constitution.

Yet,no matter how hard they try,they cannot ever get rid of Almighty God,

True, but that's not what the law is about. It merely requires the government to be completely neutral with regard to religion.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

I'd love to see you tell this mess to christian and non-christian scientists who do not agree with you.

You have yet to actually provide proof of their existence. Or at least the arguments that they use to rebuke the Theory of Evolution.

In fact,science has very little to do with evolution.

You cannot call that a fact without some heavy support. Especially as the entire field of biology would be itching to disagree.

 

[Guest]

something new?

Now you must be in total denial of the world around you.
Biology is against evolution not for it,and so is science.
If you don't already know that then you must be on another planet!
:Fade-color

 

[Guest]

It is very clear that you must be avoiding the news . You really don't have a good understanding of the times we are now in.
:B-fly: Everyone knows that the world is a very dangerous place today,and changing the constitution should not be allowed to happen at all.
People are smarter than you give them credit for,and it's easy to find scientists who are against evolution and many of them are non-christian to boot!
Evolution has no right to be in schools. it's a pagan religion.
You have no credible evidence to support yourself at all.
You call it science so it will be allowed in schools.
I don't think it's fair that all taxpayers should have to fund it when they don't believe in it,and many of us don't.
Whoever listens to you,may God help them,but the children of God who are being called by God,you won't be able to influence or do anything to change them,amen.
Who ever will listen to you and believe you was already getting off of the straight and narrow road anyway,they just needed that little extra shove.
I pray that you will one day wake up and know the truth before it's too late.

 

[Barbarian]

It is very clear that you must be avoiding the news .

I just cited some of the news for you. It's pretty good news. We've actually seen a decrease in violence in public schools, and even before, they were safer than other places for our children.

You really don't have a good understanding of the times we are now in. Everyone knows that the world is a very dangerous place today,

The world has always been a dangerous place. But at least the public schools are relatively safe. Your kiddo is more likely to get hurt at home or in his neighborhood than at a public school.

and changing the constitution should not be allowed to happen at all.

Well, it's got change built into it, as the Founders intended. That's why they wrote it that way. They knew it would have to be amended from time to time.

People are smarter than you give them credit for

Actually, most of them are smart enough to check the fact before they draw conclusions. It's good habit.

and it's easy to find scientists who are against evolution and many of them are non-christian to boot!

I knew one once. And I've known a lot of scientists. I never met one who doubted evolution, who didn't have a religious objection, though. Could you name one?

Evolution has no right to be in schools. it's a pagan religion.

No, that's wrong. It's merely a scientific theory, based on evidence.

You have no credible evidence to support yourself at all.

The most compelling evidence for evolution falls into several categories:

1. Homologies in related organisms
2. Fossil intermediates
3. Genetics
4. Embryology
5. Molecular biology

Would you like to learn about some of it?

You call it science so it will be allowed in schools.

It is a well-tested set of ideas, supported by a body of evidence. That's what science is.

I don't think it's fair that all taxpayers should have to fund it when they don't believe in it,and many of us don't.

Some folks think the Earth is flat, too, but we still teach that it's round. Some think the holocaust never happened. But we still teach history according to the facts. That's how it works.

Whoever listens to you,may God help them,but the children of God who are being called by God,you won't be able to influence or do anything to change them,amen.

Most of us who are Christians already accept that evolution is consistent with God's creation.

 

[Guest]

That would be great if children were safe in school but most Americans know that they are not that safe.
There are so many secular scientists to choose from,but here we go: Hubert P. Yockey,
Sir Fred Hoyle " The Intelligent Universe".
Micheal Denton
Frances Crick,
Peter T. Mora "The Folly Of Probability"
George Wald " The origin Of Life"
Julian Huxley " evolution in action"
Charles J. Smith " Problems with Entropy in Biology" Biosystems.
Jeremy Rifkin " Entrophy: A New World View"

:B-fly:

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

Frances Crick DOES believe in evolution, he just doesn't believe in abiogenesis.

