Which came first: the young earth, or the inerrant scripture?

I've been browsing through threads and I've noticed you've mentioned me in a condescending manner at least twice recently. And you havent posted that much.Just stop.

You don't need mods to deal with Tal. Watch:The Bible doesn't mention Tal, therefore he doesn't exist.

I've posted this twice already, but I'll do it again. linkEvolution's basic claim is that life formed from randomly from atmospheric conditions and has slowly turned from one species to another, getting more complex all the time until we ended up with what we have today.What doesn't wash with me is that we don't see species producing (or evolving) into other types of species today. They all fit nice and neat into their family, genus, kingdom etc. And you can't use the argument (well it takes a really long time so we can't observe it taking place) because science IS observation. The other big thing that doesn't wash is that life formed from random events. It is simply too complex.

---

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

And all you people who are simply mocking me are just doing so because you can't answer the issues. So you stoop to 4 year old banter to try to hurt my feelings.Big of you.Keep in mind this thread was started because holmes wanted to know how specific christains came to not believe in evolution. This is a totally based on each individuals experiences and I was just relating how I came to that conclusion.Then your ignorant flames start.

---

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

First off, I remember seeing a documentary where chemist created primordial conditions in a beaker, hit it with electricity and came out with amino acids - the building blocks of life. I'll try to find the name of the doc, but it was a while ago. Well, if you want to see something, you've gotta go look for it. And since we're talking about a process that takes place over time, we need to look at things that reproduce very quickly so that we can actually see the change take place in the very short time we are here.Let's look at viruses, the are living, they reproduce very quickly.Seems to me every time I open the paper, there's a new strain of flu coming out of Hong Kong. Since the new strain of flu doesn't reproduce with the old strain of flu, it can be said to be a different "species" of flu.How many strains of AIDS is there now?Or, let's look at bacteria. I personally, while working for Pfizer, exposed bacteria to chemicals designed to cause mutation. Most of the bacteria died as a result, and of the survivors, some were very different. They represented a related organism, not the same species.Your suggestion that evolution doesn't happen because you haven't seen it in the blink of an eye that you've been looking is pretty silly.Also, you're mixed up about classification. Just because we have a system of classification doesn't mean that everything was made to fit the system. The system is made to fit what we see. As we discover new things, we CHANGE the system to include them.A few years back a parasite was discovered living in the mouths of lobsters. The parasite was so radically different than anything else, it got it's own phyla.Here's an article.
http://dml.cmnh.org/1995Dec/msg00722.html

Once again, (and you've been told this before) the TOE has nothing to do with Abiogensis.Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Even your very own sources refute what you say.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Keep in mind this thread was started because holmes wanted to know how specific christains came to not believe in evolution.

---

Well, Tal is correct.

Use my source and point that out please.Then tell me how you think life started according to TOE.

---

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

I love this! It's so precious. "I don't believe in your chemical beginnings of life. There's no rational basis for it. Instead, I believe it was started by magic."

TOE has no opinion on how life started. It is not interested in how life started, only in how it evolved after it did start.

That is exactly how evolutionists think it started.

---

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

How many times do you need to be told. The TOE says NOTHING about how life started. That is Abiogensis, not the Theory of Evolution.Even YOUR source tells you that it's Abiogensis.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Not according to Wikipedia

---

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

No! No, no, no no NO!Tal, you don't even know what evolution does say!Evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis. If abiogeness is true OR false, evolution still stands. They are entirely seperate issues!Perhaps if you could use some reference other than Wikipedia, or even just read the article a bit more closely, you would see that. Abiogenesis is related to evolution only in that it is widely held to be a possible origin for life, which evolved from there. Evolution does not depend on how life came about - it only requires that life exists, and then predicts that new species will evolve from pre-existing species through small generational changes guided by natural selection. That is all. Yes, we DO.

quote:

---

1. Primula kewensis was speciated from Primula verticillata and Primula floribunda in 1912 by Digby via hybridization and polyploidization.
2. It was shown that you could reproduce the existing species Tragopogon mirus by hybridizing Tragopogon dubius and Tragopogon porrifolius, as demonstrated by Owenby in 1950.
3. In 1969, Pasterniani demonstrated speciation (as defined by reproductive isolation) via artificial selection rather than hybridization. He took two existing varieties of maize, planted them in a field, and over a 5 year period, selected only kernels which were not interbred for the next year's planting. At the end of this 5 year period, the plants' natural likelihood of interbreeding had been reduced by an order of magnitude.
4. In 1983, Macnair and Christie were able to show that varieties of the Mimululs guttatus flower which had developed a tolerance to copper were no longer able to breed with varieties which had not developed this tolerance.

---

Not to mention that we see evolution all the time in microbes, whose reproductive rates are fast enough for us to observe in a laboratory setting. Note that the so-called "superbugs," germs who have evolved a resistance to certain medical treatments, are seen all the time. The germs who are not resistant die off, leaving those who are to multiply. Small differences guided by natural selection at work right in front of you. Don't be dense. The terms "family, genus," and other classifications are directluy related to representing what specific branch of the evolutionary tree a particular species belongs to. That argument is still valid, becuase we CANNOT observe within our own lifetimes a large degree of evolutionary change in the majority of species - they just don't reproduce quickly enough. But we CAN see it in organisms like bacteria, and we can see the obvious evidence in existing species. Every feature of every species is a slightly altered version of the same feature in another species. No feature is truly unique. THis suggests common ancestry, and is exactly what evolution predicts. That's abiogenesis, an entirely different subject wholly seperate from evolution. And stating "it is too complex" is an argument from incredulity - just because you don't comprehend it doesn't mean it isn't so. You would have to provide evidence that complexity is not natural.

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

[qs]Contents [hide] 1 Scientific theory
1.1 Ancestry of organisms
1.1.1 Evidence of evolution
1.1.1.1 Morphological evidence
1.1.1.2 Genetic sequence evidence
1.1.2 Origin of life
1.1.3 History of life [/qs]It is listed as a sub-topic.

---

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*