Hey REM, sorry for the delay. Let's pick it back up shall we?
>>Irrational people believe in lots of things without evidence, such as UFO's from outer space,
So 80% of people on the earth are irrational becasue they believe in God? You evolution guys are all the same. If someone does not agree with the theory and I say THEORY of evolution, then they are ignorant, irrational, uneducated, etc. I am not surprised you say this REM, it seems to be the norm with the 'pride of science'.
>If god is all-powerful then he knows what evidence I would be willing to accept; and if he were all loving and truly wanted me to know him, then he would provide it.
Your logic here is flawed REM. If God is all powerful, should He come down and appear to you just because you doubt Him? Does that sound like an all powerful God to you? One that runs whenever a skeptic snaps his fingers? The God of the universe does not need to prove himself to you REM. If you reject the evidence of life itself then there is not much else God can do for you. Imagine the creator of the sun, rushing down to meet your request. Seems a bit silly don't you think? And another thing, in a previous email you mentioned that if God moved a mountain you would believe. I was thinking about that and I realized, no you wouldnt. The humanistic/evolutionary community would have a myriad of reasons why the mountain was moved and none of them would involve God and you would probably be convinced.
>>[referring to billions of years] It's difficult to imagine, but you have to step outside your current frame of reference to understand it. In that timescale, things unimaginable to you are capable of happening.
And this is where faith comes in. This is what you are putting your trust in. I am so glad you mentioned this.
>>Life could have come from nonlife by purely naturalistic means, even though we have not found the mechanism yet
No it couldnt have. It is impossible. I am sure you are aware that anything beyond 10 to the 50th power is considered absurd in almost any scientific circle. It goes beyond any form of probability. Non life becoming life is somewhere in the realm of 10 to the 40,000th power. Would you really put your trust in that? Also, enough about saying there is no evidence for God. You cannot put everything in a test tube to prove if it is real. I am sure you love your family but according to the scientific method, it would be impossible to prove, hence it is not true. Complex design and intricate detail always comes from intelligence.Never from disorder.
>>Interesting that you can believe in micro-evolution and hold this thought at the same time. Cognitive dissonance, anyone? Natural Selection doesn't work in a vacuum. It works with mutations - those are the real creators. Natural Selection picks the most fit mutations. Pretty simple, really.
REM, you are commiting the fallcy called equivication. You say that natural selection is blind, yet in the same breath you claim it picks those fit for survival. You may just be using descriptive language, but you do realize that natural selection picks absolutely nothing right? The ones most apt for survival will survive, but only if the mutation can make it better than the other species. Also, since most mutations are not beneficial, then you would have to start the process all over again.I mean I am no mathemetician, but if only 1 out of 100 mutations are beneficial, then 99% of the mutations would actually harm the gene pool and not help it. Follow me? Since we are on the topic of mutations, how about sharing with me some beneficial mutations that we find. How about a list of , oh, let's say 10. Give me 10 examples of mutations that are beneficial. Ones that are not diseases, cancers, etc. (since you believe that mutations are responsible for complex systems such as the visual and auditory, this should be quite a list. Also, if you don't answer any of my post, please answer this part)
>>If there were an intelligent designer with foresight you'd expect to find perfectly capable species that have survived until this day.
That makes little sense.
>This is where it gets really funny. Do you realize that every time someone has tried to say a particular structure is irreducibly complex, we have found that it really was not?
Can you give me an example?
>>The funny thing is that the jokers you get this 'irreducibly complex' information from BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION. The people you are trying to use as ammo against Evolution don't agree with you! I'm talking about Behe, one of the loudest proclaimers of this theory. Also Dimbski, an Evolutionist, has done some work on this. Doesn't it make you feel silly that you are trying to argue against Evolution by supporting the theories of Evolutionists? lol
I am aware of Behe's belief's. Don't you find it strange though, that these men who believe in evolution are basically saying "Hey guys, there's no way this could have come together piece by piece'. There has to be another explanation. Also, I noticed you called them 'jokers'. Do you notice the pride that you exhume? Think about it REM, whenever someone doesnt agree with you, they are fools. And you accuse me of circular reasoning.**sheesh**
>>Many have said that evidence can only take you so far, but if you have faith, you will find god. This is basically saying you have to have faith (belief without evidence) before you can believe. I don’t find that approach intellectually satisfying myself.
The funny thing is that you already prescribe to this. And you cant even see it. All the information you have about evolution you get from men who have 'studied it'. You put your faith in them and also the idea that someday the missing pieces might fall in together. You are a man of faith.
Out of time....... If I missed anything, bring it to my attention and I will go over it later. Have a great one.
Penn
P.S. I spoke with Santa Claus and he said to tell you to quit misspelling his name. :)
