absolutetruth wrote:And that is a total non sequitur. Utterly irrelevant to what I had asked.
ok. fine. they weren't trying to prove a "literal Genesis". there was no need to then (as much as today). that wasn't their specific goal as it is many scientists today.
Finally, an admission of error of representation!
Um... If that is the morst relevant science-related passage you can find, don't bother trying to impress me anymore.
that wasn't meant to be a "science related" passage. more like a "principle related" passage. a "consistency related" passage. i was saying that they had biblical support to expect consistency in nature.
But that is not what your original claim was - your original claim was "the fact that the Bible has been tried and tested and proven to be accurate on everything it touches (be it morality, creation, philosophy, history, logic, science or whatever)..."
I asked what science was in the bible, you give me that silly "dinosaur" description and some vague verse about 'unseen forces.'
You're un undereducated propgandist. For your information, I did not once take a class on or even containing evolution until I was already studying it in graduate school. I attended undergraduate university in a very conservative area of Michigan where the subject was not even discussed in general biology class - it was only offered to biology majors (of which I was not).
The standard creationist nonsense about 'evolution crammed down the throats' of students is just nonsense.
you went a different educational route and ended up being a victim anyway? how's that better?
OH, please... Just because you have been brainwashed into rejecting anything that does not conform to an ancient book of fairy tales is no reason to insult everyone else's intellience. Quite unlike you (and your hero Sarfati), my research and graduate education dealt directly with the issues involved in evolution. I have SEEN the evidence myself. If you actually uinderstand it, it is very convincing. Just ask Kurt Wise.
and it seems weird for you to say that evolution isn't crammed down our throats. our lower grade schools, to middle schools, to high schools, to universities, to the media, to the museums are filled with evolutionary ideas.
Yeah, I mean it is in the pledge of allegiance, it is on our money, heck - it is even in the oaths that many have to take! It is mentioned at convocations and commencement. It is mentioned by politicians at the clese of nearly every speech. It is just inescapable!
and in most schools, it's the only idea of nature, or "science" that's allowed. so please tell me again that evolution isn't (for all practical purposes) crammed down our throats without knowing that you're blatantly lying.
It is not 'crammed down' anyone's thorats anymore than the theory that germs cause disease is. I am not lying. I cannot help it that you are programmed to think this way, many in your camp are. It is sad really.
Where did I say that? Please stop making things up for your strawman arguments.
well, from the links you've cited, and from your own language, you must believe that. i understand that you guys think that environment has an influence on the addition of information through mutations, but saying it doesn't make it so. that's a silly idea.
Yes, it is silly to simply assert things that you want to be so and insist that they are that way.
Not understanding something is not a rational reason to insist something cannot be true.
I see that you do not understand how the environment can influence "new information", but that is no reason to dismiss it so glibly.
When environmental influence can be demonstrated to influence "information", it is even more ridiculous to dismiss it.
you have to believe that all this "information adding" is accidental. there's no driving force with no telos that makes sense of all this. and if there's no driving force toward a particular telos, then everything must be accidental. and if you tell me that the human organism, with all of it's complexity and grandness and specific detail in its operation arose by the successive addition of numerous genetic and biological accidents, i'd say that you are simply insane to believe that.
LOL!
Classic. You simply cannot believe your strawman, so you knock it down with personal incredulity! Brilliant creationist logic!
Since you still have not/cannot define 'information', your entire line of "reasoning" is pure garbage.
Let me know when you actually understand any of this material. You are clearly on autopilot here.
if you disagree with that, then how does environment influence these mutations in order to create such beautifully complex organisms and not just mess?
Via selection. See - you do not even have a basic understanding of the very thing you are arguing against! Incredible...
Gee - an unsupported assertion from this guy?
well, considering the odds of accidental mutations and "information adding" enabling the production of some of the most complex creatures in the world, i'd say that assertion is easily supported.
Please, show me the support.
What ARE the odds you speak of and how, exactly, were they determined?