what does creationism explain?.
what does it predict?.
what about blind cave fish with residual eyes.
All I know is, I was not there at the beginning, so anything I could come up with is pure speculation. Nothing more, nothing less.
So when police detectives get to a crime scene all they can come up with from examining all the evidence is pure speculation?
.
if i had to answer this i suppose i would say im not sure which one i believe, i have always wondered why the universe is so huge and always wondered what its role is and how it affects us.. im always fascinated when i look up at the sky and think to myself i feel so small in such a huge universe a sought of cold isolated feeling is what i experience and then i think, i wonder why this planet came to support life after all it was supposedly all happened by chance.. dont get me wrong im no scientist but i think i need more convincing regarding evolution.. can anyone help regarding these questions
hoob:
DNA is like a string of protein recipes. The chain of molecules in a gene [recipe] is used to build a protein.
Think of a cooking recipe. You take certain QUANTITIES of certain INGREDIENTS doing certain MIXING, HEATING, COOLING etc. Mutate any of these aspects (change quantity, change an ingredient, duplicate a step, reverse something) and you are going to get a new result. Accumulate several of these and you most certainly have a new recipe. Mutations to DNA change the resulting proteins in the same way.
EVERYONE: If you haven't already, go and read the link JANH posted on page one of this god forsaken thread. Fascinating stuff.
.
if i had to answer this i suppose i would say im not sure which one i believe, i have always wondered why the universe is so huge and always wondered what its role is and how it affects us.. im always fascinated when i look up at the sky and think to myself i feel so small in such a huge universe a sought of cold isolated feeling is what i experience and then i think, i wonder why this planet came to support life after all it was supposedly all happened by chance.. dont get me wrong im no scientist but i think i need more convincing regarding evolution.. can anyone help regarding these questions
You guys are wasting time posting links for pomegranet -- he has been on here arguing against his evolution-strawman for months - I have seen countless posts directing him to talk-origins or other sites which pom has never read. (Even links just so he can get the proper definitions of what he is arguing against!) I have seen countless questions or rebuttals posed to him which he sidesteps or ignores. This is always the case with creationists. Pom is particularly amusing.. he is almost a charicature of a creationist.
Anyone who really wants to learn about evolution will find their way to the right resources and learn. Type in evolution to google and you'll get 6 months of reading material.
one of jw "beliefs" that was and still is most confusing to me is the condition of married persons after the resurrection.
in particular, if one marriage partner dies before the big a and then gets resurrected.. its surprising how many jw's hold sacred their own private interpretation on this.. generally i found that if the marriage had been a happy one, a lot of jw's believe if the surviving marriage partner does not remarry, then they will end up back with their dead-but-back-again married partner after the resurrection.
in a normal sexual marriage relationship.. if the survivng partner does remarry however, the the old chestnut gets rolled out about people in the resurrection "will neither get married or be given in marriage.
The reason this scripture is even troublesome for the witlesses is that they try to shoehorn it into their (IMHO) erroneous 'two-class' system. If you read the scripture as though it is talking about Christians who are resurrected to heaven, it makes sense.
today was one of the hardest days i've had yet since leaving jw.
i was barely able to work, and i have a knot in my stomach.. i look at the world situation and i feel so hopeless and helpless.
knowing there are millions of people outside of the u.s. that, if you were to put a button in front of them that had a label below it that said "kill every man woman and child in the u.s.a." that they wouldn't even hesitate to press it.. i wonder where it will end.
We are all part of a meta organism called humanity. All of us have a part to play. Some of us got a good part, some of us got a bad part. Some of us got an unimaginably bad part. We all face the same eventuality. Life is full of happiness and pain in varying degrees. We all experience vibrant youth and aging decay; extreme happiness and extreme pain. We watch our parents and friends die, we watch our children embrace the joy of living. Humans love each other, hate each other, help each other, kill each other. The cycle repeats itself infinitely. This is what it means to be human.
.
can you see this pic?
if so, would you date this man?
The inside of his nostril is a little shiny
any of you evolutionists ever crunch the numbers?
Pomegranet you missed the point. I was saying that your definition of Evolution is wrong. You are lumping abiogenesis in with evolution. It should be considered separately. I wasn't asking for a list of authorities to appeal to.
any of you evolutionists ever crunch the numbers?
Estimates are that there there are 100,000,000,000 galaxies in the observable universe, and 100,000,000,000 stars per galaxy. That is 1x10^22 stars. Assuming 1% of stars have planets (there is really no basis for this estimate just chose it randomly), you are still talking about nearly 1x10^20 planets where chemical reactions could take place. All it takes is for a self replicating molecule to appear on one of those. Not to mention that organic molecules have been detected in space, which leads to the possibility reactions can take place in space in certain cases (eg nebular clouds or dust clouds)..
You can't just think about it from the perspective of earth.
POMEGRANITE:
Evolution deals with the start/origin of life from the minutest to the grandest. Which would mean the formation of what would be considered the first species, which would have to be at the molecular level.
Wrong. In your mind this may be true but if you would bother to actually learn about evolution (for example it is clear you did not read the material that expatbrit quoted) you wouldn't make these incorrect statements.
stupid question but why do we age, although scientists think it genetic, is it really why we age.. religion says its due to sin.. evolution says what on this subject.
its strange because many yearn for eternal life and thats probably why so many are attracted to religion.. i suppose it could be us wanting to survive, its still strange though because its such a waste .
im confused.
Read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. If you think about this question from the standpoint of a gene which is trying to propagate itself, it all makes sense.
Briefly:
1. think of human organisms as giant complex machines containing genes, whose purpose is to propagate the existance of those genes.
2. age of reproduction is roughly 16-40.. Genes which contribute to a healthy organism reaching this age and reproducing are selected to continue, and will become widespread in the gene pool.
3. From an evolutionary standpoint, past 40 and there is less benefit, so genes that extend life are not strongly selected. Although there is some benefit to being a grandparent to one's genes (if you are around you can help your grandchildren, who contain 1/4 of your genes), which is probably why our lifespan doesn't end right after the fertility years.
4. Your urge to live forever is simply an expression of the survival instinct. We are genetically programmed to want to live with every fiber of our being, and to do nearly anything to survive. If we weren't that way (say we had a weaker survival gene), we'd be more likely to die, less likely to propagate our genes, hence they would gradually vanish from the gene pool; leaving only 'strong survival' genes.
i was just thinking about all my old witness friends and how many of them have weird bible names.
i mean, who the hell outside of a witness would name their child "ephriam" or "hezekiah" or "elijah"?.
i guess they don't have to worry about being picked on by the kids at school for their names because most witless kids don't go to school anymore, lol.
I wonder if anyone has ever been named Jehovah? Because that would really be funny.