 

[Barbarian]

That would be great if children were safe in school but most Americans know that they are not that safe.

It's not a matter of opinion. We know what the injury rates are, and they are lower in schools. Check the link I gave you.

There are so many secular scientists to choose from,but here we go: Hubert P. Yockey, Sir Fred Hoyle " The Intelligent Universe".

Hoyle was an evolutionist. He just thought that life originated elsewhere and was brought here somehow.

"So I get all these results and now I'm unshiftable. I'm totally unshiftable now because it's sort of religion with me. That is the word of God." ... You know, the beginning of the Cambrian, that great event. And that everything that we have subsequently used has been simply a question of permuting and combining what came in at that time.

Micheal Denton

Here's what Denton says, in Nature's Destiny:

"it is important to emphasize at the outset that the argument presented here is entirely consistent with the basic naturalistic assumption of modern science - that the cosmos is a seamless unity which can be comprehended ultimately in its entirety by human reason and in which all phenomena, including life and evolution and the origin of man, are ultimately explicable in terms of natural processes. This is an assumption which is entirely opposed to that of the so-called "special creationist school". According to special creationism, living organisms are not natural forms, whose origin and design were built into the laws of nature from the beginning, but rather contingent forms analogous in essence to human artifacts, the result of a series of supernatural acts, involving the suspension of natural law. Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the organic world - that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms, waterfalls, or galaxies." (page xvii-xviii).

Frances Crick,

Crick is an evolutionist. He has published papers on molecular evolution.

Peter T. Mora "The Folly Of Probability"

Mora is writing about the probablility of life appearing, not about evolution:
By such logic we can prove anything, such as that no matter how complex, everything will repeat itself, exactly and innumerably.

George Wald " The origin Of Life"

Wald is not only an evolutionist, he also believes that abiogenesis is true:
""Yet here we are - as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation." Scientific American August 1954, page 46

The origin of life is not, however, part of evolutionary theory. There are lots of scientists who disagree about the orgin of life.

Julian Huxley " evolution in action"

Julian Huxley was an evolutionist.
"As for Huxley's belief that evolution is progressive in nature, he did employ the concept, but in a carefully defined and limited way. "
http://noosphere.cc/huxleymenu.html

Charles J. Smith " Problems with Entropy in Biology" Biosystems.

"The thermodynamicist immediately clarifies the latter question by pointing out that the Second Law classically refers to isolated systems which exchange neither energy nor matter with the environment; biological systems are open and exchange both energy and matter."

Smith goes on to say that this does not account for the origin of life, however. But, as you know, evolutionary theory is not about the origin of life. It merely explains how existing life changes.

Jeremy Rifkin " Entrophy: A New World View"

Rifkin is not a scientist. It's a little hard to say exactly what he is...

"Indeed, Rifkin seems to have substantial experience as a political activist. During the 1960s and 1970s, he joined the peace movement, serving as the organizer of the 1968 March on the Pentagon and founder of the Citizens Commission (1969), a group established to bring public attention to alleged U.S. war crimes in Vietnam. In 1971, Rifkin established the counter-cultural People's Bicentennial Commission to provide an alternative to official U.S. government plans to celebrate the bicentennial.

By the late 1970s, Rifkin focus shifted to the fledgling biotechnology industry. Although Rifkin possesses no formal training in the sciences, he nonetheless speaks out against biotechnology, the genetic research that could offer cures to diseases such as Sickle Cell Anemia, Alzheimer's and others and has already made possible the development of heartier, more disease-resistant agricultural crops."
http://www.nationalcenter.org/dos7126.htm

I suggest that you get some of these articles and books, and read them. You will be surprised to find that they don't say what you've been told they do.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

Re: something new?

Now you must be in total denial of the world around you.
Biology is against evolution not for it,and so is science.
If you don't already know that then you must be on another planet!

No, you can't just say that, you have to SHOW it. Biologists have to use Evolution for modern biology to make any sense at all. Without it one cannot see how animals are related.