What's wrong with evolution?

Originally posted by jaywill
Why did Evolutionists back away from Origin of Life arguments of science?

Probably because they saw it was a loosing battle for Darwinism.

As Francis Crick, Nobel Prize winner for the DNA model said:

[b]"Every time I write a paper on the origin of life, I swear I will never write another one, because there is too much speculation running after two few facts" [/b]

Why did Evolutionists back away from Origin of Life arguments of science?

I assume you've found some new evidence claiming that evolution has been used to try to explain the initial origin of life since you've bought this up again after I pointed out that your link for it said no such thing?

And just to clarify another question recently asked that you seem to have dodged:

Do you believe that God is Omniscient?
Do you believe that God is Omnipresent?
Do you believe that God is Omnipotent?

Just so we can avoid putting words into your mouth or tarring you with an inappropriate brush in future?

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by Penguin
[b]Why did Evolutionists back away from Origin of Life arguments of science?

I assume you've found some new evidence claiming that evolution has been used to try to explain the initial origin of life since you've bought this up again after I pointed out that your link for it said no such thing?

And just to clarify another question recently asked th ...[text shortened]... ng words into your mouth or tarring you with an inappropriate brush in future?

--- Penguin.[/b]

The Theory of Evolution has evolved so much over the past years, that it would not surprise me if it is used to explain the origin of matter and energy in the near future... 😛

Originally posted by Penguin
[b]Why did Evolutionists back away from Origin of Life arguments of science?

I assume you've found some new evidence claiming that evolution has been used to try to explain the initial origin of life since you've bought this up again after I pointed out that your link for it said no such thing?

And just to clarify another question recently asked th ...[text shortened]... ng words into your mouth or tarring you with an inappropriate brush in future?

--- Penguin.[/b]

Not more of this tripe, please. The argument has been hounded back into the cave from which it came; its proponents have either skulked off into the vapors or relied on the same by arguing what the definition of 'is' is.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Here's the thing, even most Christians think you are a complete retard.

Doubtful, Mr. King.

There is only one way one truth and one light.

There is only one way to God, and that is trough Jesus.

Most Christians are on my side.

Thanks for playing...

Originally posted by amannion
McDonalds has a hamburger, so there must be a hamburgler.
Hmmm yes, fascinating stuff.
You creationist/IDers have got this argument from reasoning down pat.

A Beginner?
Yes, God.

Originally posted by dj2becker
The theory of Evolution still does lean on abiogenesis does it not? If abiogenesis falls through the carpet so does the TOE as a proper theory of explaining origins.

Unless of course you just want to use it as a theory to explain the diversity of life.

The Theory of Evolution shows that all known life on earth today descended from single celled life in the past and probably from one single ancestor. It does not explain where those originating cells came from nor does it need to for it to be a viable scientific theory. If I theorise that you were once a young boy, I do not need to know how or where you were born for my hypothesis to be convincing.
There have been hypothesis on the origin of live other than abiogenesis on Earth. For example it has been sugested that life originated on mars or some other planet or a meteorite. Whether life got here by means of abiogenesis or off some alien spaceship does not in any way affect the evidence for or against evolution.

If you want 'a proper theory of explaining origins' then you must first explain what you mean by 'origins'. Abiogenesis can hardly be called 'The Origin' but rather an important step in our history.

Originally posted by dj2becker
The Theory of Evolution has evolved so much over the past years, that it would not surprise me if it is used to explain the origin of matter and energy in the near future... 😛

Many good scientific theories are updated as new information comes in, the details of the TOE no more than many others. The essential features have not changed a jot in 150 years.

I've still not seen any evidence that it has ever been used by evolutionary biologists to try to explain the first origin of life. KJ stopped talking about the claim a while ago when I pointed out that his source for it actually said nothing of the kind. He then bought this subject up again a few posts ago so I was just asking for the new evidence he must have found.

Penguin.

Originally posted by twhitehead
The Theory of Evolution shows that all known life on earth today descended from single celled life in the past and probably from one single ancestor. It does not explain where those originating cells came from nor does it need to for it to be a viable scientific theory. If I theorise that you were once a young boy, I do not need to know how or where you w ...[text shortened]... Abiogenesis can hardly be called 'The Origin' but rather an important step in our history.

The Theory of Evolution shows that all known life on earth today descended from single celled life in the past and probably from one single ancestor.

Depending on how you interpret the evidence that is before you. If you examine the evidence with a presupposition in your mind with regards to what you want the evidence to tell you then you should not be surprised if you see what you want to see in the evidence that is before you.

Originally posted by Penguin
Many good scientific theories are updated as new information comes in, the details of the TOE no more than many others. The essential features have not changed a jot in 150 years.

I've still not seen any evidence that it has ever been used by evolutionary biologists to try to explain the first origin of life. KJ stopped talking about the claim a while ago ...[text shortened]... gain a few posts ago so I was just asking for the new evidence he must have found.

Penguin.

Would you care to explain why the Stanley Miller experiment was hailed as a major development in Evolutionary Science?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Would you care to explain why the Stanley Miller experiment was hailed as a major development in Evolutionary Science?

It was? I thought it was hailed as a major breakthrough in microbiology/chemistry. After all both Miller and Urey were chemists.

Originally posted by telerion
It was? I thought it was hailed as a major breakthrough in microbiology/chemistry. After all both Miller and Urey were chemists.

Ever heard of chemical evolution and the primordial soup?

Originally posted by dj2becker
The theory of Evolution still does lean on abiogenesis does it not? If abiogenesis falls through the carpet so does the TOE as a proper theory of explaining origins.

Unless of course you just want to use it as a theory to explain the diversity of life.

Evolution does not address the origins, it only touches a process.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Evolution does not address the origins, it only touches a process.
Kelly

God, unlike science, does not have a process.

He has a plan for Scott, and Kelly and Ammanion and King and all of you (my apologies for

misspellings).

God breathed Adam into existance...refute that...no, try and do that.

God made the entire expanding universe that you see.

God made every living creature on the planet.

Again, these were accomplished through no scientific process.

God created Darwin too and all of us.

You have to believe in God, and know Jesus as your own personal Savior.

All of the previous evoultion processes, etc. can be refuted by the Bible.

No, you don't believe me

then go to: http://www.answersingenesis.org

Still don't believe me?

Go to http://www.drdino.com

Still wrestling with evolution vs. creation?

Go to http://www.icr.org

I still pray for you guys each and every day.

I know that God etched his Word upon your hearts.

Someday you will find out the TRUTH.

Nosrac

Originally posted by KellyJay
Evolution does not address the origins, it only touches a process.
Kelly

Strange that whenever you speak to an Atheist regarding the matter of origins, they tend to *bring up the TOE...

*No pun intended.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Strange that whenever you speak to an Atheist regarding the matter of origins, they tend to *bring up the TOE...

*No pun intended.

Okay, now that was funny!

But you are correct about that.

What gives with evolutionists vs atheists????

I mean, the Bible says 'Every knee shall bow'

that means ALL of them

I fear for some of them, that's why I pray for all of you guys everyday!