DrW wrote:Deleted (due to potential for cranial catastrophe).
I know huh. The rest of LittleNipper's posts are too inane for a comprehensive response. The fact that he cut and pasted them does more damage to his position than I have accomplished.
Evolutionism is merely a story. It is simply a story designed to compete with the historical record that we observe in the Bible.
Who leaked this?
Evolutionists tend to hide in the weeds of the unknown with an argument from ignorance: "If you can't prove, by empirical science, that evolution is impossible, then it happened."
Evolution is the most supported theory in all of science at the moment from evidence. Religion on the other hand is established in just this manner.
Notice how they use the weakness in their own position in an attempt to apply it (without justification) to science to try and knock it down? Too funny and too ironic.
Hey LittleNipper let's review the definition of an argument from ignorance:
Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). It asserts that a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true (the vice versa spelled out).
It asserts that a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
This is exactly the attack made upon evolution by ID proponents. Evolution is false because it has not yet been proven true.
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.
This is exactly the manner in which the ID crowd supports the existence of the designer!
By empirical science alone, we can only prove probabilities.
And by religion we can prove nothing at all. This is a variation of science doesn't know everything, religion doesn't know anything.
However, empirical science is not a tool that can prove anything to be true or false absolutely. For absolute proof, we have revelation.(See Basic and Concise Guide to Practical, Useful Logic and Reasoning)
Hmmm, if everybody could only agree on which revelations are valid and their proper interpretations.
God says that He created everything.
Are there any original texts? So just secondhand accounts?
He is the One Who enforces the laws of nature.
The evidence says otherwise. No hidden variables in QM includes god(s). Do you have any evidence to back this up? Didn't think so.
we know Him personally through the indwelling Presence of Jesus Christ
Is Jebus being cloned now?
PhysOrg said, "random introduction of errors into proteins, rather than traditional natural selection, may have boosted the evolution of biological complexity." How can that be?
There are no "errors" in evolution. There is no intended outcome by comparison to which that which "comes up short" is considered an "error." There are copying errors as chemicals make copies of themselves which provides for variations. But the result is not better or worse than that which was copied. It may be better fit for the environment and have a better chance of persisting as a result however.
Is there any complex system that gets better with the introduction of random errors?
Is there no way to improve a complex system? We presently have lost the ability to make our own vitamin C due to mutation. So if that mutated back to allow the bodily manufacture of vitamin C would that not be an improvement? What makes the mutation in one direction possible but the mutation in the opposite direction impossible?
Now, three people observe the same fossil in the same rock layer. One person has a worldview built on a foundation of millions of years, naturalism, big bang, evolution, materialism, and uniformitarianism and automatically sees the fossil as further evidence of all these foundational premises. Confirmation bias. This is further confirmed by colleagues with the same worldview. A second person has a worldview built on a foundation of biblical creation, about 6,000 years, a great, catastrophic, worldwide flood, and a God Who created everything and Who is currently enforcing every law of nature at every level throughout the Universe and automatically sees the fossil as further evidence of these foundational premises.
Well then feel free to take some dead animal, bury it in some muck, and apply pressure for a year and make a fossil to prove it can be done. Not going to do it? Thought not.
Ultimately, the Holy Spirit will destroy the veil.
If the mind is the veil I can agree with this.
Here is one other component of this dilemma. Supernatural revelation can come from one of three sources: Divine, demonic, or human. Because of the fall into sin that puts all human beings into bondage to Satan, human supernatural revelation actually comes from demonic forces originally, so those two could actually be one and the same. You may prefer to call them earth spirits or gods or some such, but they are demonic forces, principalities, powers--basically, they are beings created by God who have stumbled and fallen away from Him.
Is this degree of damage to one's thinking less than the damage done via drug abuse?
If we trace information back to its source, we always come to a mind, not a material process.
Except that a mind is due to a material process.
Kolob’s set time is “one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest” (Abraham 3:4). I take this as a round number. - Gee
