13 Feb 09
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywill….1.) The origin of life has nothing to do with Evolution
[b]=======================================
Creationist’s intelligent design hypotheses has nothing to do with science because it is not a scientific hypothesis. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis it must be either derived from evidence or reason.
=======================================
You run away from your own problem as an e to defend your religion which declares there is no need for Divine Intelligence, atheism.[/b]
.…
This is factually correct for the theory of evolution is not a theory of the origin of the first life -no good trying to hide this fact because fact is fact.
….2.) The evidence for this first simplest life has disappeared.
..…
Again, this is irrelevant to the theory of evolution because the theory of evolution is not a theory of the origin of the first life nor a theory of what that first life was or when and where and how it formed etc etc -it only says how the diversity of life formed and no matter how much you try and dodge this fact -sorry! -fact is fact.
This totally debunks the rest of your post.
13 Feb 09
Originally posted by whodey"...you can safely discuss pretty much anything with most people anywhere EXCEPT religion."
Religion is a touchy subject. In fact, you can safely discuss pretty much anything with most people anywhere EXCEPT religion. Then when you do they get that look in their eye that lets you know you better shut up or else!! ðŸ˜
...*and* politics.
13 Feb 09
3 edits
Originally posted by FabianFnasReally they are kind of one in the same when you think about it. Both espouse "beliefs" in regards to the way people should live. For example, we have the gospel of socialism and the gospel of capitalism floating about out there. In fact, at one time in my life I was a proponent of the gospel of capitalism......that is until it came crashing down around us via this current credit crisis. I guess those who believe in the gospel of socialism will just have to wait their turn. My guess is it will happen when the ponzi scheme of social security comes crashing down around us. It will make the current credit crisis look like a walk in the park.
"...you can safely discuss pretty much anything with most people anywhere EXCEPT religion."
...*and* politics.
As for what I believe politically now, I recognize the fact that both systems of government can work on paper, however, when the hearts of men are corrupt both WILL be undermined. I then return to the teachings of Christ which focus on the condition of the hearts of men. It IS the ONLY answer to our woes. Countries like the US can continue to believe the gospel of democracy is the answer as they try and force their gospel on others but all I can do is turn my head and laugh at them.
13 Feb 09
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonYou are correct. In fact, I think you should start a thread on the criticisms of abiogenesis. I very much enjoy poking fun at it. 😛
[b]….1.) The origin of life has nothing to do with Evolution
.…
This is factually correct for the theory of evolution is not a theory of the origin of the first life -no good trying to hide this fact because fact is fact.
….2.) The evidence for this first simplest life has disappeared.
..…
Again, this is irrelevant to the th ...[text shortened]... ou try and dodge this fact -sorry! -fact is fact.
This totally debunks the rest of your post.[/b]
13 Feb 09
3 edits
Originally posted by jaywill…."A WEAKNESS in the Theory of the Evolution of Life has nothing to do with the Theory of the Evolution of Life."
People saying that the origin of life has nothing to do with Evolution are really saying this:
"A weakness in the Theory of the Evolution of Life has nothing to do with the Theory of the Evolution of Life."
Let's see now how elagantly Mr. Hamiliton or someone will defend this grand dodge.
.… (my emphasis)
How can something that it totally irrelevant to a theory be a “WEAKNESS” to the theory? 😛
If you really want an analogy to confirm the obvious absurdity of this:
I see an avalanche and I see that it is currently moving down hill.
I form a theory that it has been moving down hill in the past ( just a few moments ago into the past ) all the way back in time to its origin.
But I didn’t see its origin nor is there any trace of its origin. Thus I conclude ( using your ‘logic‘ ) that this is a “WEAKNESS” to the theory that it has been moving down hill in the past all the way back in time to its origin is false 😛 -how stupid is that?