Evidence for God from Science

The actual texts aside, I think that History Channel does a good job on it's Biblical/religious documentaries. They put aside the people who say the Old Testament was a myth AND the literal Bible-thumpers and analyze the physical evidence. It is quite interesting to find that most of the places in t...

No one has ever made matter appear from nothing. This isn't evolution... but maybe God created the Big Bang and evolution along with it in the Beginning? Problem solved No one has ever seen an animal give birth to anything other that it's own kind Where did you see evolution predicting this? It doe...

Just to add a point to the "most mutations are harmful" line I see a lot here. Assuming natural selection is acting on each organism of a population in the same way, selection should immediately remove said negative mutations from the population. So even if you have 1000 organisms with &qu...

wow, that's all I have to say...

Actually, I think that the two pictures of the crabs are of the same genre. One is female and the other is male. The colors are used to atract the oposite sex for mating. How in the world could that not be ID for reproductive purposes? As far as the cats, It might have been more convincing if you p...

But I doubt the *accumulation* GIVEN THAT mutations are far more likely to disrupt than create. In that sense I doubt that the mechanisms of evolution have the POWER to generate and accumulate additional mutations to create that A-B-C pathway. Actually most mutations are neutral, not negative. And ...

So, yes, to me, there is still a boundary between species and genus and the larger differences. At least with regards to actually observing the said power. And I know you keep saying that we can't, and that really bothers me. It puts evolutionary history solidly in a very interesting model, but I c...

Well I guess I'll be the fool then.... We have never seen it happen, so what we have here is perhaps pure speculation. I think we can agree on many things such as Noah's local flood, OEC, and many other things.. But I won't stoop down to the so called "facts" of Darwinian evolution. If yo...

While I agree with you for the most part, it's the YEC's that irk me more than the OEC's. I really have no idea what the extent of God's involvement in orgins was. I'm running with the evidence he have right now. I see "created evolution" as a perfectly good mechanism of creation. Most Chr...

Gerald McGrew wrote: See the post above; we've seen it happen. And you still haven't answered the question: What makes macroevolution unscientific? No, that is the point. We have not seen it happen. Our web site challenges that opinion, not fact, here. I'm actually ok with calling Darwinian evoluti...

Simply put: If God created naturalistic evolution, can it really be considered naturalism?

It is possible a natural mechanism exists for creating new biological information (macroevolution) and we simply do not know what it is. I personally see too much design to not believe in it. Perhaps you miss this design I see. Yes, it is easy to see that things "appear designed", but whe...

huh? It is pretty easy to ID a true Homo sapiens from bones (structure and proportions)... and fossilized bones are old. Plus, there are no Neanderthals, H. erectus, or Australopithecus in existence today, so this means they lived long ago. That's a ridiculously simple explanation but I don't know w...

Actually I have on numerous occasions on this board defined the difference as I see it between macroevolution and microevolution, and I am fairly certain within thread you would have participated. Do a search for kurieuo with macroevolution and microevolution as keywords. I'm sure it will turn them...

"Macro" evolution only exists in the minds of creationists. Modern science makes no such distinction. We could be swayed if you could tell me when "lots of micro" becomes "macro" and what can possibly stop that from being so. Does God go "whoa whoa whoa, let's sto...