Evidence for God from Science

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:56 am**

And the rock band The Beatles proves that macro evolution is not possible.

You say all of what you claim is proved through some study....evidence?

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:22 am**

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:And the rock band The Beatles proves that macro evolution is not possible.

You say all of what you claim is proved through some study....evidence?

Yes it can be deducted by compiling the data from numerous genetic and morphological studies. The data is there for you to dispute. Alternative interpretations and criticism is requested before a study can be published.

http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id ... khq559pfqj
http://www.csa.com/partners/viewrecord. ... cid=826736
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi- ... 4/ABSTRACT
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/link ... 8nklp35mft

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:55 pm**

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
Jbuza wrote:As one can plainly see evolution has become the great I AM for some people. Foundations laid long before Darwin made all those appolications possible, and they woulkd be possible without him or the theory of evolution.

Punk upstarts think they own science now.
The great I AM? You claim to have all the answers. Perhaps you are God?

One thing I don't understand is that at one moment you espouse the idea of a scientific forum where all ideas should be considered.

Than the next moment you tear down and dismiss opposing points of view?

Rather than an open sharing of ideas I get the feeling that you only want to destroy ideas which are contrary to your own worldview.

I make no claims such as these:

Using this model we have been able to.
Make major contributions to the pharmaceutical industry
Make major contributions to the biochemical industry
Decipher the genetic code.
Complete genomes for many organisms including humans
Predict species distribution
Help analyse damages caused by intrusive species
Explain recessive disorders
Explain disease outbreaks
Predict patterns of disease and recessive traits.
Explain origins of novel proteins and unique species.

I certianly don't pretend that I have all the answers.

But it appears from the above that you feel that all advances we have made are a result of evolution. Sorry, I don't mean to supress your ideas, and didn't know that I did. I was just trying to point out that other views and theories have contributed inavluably to those areas of investigation.

It's just that I feel you are trying to grant credit to evolution for discoveries that it wasn't entirely responsible for.

If you would like to illustrate how evolution is resposible for the above I will listen patiently and offer what constructive criticism I can and offer how other views can also explain those things if you would like.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:13 pm**

Jbuza wrote:
BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
Jbuza wrote:As one can plainly see evolution has become the great I AM for some people. Foundations laid long before Darwin made all those appolications possible, and they woulkd be possible without him or the theory of evolution.

Punk upstarts think they own science now.
The great I AM? You claim to have all the answers. Perhaps you are God?

One thing I don't understand is that at one moment you espouse the idea of a scientific forum where all ideas should be considered.

Than the next moment you tear down and dismiss opposing points of view?

Rather than an open sharing of ideas I get the feeling that you only want to destroy ideas which are contrary to your own worldview.
I make no claims such as these:

Using this model we have been able to.
Make major contributions to the pharmaceutical industry
Make major contributions to the biochemical industry
Decipher the genetic code.
Complete genomes for many organisms including humans
Predict species distribution
Help analyse damages caused by intrusive species
Explain recessive disorders
Explain disease outbreaks
Predict patterns of disease and recessive traits.
Explain origins of novel proteins and unique species.

I certianly don't pretend that I have all the answers. But it appears from the above that you feel that all advances we have made are a result of evolution. Sorry, I don't mean to supress your ideas, and didn't know that I did. I was just trying to point out that other views and theories have contributed inavluably to those areas of investigation.

All advances? You interpreted that due to your defensive stance. I never stated this. And as for you trying to point out other views and theories, remember you posted.

Jbuza wrote:Punk upstarts think they own science now.

Making contributions is not the same as sole responsibility.
Where was I giving responsibility where it was unwarranted?

Don't forget my post was in responce to

Felgar wrote:Even models that DO predict reality and have substantial experimental support (such as early geo-centric models of the solar system) can still be found completely incorrect. Evolution doesn't even have what those geocentric models had.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:54 pm**

Sorry. I guess I have reaction formation to being told that Creation is not Science, so I try to put down evolution as not science either. I know it isn't productive, Sorry.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:31 pm**

Jbuza wrote:Sorry. I guess I have reaction formation to being told that Creation is not Science, so I try to put down evolution as not science either. I know it isn't productive, Sorry.

It's ok, I am being too harsh, I am sorry too.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:35 pm**

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
Jbuza wrote:Sorry. I guess I have reaction formation to being told that Creation is not Science, so I try to put down evolution as not science either. I know it isn't productive, Sorry.
It's ok, I am being too harsh, I am sorry too.

Can you just feel the love? LOL!

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:36 pm**

If God is omnipotent, God can create through evolution

Yes he can, but he didn't. Just because he's able to doesn't mean he did. Besides, it makes it very clear in Genesis 1 that God created everything.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:36 pm**

BARockStar, all I get is abstracts from those articles.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:42 pm**

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:BARockStar, all I get is abstracts from those articles.

Yes, you'll need to go to a library to get the full articles. Try you're University library.

This is all besides the point though as the topic is can god create through evolution and I have no opinion on this matter.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:43 pm**

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:BARockStar, all I get is abstracts from those articles.
Yes, you'll need to go to a library to get the full articles. Try you're University library.

Our behaviour is a result of our given bodies.

I blame my laziness on my legs...K?

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:45 pm**

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:BARockStar, all I get is abstracts from those articles.

I tried one: went to lower right side and chose paper as PDF - do you see this option ?
It looks like this for me:

Full Text Available
The full text of this article is available. You may view the article as (a):
PDF
The size of this document is 118 kilobytes. Although it may be a lengthier download, this is the most authoritative online format.
Open: Entire document
One page at a time

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:47 pm**

BGood, you wanted me to actually work? When all I needed to do was click a button

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:50 pm**

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:BGood, you wanted me to actually work? When all I needed to do was click a button

heh sorry.
How dare I.

Posted: **Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:50 pm**

Oh goody, building the possible evolution of mammals using protein sequence...that's all fine and dandy...but different proteins give different results...bad assumption behind it I say.