| Joelcool7 said: Rather knows what he's talking about. As for the other reply ummm no the link does not support Macro evolution also my understanding of evolution comes from my biology class and secular text books which defined Macro evolution as evolution of one species into another. The evidence that we all contain DNA road maps belonging to other species really proves nothing. Assuming a God created us their is no reason to believe he did not design us using such traits. We really don't know precisely how God created us the Bible defines a time line it does not explicitly give us a road map. The idea that big bang theology and abiogenesis can never be accepted as factual is even if they are proven to be possible nobody can ever prove that they did occur and nobody could prove even if they did that God did not cause or use them. As for living fossils. The coelecanth was declared extinct it was gone no record in the fossil record of it living recently. Then suddenly it was found alive and the fossil record was corrected. Just watching Discovery channel and History Channel you will notice very fast that the record is constantly changing and that even discoveries we have made get proven and disprove on a regular basis. Example a megaladon tooth was found it was dated only thousands of years ago. The researchers pulled the tooth out to re-test it. They said they couldn't test it the documentary left it as unknown but it was then classified as millions of years old with no evidence. Constantly if you watch science programs their are inconclusive results or things that cannot be dated. Different groups then twist the evidence to support their theories. I do not reject science. I however only rely on scientific fact not theory I am skeptical and will always question any science that cannot be observed and repeated. I take science for what it is. It wasn't all that long ago that science claimed the earth was flat their was evidence to support that. If you lived at that time you'd look at the ground and say ya its flat. But as we improved we realized hey it isn't flat. Wow the earth isn't center of the universe. Holy crap we rotate around the sun not vice versa? Scientific theory should always be questioned and always improved upon. The idea of evolution being both theory and fact is true. But one does not have to say all evolution is fact because it isn't. And one can't say all evolution is false because it isn't. Things are more complicated then that. Also yes I only have a Bio 11 education in evolution but of course that is also a Canadian one. Again I do not reject science, I question anything that cannot be observed and repeated. I don't think its a bright idea to throw your entire belief system behind a set of theories. Lastly the Bible does not disprove evolution or refute it for that matter. Anybody with any kind of Biblical education is aware of this. As a matter a fact the Bible actually suggests micro evolution, the Ark carried two of every animal now was that two of every breed? Was it two Dalmatians and two Doberman? No it was two dogs and so fourth. So how do we have so many species today? Well obviously the Bible clearly suggests they had to have evolved. It is fairly ignorant to say a Christian cannot believe in evolution. Evolution does not disprove the existence of God nor does the proven facts refute the Bible. In fact even Macro evolution doesn't disprove the Bible. Again if you study the Bible and by that I mean the Hebrew texts and study biblical theology you will not make a claim that a Christian cannot believe in evolution. |
Assuming this is to me.
I don't really know how to have a "proper" debate with you if you already have your own pre-conceptions. You already assume God created organisms, I didn't make assumptions either way, I never said God didn't start life of earth and I definitely didn't say a christian cannot believe in evolution or evolution disproves the existence of a God. The proven fact that evolution occurs, the proven fact of common ancestry, more specifically human evolution disproves the story of Adam & Eve which is the basis of christianity, this is just one example, so unless you take a lot of things in the bible metaphorically, it's pretty hard to believe in both the bible and well-supported science.
Give me examples of established scientific facts being completely disproved (not the explanations of facts being improved) in modern science. I'm not getting into the "science is always changing!" argument based on people thinking the world was flat how many hundreds or thousands of years ago.
Evidence in Genetics (DNA) not only proves common ancestry (I have no idea how you think this doesn't prove macro-evolution) with the fact that we all share DNA and can map out an accurate evolutionary tree based on how much we share with eachother, but a crapload of other ways as well, one being what I mentioned myself in my previous post, another being Chromosome #2. Again, in the talkorigins link I posted, you'll find a giant amount of evidence supporting macro-evolution specifically. I think it's pretty ridiculous that you're even considering the Noahs ark myth as true. We can focus on Noahs ark if you want, but PM me if you will please because it's not OT. I do agree though, if it were true and we found most fossils on one sedimentary layer dating back to 4000 years (tell me if that date's wrong pls) and the evolutionary tree led out of the middle east for all organisms, than noahs ark would make sense, and the bible would suggest evolution. But this is on the assumption that Noahs Ark and the global flood actually happened and the evidence supported it, which it absolutely doesn't.
I don't base my "entire belief system" around a set of scientific theories. I base my understanding of the natural world around a set of scientific theories and laws.
I didn't see many direct replies to what I actually said or the evidence I presented, and although I don't like making the distinction between micro/macro evolution since they are practically the same thing, just on different scales I said macro-evolution has been observed and posted a link to it, I explained some of the evidence myself and then posted a link to a huge compilation of supporting evidence, did you not read that?
