Evidence for God from Science

Evolution, if taken properly, literally puts a question on a lot of traditional christian beliefs and obviously that is a hard thing to square. It introduces death biologically rather than because of sin. And pretty much negates a core belief that death came through sin. It proves that mankind didn't come from a single couple. It undermines man being special. It falsifies the literal creation account and pretty much all of the genesis story and its various interpretations.

Wow, so, evolution "proves" such things? That's a pretty incredible assertion. Not to mention an extraordinary level of faith in mortal man and his crude tools to discern the things of an all-powerful God, for Whom there are NO limits!

Nonetheless, Neo's above quote is an honest answer to what the reality of the asserted truth of the evolution of man (from earlier and simpler life forms) would HAVE to mean for Scripture - IF it were true - it would mean that much of Scripture is untrue and NOT "God-breathed!" And it's one of the biggest reasons why I reject it. Of course, I would not deny that ANIMAL death occurred before sin entered the world.

And so, Neo, WHY (as I assume you believe) does mankind even need a Savior, and how and when did sin enter the world? Also, clearly, IF true, God was either not in control of the Bible's writing OR that did not even matter to Him. AND, if at least some, or even most, parts of the Bible are untrue (now, I'm speaking of its original autographs), then this means God has allowed copious amounts of lies and fiction to be interwoven into His Holy Word. And if THAT is true, how do you know which parts are true and which parts are not? Obviously, you couldn't! And so, what you end up with WOULD be a God of confusion. Of course, some would say God evolved two specific creatures to a point and then suddenly imbued them with souls and thus they became "man." OR only Adam evolved and Eve did, in fact, come miraculously from Adam. Still, Scripturally, you have many problems with reading key parts of Adam & Eve's story, only symbollically. And, IF the Creation accounts (and other Scriptural portions) are actually true but mostly only in an allegorical way...well, we're pretty much right back to it being worthless to us - at least as far as their being communicated in a way we can truly and correctly understand, and in such a way that we don't run into the myriad of dangers related to their misinterpretation and misapplication. We could easily interpret them in a thousand inaccurate, if creative, ways.

But does the Lord Who created on a scale so amazingly detailed, comprehensively and necessarily interactive, down to the molecular level, throughout vast cosmos run by laws of such great precision, Who came to DIE for His Word - does such a God treat His Word so casually, so irresponsibly, so indifferently, with all of the chaos such a twisted tapestry of uncertainty that would create, so clearly knowing the evil that would clearly arise from such distortions? It's one thing for man to prolifically do evil, merely due to sinful hearts and minds, but it's quite another for Him to deliberately allow us to be so deceived by allowing His Holy Word to become so incredibly corrupted, that abundant and terrible lies and distortions are as well blended as the last smoothie I tried. Truly, drunks are more cautious about where they throw empty beer bottles from moving cars, than what Neo is asserting has happened concerning the inaccuracy and the supposed, perverse devastation of God's Word.

It's a certainty that whatever Being created this world is obviously a fanatic about His Creation's unfathomable scale and immense layers of minute details! But then we're to believe He got exceptionally sloppy with Its "instruction manual?" Such a God is anything but personal and reliable - no, instead he's a deist god whom creates his universe and sits back to watch the carnage, his creatures forever only certain of his unreliability, like kids watching ants torture a grasshopper. Not too much love there, eh? And HOW could we EVER trust such a god?

As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Well said Bipster, we should respect each others opinions and not tear each other down, we instead should build each other up into the glory of God. Sometimes I wonder whether Satan has deceived us with a creation theory or maybe it is more like he has deceived us with arguing about something that really doesn't matter, further to that maybe he has deceived us so much that we think less of those that don't believe the same as us.

I think all theories are probably incorrect to one degree or another and I just don't think we have all the facts surrounding the circumstances quite yet and for someone to claim absolute truth in these matters is just plain arrogant.

We should all have a think about how Satan deceives people, I highly doubt it is with creation theory, he is much, much more cunning and subtle than that. A good book by C.S Lewis - The Screwtape Letters is a very interesting read and really opened my eyes to how Satan deceives us, I highly reccommend it for everyone to read, C.S Lewis is one of my favourite writers.

Philip wrote:

Evolution, if taken properly, literally puts a question on a lot of traditional christian beliefs and obviously that is a hard thing to square. It introduces death biologically rather than because of sin. And pretty much negates a core belief that death came through sin. It proves that mankind didn't come from a single couple. It undermines man being special. It falsifies the literal creation account and pretty much all of the genesis story and its various interpretations.

Wow, so, evolution "proves" such things?

Yes it does. Infact its not even a question.

