Originally posted by SoulReaper
Noone is claiming that Abiogenesis is the same as evolution.
The link you posted a few pages back claimed exactly that. Evolution can't explain the origin of life was pretty much the basis of the argument and
yours. You keep saying science doesn't know x and science doesn't know y. Let's focus on what science DOES know. Anything else is speculation at
Noone is claiming that mutations don't happen.
You have ZERO working theories for how the mutations that can be observed... could possiblly have slowly evolved the complex living organisms that we
This is what I'm doubting.. not that mutations take place... but that they took place in the manner that you are proposing.
You really need to do a better job explaining your points. There is a working theory. It's called evolution, the study of genetic mutations and
natural selection. What manner do these mutations need to take place in? You need to point out specifics and details if you want to talk science.
Simply making a general statement isn't good enough without facts to back it up. What is the actual claim here? Are you trying to say we can't
observe evolution in the long term? Are you saying that mutations don't cause changes to species? What exactly is it?
You really have no clue what it means to present a WORKING, PAUSIBLE theory for consideration.
So being backed by genetic mutation
rates, natural selection (both observable in a lab and in the wild), the entire fields of biology and genetics, and the fossil record doesn't qualify
as plausible or working I guess.
It is a HUGE JUMP to go from showing that mutations happen... to claiming that this process of Accidents in copying information evolved the
Complex living organisms that we have studied via modern biology.
None of that makes any sense. You still haven't cited a single piece of
evidence from the actual theory of evolution that you disagree with, you just make preachy blanket statements that have no basis in reality and don't
apply to evolution.
Linking me to a site that shows an observed process that can occur randomly is not proof that those random process' caused the evolution of a
complex living organism.
I'll put this as basically and straight forwardly as I can.
Evolution = genetic mutations sorted by natural selection. To deny evolution is to deny that, A: genetic mutations influence change, and B: natural
selection exists. Is this your claim? If it is, I hate to tell you this, but both are proven. You are trying to make evolution its own magical
process, but in reality, that's all it is.
Be honest and say that you Have no Working Theory for a godless existence according to science.
There is no "godless" theory. When there is no evidence for something in science, it is ignored, therefor god's existence (whether yes or no) does
not factor in to any scientific theories or equations. It doesn't mean god doesn't exist or that science is against god. Science works with
Your theories are all based on Faith in incredible events against impossible odds.
Odds greater than a god? Please break down those numbers for me. 2nd request. I want to see the math behind your "odds".
Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not there is a god. Why does evolution conflict with your faith? Why doesn't it STRENGTHEN
your faith? Shouldn't god using a process of evolution to create life make him that much greater? I don't get the beef.
Lets start with this:
Very basic, easy to understand to the point. If you want to talk science, let's do it, cite me some of the faulty science from that link. It you
want to discuss it that's fine, but I'm not just going to go back and forth on semantics. Backing up claims is kind of important on here.
on 12-6-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)