RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   
  Topic: Common Descent - Evidence No.1< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2005,08:45   

Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 14 2005,13:33)
Actually I have never taken a technical or scientific subject where the Bible was a textbook. The Bible is not a book of science primarily but where history impinges on science by necessity I suggest it is as well supported as general evolution. It simply does not speak to 99% of science period.

I do not agree that IDers and YECs theories have no impact on the results of thier work in science.

1) I have outlined elsewhere the impact of using the tols normally associated with systems design, analysis, debugging, securing etc. has been extraordinary in the genome project and subsequent outcomes. This is consciously or unconsciously the direct result of a design implication rather than a random walk through animal space, there could not be a greater dichotomy.

2) We would never waste time talent and resources on origin of life experiments over 100 years, space alien research, panspermia research but rather direct empirical science of understnading the marvelous designs and learning how to apply them to helping mankind.

3) It is the Bible's provence to lift the spirit and hope of mankind outside of science which is a large part of existence, actually.

Didn't your mommy teach you not to mistate other peoples positions?

In answer to:

1.  How does saying, "This is designed" lead to figuring out the genome sequences?  That's just ridiculous.

2.  You can't say that Creationism/ID helps mankind by....helping mankind.

3.  That only applies for Christians.  What about other religions?  Also, you are the one that is using the Bible as an accurate account of the origin of life.  Now, you say that it is only to be used as a way of lifting spirits?  So, now, where do you turn to for your backing of the origin of life story in the Bible?  Do you turn to the same Creationists that admitted under oath in Court that their "science" is based on the Bible?  Do you even see the circular reasoning there?

  77 replies since Mar. 30 2005,01:21 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]