Nonetheless, Neo's above quote is an honest answer to what the reality of the asserted truth of the evolution of man (from earlier and simpler life forms) would HAVE to mean for Scripture - IF it were true - it would mean that much of Scripture is untrue and NOT "God-breathed!" And it's one of the biggest reasons why I reject it. Of course, I would not deny that ANIMAL death occurred before sin entered the world.

This is self defeating, If animal death occured then death is not an abstract spiritual entity anymore. It still contradicts scripture. Paul never said, animal death and human death are different things. He said because of sin, death came into the world.

And so, Neo, WHY (as I assume you believe) does mankind even need a Savior, and how and when did sin enter the world?

Because mankind are not perfect, they disobey God's laws, that is why they need saving. Sin and mankind go hand in hand, as long as man is a free moral agent, the potential to sin is present.

Also, clearly, IF true, God was either not in control of the Bible's writing OR that did not even matter to Him.

Is God control of it? St Augustine wanted to throw out John chapter 8 from the gospels and some under him did exactly that. Our canon was voted upon, did they ask God? No they decided via different criteria but no criteria was that God should be asked?

We don't have any original manuscript left. Was God unable to save them? or if it did matter to him, then I don't understand why we don't have them? is God in control of this?

AND, if at least some, or even most, parts of the Bible are untrue (now, I'm speaking of its original autographs), then this means God has allowed copious amounts of lies and fiction to be interwoven into His Holy Word.

Genesis story is true then I guess, we should throw away the all the evidence which proves its not true. After all a writer 3500 years ago couldn't be wrong about somethings, could he now?

And if THAT is true, how do you know which parts are true and which parts are not?

I don't, but when I find evidence against one, I then know of it.

Of course, some would say God evolved two specific creatures to a point and then suddenly imbued them with souls and thus they became "man." OR only Adam evolved and Eve did, in fact, come miraculously from Adam. Still, Scripturally, you have many problems with reading key parts of Adam & Eve's story, only symbollically. And, IF the Creation accounts (and other Scriptural portions) are actually true but mostly only in an allegorical way...well, we're pretty much right back to it being worthless to us - at least as far as their being communicated in a way we can truly and correctly understand, and in such a way that we don't run into the myriad of dangers related to their misinterpretation and misapplication.

Very true, and that is why I am not saying its allegorical, I am saying the story is made up, its fiction. I have come to understand that the best way to understand that story is to read it as the original authors meant it, within a six day creation frame.

We could easily interpret them in a thousand inaccurate, if creative, ways.

Exactly, see above.

But does the Lord Who created on a scale so amazingly detailed, comprehensively and necessarily interactive, down to the molecular level, throughout vast cosmos run by laws of such great precision, Who came to DIE for His Word - does such a God treat His Word so casually, so irresponsibly, so indifferently, with all of the chaos such a twisted tapestry of uncertainty that would create, so clearly knowing the evil that would clearly arise from such distortions? It's one thing for man to prolifically do evil, merely due to sinful hearts and minds, but it's quite another for Him to deliberately allow us to be so deceived by allowing His Holy Word to become so incredibly corrupted, that abundant and terrible lies and distortions are as well blended as the last smoothie I tried. Truly, drunks are more cautious about where they throw empty beer bottles from moving cars, than what Neo is asserting has happened concerning the inaccuracy and the supposed, perverse devastation of God's Word.

All of this is irrelevant to the point. No one does evil by reading or not reading genesis, the whole chaos is man made, I hardly think God is bothered about our creation stances.

Such a God is anything but personal and reliable - no, instead he's a deist god whom creates his universe and sits back to watch the carnage, his creatures forever only certain of his unreliability, like kids watching ants torture a grasshopper. Not too much love there, eh? And HOW could we EVER trust such a god?

What love? just a couple of week back, they burnt alive Christians in my country. Where was God? was he watching lovingly? Is that what you are saying? You don't like the God I have in mind? your God in America is very loving I suppose, please tell him to visit my country the next time you meet him. The [poop] has hit the fan but he is lovingly being indifferent. I don't see him helping anyone here even when people die in his name, what reliability are you talking about? The only thing reliable is that we all are going to die someday or get killed someday. That is as much trust as I have in God.

And why do you need a bible to be a christian Phillip? do you not know Christ? If I take away your bible and stop you from ever having one, will you leave Christ? will you not be God's son anymore? Is your faith on the bible or your personal relationship with God? or is it that you don't know God, you just believe in the bible and have no personal experience with Christ and obviously you need the bible then?

For 1600 years the common man had no bible, the early church had no bible and everyone survived. But now its impossible?

