Evidence for God from Science

Murray wrote:Well i'm still christian , I believe in god, I just take the framwork creation stance instead of OEC. What led me from OEC is just lack of legetimacy and support for OEC, along with the fact I strugle with picturing every living thing being poofed into existance out of mid air.

What's this "poofed...out of mid air" business?

This picture shows the supposed evolutionary "Tree of Life". When fossils are grouped together by the time period as well as what genus they seem to fall under, they make appear to show a steady progression in complexity.

This is one of the biggest mistakes in trusting evolution. The "Tree of life" is man made. It uses man's ideas to draw lines connecting one creature to another. The problem is that it requires blind faith in a line. The line is NO INFORMATION. Zilch, nada, nothing. Everything depends upon the line, yet the line is nothing but an idea. Not actual evidence. It requires faith. You can't test, observe and repeat a line. Perhaps you should be as critical of evolutionary science as you are with OEC creation.

I could take skulls from existing apes and humans, and I could arrange a tree of life, and make something appear that actually isn't there, just by simply connecting lines. Either you will hold the 'tree of life' to the scientific standard, or you will trust it on faith.

Those are the transitional fossils. Creationists always claim that there are no transitional fossils, but they are out there.

Seraph, I've had in depth post in the past where I addressed 'transitional' fossils. I don't have the time to do such now. But needless to say, it can easily be deconstructed. There are no transitional fossils. As everything alleged to be a transition does not have what it transitioned from, nor to. All you have is an extinct creature.

Well i'm still christian , I believe in god,

Murray. You BELIEVE in God? But you say, He could not and did not create man without evolution. You didn't answer my question.
If you can't believe that God created man specifically because it defies the laws of science, then how in the world do you deal with a man rising from being graveyard dead back to life, and performing miracles that defy science? What happens when you follow your reasoning through to it's logical conclusions is you preclude yourself from being Christian. At least as far as being logically consistent. I'd say that leaves you with some explaining to do.

So when we find life on another planet, did god "poof" them on that planet it as well?

God "poofed" the entire universe. Just what are you trying to prove?

Just because a vast minority of a population believes something does not give it more credibility.

Who is making that argument? Certainly not me. The New Kids on The Block were platinum selling recording artists.

I would love to see the number that supports evolution in comparison to ID.

Murray, you just said that "This universe is well designed to have life exist. It exist somewhere else."
You have your own ID that you are proposing.

And to answer your question, let me ask you a question.
Why did god not just make a flat earth in a dome with nothing else in the universe? Since that is not the case, from your reasoning Jesus did not rise from the dead.

You know very well I believe he rose from the dead, but that has no effect on how we believe we got here. Jesus’ life and resurrection has nothing to do with how we got here.

The New Kids on The Block were platinum selling recording artists.

Thanks a lot, jlay. Now I have to go the rest of the day with this song stuck in my head. You really need to think before you speak. I'm going to have nightmares tonight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbIEwIwYz-c


Jlay, now you must watch this. See how you like it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rog8ou-ZepE&ob=av2e

jlay wrote:This is one of the biggest mistakes in trusting evolution. The "Tree of life" is man made. It uses man's ideas to draw lines connecting one creature to another. The problem is that it requires blind faith in a line. The line is NO INFORMATION. Zilch, nada, nothing. Everything depends upon the line, yet the line is nothing but an idea. Not actual evidence. It requires faith. You can't test, observe and repeat a line. Perhaps you should be as critical of evolutionary science as you are with OEC creation.

I know that humans are the ones who create the lines in the tree. But it's the fact that biologists CAN draw a line between so many similar-yet-different fossils that I find compelling. Any way you look at the fossils, they show a general trend of going from simple looking fossils dating back a billion years ago, to complex ones dating back a couple thousand years ago. I see this as evidence for evolution whilst not seeing much reason to dismiss it. I also think macroevolution is compatible with the Bible creation account, so I don't see it as "God vs. evolution". I'm critical of non-evolutionary creationism because it's really nothing but denial of evolution and trying to find holes in the theory. Creation scientists don't often present evidence that is pro-instantaneous creation rather than anti-evolution.

jlay wrote:I could take skulls from existing apes and humans, and I could arrange a tree of life, and make something appear that actually isn't there, just by simply connecting lines. Either you will hold the 'tree of life' to the scientific standard, or you will trust it on faith.

Well, when charting out the tree biologists do more than just plot a bunch of fossils on paper and draw connecting lines. They consider where the fossils were found in relation to each other, what time period carbon dating shows them to be from, etc. You could make your own graph, but whether it would stand up under scrutiny as well as one of the "scientifically official" ones is a different matter.

Well, when charting out the tree biologists do more than just plot a bunch of fossils on paper and draw connecting lines. They consider where the fossils were found in relation to each other, what time period carbon dating shows them to be from, etc. You could make your own graph, but whether it would stand up under scrutiny as well as one of the "scientifically official" ones is a different matter.

really? Are you certain. Ever heard of a Bonobo? they currently live in an area very close to where Lucy was found. They share similar knee joints to lucy that allow them to stand erect. Yet Lucy was lauded as an ancient ancetsor and an evolutionary link. Again, maybe you should stop putting so much faith in what you think about evolutionary biology and forensics.

Any way you look at the fossils, they show a general trend of going from simple looking fossils dating back a billion years ago, to complex ones dating back a couple thousand years ago.

Uhh, there are comnplex fossils dating back billions of years.

And to answer your question, let me ask you a question.
Why did god not just make a flat earth in a dome with nothing else in the universe? Since that is not the case, from your reasoning Jesus did not rise from the dead.

Murray, don't think I need to dignify that lunacy with an answer.

Jlay, did you realize there is a book about a half human half bonobo names lucy?

Kind of makes it hard to read up on lucy being a bonobo when all you get for search results are books