Loudoun County Va

[JayJay]

@YOSUP

The oddesy didn’t have creationary timelines that coincide with Darwinism.

Genesis says there was light before the sun…thinks Dark is a thing in and of itself…thinks the sky is a “firmament” that has waters above and below it…thinks land plant life came before sea life…thinks birds came before land animals.

In what way does Genesis mirror the evolutionary order?

[WuWei]

@Borgia_dude

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

Without using Evolutionary Theory, please explain Human Chromosome 2.

Without using creationism, explain the big bang.

Matter and energy always existed. Do I get a prize?

Prove it.

[Paul_Do]

@WuWei

@JayJay

@YOSUP

This is the problem I have with progressives. Their truth has to be the universal truth and any other idea or theory must be cancelled. Ladies and gentlemen this conversation is a perfect example of what I am taking about.

On the contrary you can believe in creationism all you want.

If you want to have it taught as science frame it as a falsifiable hypothesis/theory.

Same for evolution?

Creationism starts at a conclusion then cherry picks and misrepresents information to try make it seem like it might be valid. There is no evidence to suggest all life was created at the same time in their current form.

Fossil stratigraphy completely destroys creationism, no amount of hand waving will change that.

[Dem]

@zantax

@Dem

@YOSUP

why we are here.

Science isn’t interested in the why. Only in the mechanics of our universe, so that we may better understand it. The why is for theologians, and philosophers.

Of course science is interested in why. They are searching for a unified theory, which is ultimately an answer to why.

I admit, I don’t follow theoretical physics. But that to me is just more how and what questions. Not why.

[zantax]

@Dem

@zantax

@Dem

@YOSUP

why we are here.

Science isn’t interested in the why. Only in the mechanics of our universe, so that we may better understand it. The why is for theologians, and philosophers.

Of course science is interested in why. They are searching for a unified theory, which is ultimately an answer to why.

I admit, I don’t follow theoretical physics. But that to me is just more how and what questions. Not why.

Why is on the table. Everyone wants to know the answer, scientists are no different. Which is no guarantee the answer can be found.

[Paul_Do]

@Dem

how

He is wrong, science is interested in why, but that isn’t evolutionary theory job anymore than molecular orbital theory.

That is something totally different and has nothing to do with evolution.

[zantax]

And, so the far the answer is looking like, computation.

[Borgia_dude]

@YOSUP

Nevermind genesis and Darwin’s evolution timeline of things being made coincide with one another.

The Bible has the creation set billions of years ago? And mankind existing 100,000 years ago? Tell me more and where this is in the Bible.

[Dem]

To me, why is more of a philosophical/religious question.

[Paul_Do]

@zantax

@Dem

@zantax

@Dem

@YOSUP

why we are here.

Science isn’t interested in the why. Only in the mechanics of our universe, so that we may better understand it. The why is for theologians, and philosophers.

Of course science is interested in why. They are searching for a unified theory, which is ultimately an answer to why.

I admit, I don’t follow theoretical physics. But that to me is just more how and what questions. Not why.

Why is on the table. Everyone wants to know the answer, scientists are no different. Which is no guarantee the answer can be found.

You are completely correct. That is not what the theory of evolution is a about though. Would you expect molecular orbital theory to explain gravity?

[Borgia_dude]

@YOSUP

The oddesy didn’t have creationary timelines that coincide with Darwinism.

What was the biblical timeline for the T-Rex?

[YOSUP]

Surprising Similarities Between Creation & Evolution

[zantax]

@Paul_Do

@zantax

@Dem

@zantax

@Dem

@YOSUP

why we are here.

Science isn’t interested in the why. Only in the mechanics of our universe, so that we may better understand it. The why is for theologians, and philosophers.

Of course science is interested in why. They are searching for a unified theory, which is ultimately an answer to why.

I admit, I don’t follow theoretical physics. But that to me is just more how and what questions. Not why.

Why is on the table. Everyone wants to know the answer, scientists are no different. Which is no guarantee the answer can be found.

You are completely correct. That is not what the theory of evolution is a about though. Would you expect molecular orbital theory to explain gravity?

Quantum gravity, possibly.

[YOSUP]

Dinosaurs were mentioned in the book of job, wish I could ask him. But he has long left us.

[Eagle-Keeper]

[quote=“Jezcoe, post:163, topic:239430”]

@Eagle-Keeper

@Jezcoe

There is no scientific distinction called “micro” and " macro" evolution. It is a made up nonsense term.
[/quote]

Has there ever been an observation of a significant morphological change in an animal that provided the mutant a definitive survival edge over the existing species?

One can see great morphological change in the lineage that begat whales

As I understand it whales evolved from a dog-like mammal. In the course of human history as far as I know, no human has observed a dog-like mammal in the wild giving birth to an offspring say with mutated stunted legs. Then observe it’s mutant offspring survive and then reproduce an offspring with the very same mutation, etc.

[Borgia_dude]

@WuWei

@Borgia_dude

@WuWei

@Jezcoe

Without using Evolutionary Theory, please explain Human Chromosome 2.

Without using creationism, explain the big bang.

Matter and energy always existed. Do I get a prize?

Prove it.

You asked for an explanation, not a proof. I gave an explanation.

[Dem]

@YOSUP

Surprising Similarities Between Creation & Evolution | Answers in Genesis

Ah. So we are a young earth creationist. Hard to argue with someone who believes the earth is 6,000 years old, and Dinosaurs and Man walked together.

Does God not seem deceptive from this point of view? Created an inquisitive man, and a universe that shows all the evidence for it being billions of years old, the evidence for evolution, etc? Seems like a trickster to me.

Side note, I haven’t seen that website in forever. Someone else said it, but this really does take me back to the old days.

[YOSUP]

No we need proof! That’s what you keeping asking us for.

[Paul_Do]

@zantax

@Paul_Do

@zantax

@Dem

@zantax

@Dem

@YOSUP

why we are here.

Science isn’t interested in the why. Only in the mechanics of our universe, so that we may better understand it. The why is for theologians, and philosophers.

Of course science is interested in why. They are searching for a unified theory, which is ultimately an answer to why.

I admit, I don’t follow theoretical physics. But that to me is just more how and what questions. Not why.

Why is on the table. Everyone wants to know the answer, scientists are no different. Which is no guarantee the answer can be found.

You are completely correct. That is not what the theory of evolution is a about though. Would you expect molecular orbital theory to explain gravity?

Quantum gravity, possibly.

Do you get my point tho, theory of evolution is describing the process of natural selection and the effect that has on populations over long periods of time.

Life is already present for ToE and makes no attempts to explain how it got there.

[Jezcoe]

@YOSUP

And the Bible was long before Darwin was around

Yes… yes it was.