I don't care what creation stance you have phillip. I take you as a brother in christ. You obviously think mine is dangerous but let me assure you, so is yours, ridculous and wrong on many levels, you just don't see it that way and I am not attacking it to throw it in your face so that you spend the next half an hour, like me, defending my bald assertions about what you believe. If anything I have been answering and defending my belief here for so much time now that I am tired of it. The moment I say evolution, I am targeted with the utmost extreme and often naive questions and strawman arguments, some of which you sadly repeated above, I feel like standing infront of an inquisition. You guys keep judging me like its your right. I don't even bother contesting creation theories anymore. And I am on the edge of, where I will stop defending that I adhere to science on the creation stance and reject the genesis story.

Its of no use. no matter what I say I will still be asked the same questions "oh neo! so you don't even need saving and all that, and the bible is worthless to you" along that line.

The day they start burning Christians alive in furnaces in your country, that day I will ask you about how much you think those people trusted God and how reliable God was for them? What did their trust on God gain them?

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Hi Bippy, when you can, read this very short article.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... ation.html

Neo I couldnt help but respond. I have not previously really gotten into creation debate because I think it's personal, with no one really having the answers. I said earlier in this thread that I care just as much about proving what I believe as I do anyone proving to me. I don't care, because it has no relevance to our relationship with God or our salvation.
That is not why I am responding. I just hope my words demonstrate the empathy, compassion and sadness I felt when I read your post. You highlighted some others issues completely outside of creation debate, I undsertand it was in response to Philip.
I firstly just wanted to say you are right. It is very easy for me and others to sit back on our cosy lounges, in our relatively peaceful countries and not have the faintest idea what it like for christians in many countries like Pakistan. We can empathise but it is so foreign to anything I know, I really can't know what it is like in real terms.
I have read about many deaths, People being burnt alive and I was so upset and horrified. angry that this was just not making it onto mainstream news. I did all I could do and that was to pray. For all christians who are suffering for their beliefs and specifically for those in Pakistan. I will continue to keep you all in my prayers, for your safety and your resolve and for your faith. I can only imagine how that must test a person's faith, make them question 'where is God when we need him most' not necesarrily His existence but certainly a God that is loving, personable, observant of all that is happening to His children, His faithful followers. Why or how could He sit back and let tht happen, is that love?

I could never compare the horror of what these people have gone through but I do know pain. I have seen stuff and gone through things as a child that I just never should have had to experience. Everybody that was meant to protect me didnt. I was let down mostly I thought at the time by God. I trusted Him to help me but it seemed it never happened. I turned angry. It's interesting that I never questioned Gods existence, I knew somewhere deep inside that God was real, but what I questioned was his presence, His love, His apparent indifference. There was only really one road to take, I didn't trust Him. I would always confess when asked that I was a christian, I went to church on and off over the years but I just didn't think God was the kind of God I wanted Him to be. Always present, always loving. Listening, watching, helping. How could that be true when I was this little girl who loved Him so much, prayed every night and it seemed no help arrived. I grew despondent, indifferent and cold.
But I don't see it like that anymore.
Neo, the christians who have died defending their beliefs. God was watching, He never left their side. His love always present. As final as death seems to us, it's not. A loving, caring father was there to embrace them as soon they passed from this life into the next. That is what their trust brought them. Eternity. In a world full of violence and chaos, they kept their eyes on the Kingdom of heaven, they have their prize.
When Jesus was beaten and hung on a cross to die, His father in heaven never left His side. The apostles who were martyred in the name of Christ had their saviour with them.
With upmost love and compassion Neo, don't let the evils of this world, those that kill our brothers and sisters, that try and intimidate and destroy our faith to have the victory of pushing us away from our love and trust in God.
I pray through all our trials and intimation of those working to destroy our faith, both by man and principalities that we place our trust in our Loving Lord. That we come together and lift each other up, that for every death, every attack physical or spiritual it strengthens our faith and our resolve. They can take our lives but they will never take our faith, or our trust in our loving, present saviour Jesus Christ.
God bless Neo

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Well said Bipster, we should respect each others opinions and not tear each other down, we instead should build each other up into the glory of God. Sometimes I wonder whether Satan has deceived us with a creation theory or maybe it is more like he has deceived us with arguing about something that really doesn't matter, further to that maybe he has deceived us so much that we think less of those that don't believe the same as us.

I think all theories are probably incorrect to one degree or another and I just don't think we have all the facts surrounding the circumstances quite yet and for someone to claim absolute truth in these matters is just plain arrogant.

