Creationism vs. Evolution

LOL Show me one credential that would justify calling that charlatan a "scientist".

 

Just because you call a pig a cow (ohh perception again) doesn't mean its a cow to the rest of us.

 

Morris served on the University of Oklahoma faculty before joining the Institute for Creation Research in 1984. He received his Doctorate in Geological Engineering at the University of Oklahoma in 1980. Morris held the position of Professor of Geology before being appointed President in 1996. Morris has a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Virginia Tech (1969), a M.S., University of Oklahoma (1977), and a Ph.D., University of Oklahoma (1980) in Geological Engineering.[5]


if a phd is up to your standards.

 

Haven't any of yall seen any of the Matrix movies? Duh...

 

nothing?

 

Engineer ^^ not a scientist. BTW you can also get a P.H.D. in Theology and Art History. He should have stuck to building roads or mines (What an Engineering Geologist actually does).

 

hey now don't be talkin' bad about Engineers!

 

It's good to live where there is a lot of positive reinforcement from your own culture. A friend of mine moved to SF for that very reason. I'm for everyone being free to find what they seek in their life and to get what they deserve as the result of what they seek.

Personally, I saw more than enough of the homosexual culture and was glad to finally be off of that hotel job to work in surroundings more harmonious with my values.

That's because American society has degenerated into a narcoculture.

 

FTFY

 

No offense meant

LoL I work with them all the time. Nuthin wrong with them at all, they are useful tools. They just make me crazy when they try to tell me they know everything when they haven't a clue what I do. LoL

 

My dad is a technician and made sure I would respect them when I got out in my first job. He told me the horror stories of what they would do to the engineers that were arrogant

Luckily where I work the engineers generally help the techs out with whatever we need done, and get along very well.

 

Sorry Steve, the way I think about that is, there was devastating world change that happened very quickly in our recent past that caused those events, the flood, Tower of Babel (continental split), and nothing like those events have happened anytime recently.

 

Evolutionary hurdles:

Below are some points to consider from an experiment by noted scientist Stanley Miller. This experiment was initially performed in the mid 1950's and refined over succeeding decades and are pointed to by many supporters of evolution as "proof" that spontaneous generation of life is possible. In the strictest sense, all these experiments proved were methods of creating amino acids.
Mr. Miller was a very intelligent and talented man. I take nothing away from the empirical data he collected. I do not, however, agree with conclusions based on his work, that he proved spontaneous creation of life .

1. Miller's initial experiments were performed with the assumption of a reducing atmosphere as a given. There is no concrete evidence of the earth's having such an atmosphere. Later experiments by Miller were done in a more "neutral" environment. These experiments were successful in creating amino acids (building blocks for life), but not life itself.
Interestingly, for these amino acids to survive, they had to be immediately removed from the very environment that was used to create them or they would be destroyed by the very environment of Miller's experiment.

2. Juan Oro's experiments showed that base components of RNA and DNA could be formed chemically in a reducing atmosphere. (Components - not DNA or RNA themselves)

Quandry: Let us assume that, as in Miller's initial experiment, that the earth did have a reducing atmosphere. How is it that these components were formed (possible, but not plausible from a statistical point of view), came together and began life in an environment that would have served to dilute and chemically degrade them? To believe that this happened takes much more faith to believe than the eye witness accounts of the gospels, Acts, or the rest of the Greek Scriptures.
3. Life on earth is "left handed". That is in the sense that amino acids used by living organisms on earth are all left handed. (there are right handed amino acids). And only 20 of the (100) amino acids used in proteins in us (humans) are left handed. The above mentioned experiments produced amino acids in a 50/50 ratio.

To believe evolution even started there has to be a complete suspension of reason to believe that:
1. Sufficient, constant, electrical charge was passed through just the right chemical mixture, to create just the right mix of 20 out of 100 amino acids. (I say constant electrical charge as that was Miller's process for emulating lightning strikes which he theorized were part of the formation of amino acids. As I believe we all can concede, lightning is neither constant nor predictable.)


2 a. This formation of amino acids happened in a reducing atmosphere (as Miller originally theorized) which would allow for the formation of Adenine (one of the 4 necessary bases for RNA/DNA). Then after the formation of these amino acids and Adenine (and the other 3 necessary bases for RNA/DNA - but we will just assume the other three bases were hanging around waiting on everyone else to show up), they were all simultaneously removed and whisked away to an undisclosed location where there was a non-reducing atmosphere. Once there these components decided to form themselves into some form of life.

OR
2 b. The atmosphere was non reducing to start with (as Miller later theorized and experimented) and these same 20 amino acids were formed, but whoops, sorry, no bases to form DNA/RNA.

This is just a very small example of some of the issues that evolution has. Just because you have the building blocks for something (Amino acids for protein and Adenine, which, again, is only 1/4 of the bases needed for DNA/RNA), does not mean they will assemble themselves in the form needed for life. The odds of just the amino acids being formed are in the statistical realm of impossibility. Now those amino acids have to combine to form proteins, then those proteins have to combine with RNA and DNA (which also have to spontaneously create themselves without any intelligent outside intervention). Then these proteins and RNA/DNA have to come together to form cells (cells sound simple, but they are far from it), then these cells have to decide what they will become.
I am not talking about those cells spontaneously deciding to become a lizard or a fish, but what part of the lizard or fish (or insert your favorite living organism) they will become - will they be a skin cell or a liver cell? A heart cell or part of an eye? If part of an eye, which part?

It takes far more faith to believe that the above (and many, many, many other happy "coincidences") just "happened" by chance. Besides, if in Miller's experiment, the Methane, water and other chemicals he used stood for the environment on earth at the time, the electricity stood for the lightning that gave the necessary "spark" for life to get started, who or what did Miller himself represent?

Thank you for reading.


BTW - While a Christian, I do not subscribe to the "Young Earth" view.

 

thanks for the response

 

Yes. That's true, Pach.

Everyone should have the support of those who share their values no matter what they are. Humans are social beings who naturally seek out their own kind.

 

I believe God created everything. Evolution is a means of allowing his creation to bloom.

 

Hm, very quiet in here. I guess folks are all at church loading up on more bible verses that prove the bible exists.

 

I'm at work , too busy to post in here