We should all have a think about how Satan deceives people, I highly doubt it is with creation theory, he is much, much more cunning and subtle than that. A good book by C.S Lewis - The Screwtape Letters is a very interesting read and really opened my eyes to how Satan deceives us, I highly reccommend it for everyone to read, C.S Lewis is one of my favourite writers.

Excellent post daniel, Satan is very subtle yet also as you pointed out, very cunning . It's a shame that there are Some Christians today that don't even believe in satan anymore , and others yet who think he is t much of a threat anymore .

We have to always be on guard

neo-x wrote:

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Hi Bippy, when you can, read this very short article.

Neo I don't see a link anywhere my friend ??

bippy123 wrote:

neo-x wrote:

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Hi Bippy, when you can, read this very short article.

Neo I don't see a link anywhere my friend ??

My bad, please see below.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... ation.html

""What love? just a couple of week back, they burnt alive Christians in my country. Where was God? was he watching lovingly? Is that what you are saying? You don't like the God I have in mind? your God in America is very loving I suppose, please tell him to visit my country the next time you meet him. The [poop] has hit the fan but he is lovingly being indifferent. I don't see him helping anyone here even when people die in his name, what reliability are you talking about? The only thing reliable is that we all are going to die someday or get killed someday. That is as much trust as I have in God. ""
Neo, first I want to say my heart goes out to any Christian that has to go through this suffering
The problem of suffering is a tough one to get through. I had a friend in India who converted to Christianity and had to keep his Christian faith under wraps . All that gave him away was a tiny tattoo of a cross on his palm . He died at the tender age of 39. He was a big man for an Indian (6'2") , but he was a gentle giant who never laid a hand on anyone .
His wife abused him physically, mentally and emotionally . When he was in a hospital in Calcutta in critical condition and dying , instead of being at his side his wife was trying to drain his credit cards, his bank account and his moms bank account .

He passed away a few days later . Do you think that God was indifferent to him .
Is it not biblical that if someone is humbled here under man he will be exalted under God in heaven.
Should we say that God was indifferent to the martyrdom of the apostles and their students that came after them?

Polycarp a student of the apostle john was executed in a roman arena after telling the Romans that he would not renounce his faith in Christ.

In lebanon in the 1970's the plo were setting up checkpoints in beirut and if your ID card said you were a Christian lebanese u would get a bullet in the head. Was God forsaking them ?
Did God forsake the Hebrews who suffered for 400 years under the Pharos tyranny ?

My dad had the same questions you asked right now my friend and he struggled with them up and until 3 days before he passed away , but thankfully he gave it all to God and in the end trusted God and came back to him. My dad had to work through his childhood where his local town priest tried to molest him several times .

But I know where he is now . Isn't that the ultimate goal of any Christian ?

neo-x wrote:

bippy123 wrote:

neo-x wrote:

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Hi Bippy, when you can, read this very short article.

Neo I don't see a link anywhere my friend ??

My bad, please see below.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... ation.html

Thanks for the link my friend , checking it now

I will respond later as I am at work right now.

melanie wrote:Neo I couldnt help but respond. I have not previously really gotten into creation debate because I think it's personal, with no one really having the answers. I said earlier in this thread that I care just as much about proving what I believe as I do anyone proving to me. I don't care, because it has no relevance to our relationship with God or our salvation.
That is not why I am responding. I just hope my words demonstrate the empathy, compassion and sadness I felt when I read your post. You highlighted some others issues completely outside of creation debate, I undsertand it was in response to Philip.
I firstly just wanted to say you are right. It is very easy for me and others to sit back on our cosy lounges, in our relatively peaceful countries and not have the faintest idea what it like for christians in many countries like Pakistan. We can empathise but it is so foreign to anything I know, I really can't know what it is like in real terms.
I have read about many deaths, People being burnt alive and I was so upset and horrified. angry that this was just not making it onto mainstream news. I did all I could do and that was to pray. For all christians who are suffering for their beliefs and specifically for those in Pakistan. I will continue to keep you all in my prayers, for your safety and your resolve and for your faith. I can only imagine how that must test a person's faith, make them question 'where is God when we need him most' not necesarrily His existence but certainly a God that is loving, personable, observant of all that is happening to His children, His faithful followers. Why or how could He sit back and let tht happen, is that love?

I could never compare the horror of what these people have gone through but I do know pain. I have seen stuff and gone through things as a child that I just never should have had to experience. Everybody that was meant to protect me didnt. I was let down mostly I thought at the time by God. I trusted Him to help me but it seemed it never happened. I turned angry. It's interesting that I never questioned Gods existence, I knew somewhere deep inside that God was real, but what I questioned was his presence, His love, His apparent indifference. There was only really one road to take, I didn't trust Him. I would always confess when asked that I was a christian, I went to church on and off over the years but I just didn't think God was the kind of God I wanted Him to be. Always present, always loving. Listening, watching, helping. How could that be true when I was this little girl who loved Him so much, prayed every night and it seemed no help arrived. I grew despondent, indifferent and cold.
But I don't see it like that anymore.
Neo, the christians who have died defending their beliefs. God was watching, He never left their side. His love always present. As final as death seems to us, it's not. A loving, caring father was there to embrace them as soon they passed from this life into the next. That is what their trust brought them. Eternity. In a world full of violence and chaos, they kept their eyes on the Kingdom of heaven, they have their prize.
When Jesus was beaten and hung on a cross to die, His father in heaven never left His side. The apostles who were martyred in the name of Christ had their saviour with them.
With upmost love and compassion Neo, don't let the evils of this world, those that kill our brothers and sisters, that try and intimidate and destroy our faith to have the victory of pushing us away from our love and trust in God.
I pray through all our trials and intimation of those working to destroy our faith, both by man and principalities that we place our trust in our Loving Lord. That we come together and lift each other up, that for every death, every attack physical or spiritual it strengthens our faith and our resolve. They can take our lives but they will never take our faith, or our trust in our loving, present saviour Jesus Christ.
God bless Neo

God bless you Mel, that was a great uplifting post.

John, as always you are in my prayers bro and all the Christians (and non Christians) that suffer at the hand of evil men. Matthew 5:3-11

neo-x wrote:

bippy123 wrote:

neo-x wrote:

bippy123 wrote:As you all know I came from a very strong pro evolution background. Almost everyone of my family members and relatives are either pro evolution or just don't know enough to comment either .

Evolution is a historical,science and therefore you go with the explanation from the data and from our experience in what we see in the outside world as human beings .
My 2 main reasons for leaving it are
First and firemost the specified complex information within DNA , and throughout our uniform experience we have never seen specified complex information come about from anything other then intelligence .this is the main reason I'm an ID'st now.

Macroevolution is another less significant reason .

Specifically it was doctor stephen meyer's argument et from the specified complex information from arrangement if the individual nucleotide bases and their attachment points that eventually won me over.

Like I said everyone has a different take on this and I respect all opinions now .

Hi Bippy, when you can, read this very short article.

Neo I don't see a link anywhere my friend ??

My bad, please see below.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... ation.html

Neo interesting article , but how does this pertain to evolution or explain the specified complex information found on nucleotide bases and their attachment sites ? This doesn't even pertain to Macroevolution .

This is in the neighborhood of developing drug resistant bacteria . This can be looked at either from an ID perspective or a microevolutionary or adaptive perspective .

I'll give one example .

The article talks about a genetic mutation that enables some humans to keep drinking milk into adulthood because the gene that normally turns of lactase productions is kept turned on . This doesn't deal with how ten switch even got there in the first place . It also tries to make leaps and bounds to extrapolate this adaptation with what was already there to work with and say that this proves Macroevolution ?



http://creation.com/lactose-intolerance

But note that these genetic changes are not “evolution” in the uphill molecules-to-milkman sense, as the changes are downhill, i.e., information has been lost (viz., the normal switching-off mechanism of lactase production following weaning).12 Rather, at best this is an example of selection, as Hirschhorn himself went on to acknowledge: “Lactase persistence has always been a textbook example of selection, and now it’ll be a textbook example in a totally different way.”10

Yet almost all evolutionary biologists will see the same data and say that this proves evolution. This article highlights why i started questioning the theory of evolution even at the advanced age of 41 .

This was the video that turned everything on its head for me.

http://youtu.be/yLeWh8Df3k8

Philip wrote:I'm not gonna have much faith in or be much interested in discussing the intricacies of calculus if, firstly, basic, foundational math can't be explained.

The case for common descent uses only simple reasoning. Organizing organisms by a panoply of biological traits forms only one reasonable nested hierarchy. The leaves (organisms) on the tree (of life), grouped by branch and stem, form the nested hierarchy, which supports the idea of a common ancestor.

Such a simple concept required the genius of Darwin to notice and explain the unmistakable pattern. And 150 more years of analyzing biological traits among vastly different species continues to confirm this objective nested hierarchy. As if that weren't enough, DNA analysis now confirms the same nested hierarchy.

Philip wrote:I've no desire to argue over these various opinions that variously declare each school of thought on the specifics of how evolution MIGHT have worked - only to say, such an argument should be very specific to the very beginning of everything that came into existence.

I don't understand. A paraphrasing seems to be: "Ignore evolution, until science has an answer for the ultimate cause."