(July 4, 2013 at 1:17 pm)Godschild Wrote: In all that I did not see where you said one specie changes into a different one, the flu virus adapted to a vaccine, yet it is still a flu virus. domesticated dogs came from wolves yet both are still canines. Natural selection is obvious, it's there so a specie can survive in it's environment, it doesn't need to change into another specie it only needs to adapt to it's changing environment.

You do understand that this is all evolution entails, don't you? Inherent genetic variation in a species giving rise to new traits? And that those traits would add up over time, building and building? And that over a timescale of millions of years those gradual changes would eventually add up to a creature so different from its initial base that we cannot honestly call it the same species?

See, you keep doing this: no matter how many times you're corrected, you keep arguing that evolution is a magic change over one generation from one species to another, and it's not. You've been told this numerous times in this thread, and you continue with the same old bullshit. Why? Because you're a liar who can't argue with what evolution actually is, and thus must resort to pathetic equivocations and strawmen.

In essence, business as usual for the godschild.

(July 4, 2013 at 1:17 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(July 4, 2013 at 6:40 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: If you can walk a block, you can walk across the country given enough time.

In all that I did not see where you said one specie changes into a different one, the flu virus adapted to a vaccine, yet it is still a flu virus. domesticated dogs came from wolves yet both are still canines. Natural selection is obvious, it's there so a specie can survive in it's environment, it doesn't need to change into another specie it only needs to adapt to it's changing environment.

I suggest you re-read the sentence I left in the post you responded to.

Speciation is simply a matter of enough changes where a threshold is reached.

Quote:You do understand that this is all evolution entails, don't you?

Dangerous to make any assumption about what G-C understands about evolution. He's a man who literally thinks his fucking god played in the dirt and here he is!

The problem with evolution is that it cannot be "dumbed down" enough to compete with the god-playing-in-the-dirt image.

(June 27, 2013 at 5:53 pm)Godschild Wrote:

---

Post like the four above this one is what derails an OP, people parroting the same ol' tired things, why can't you go to scripture and try to disprove what Christians believe. You expect us to go to science to disprove what you believe about evolution, are we asking anything differently than you are, NO we are not. Many atheist have said to me in the last few days they read and study scripture, if that is so then prove it in conversations you have with Christians.

---

Texas Wrote:I don't think anyone is attempting to "disprove" what Christians believe.

Do you read the other posts?

Texas Wrote:I don't know that such a thing is possible. Christian beliefs don't seem vulnerable to being empirically disproved, nor do they have any potential of being confirmed by any human faculty.

You're correct, the spiritual can not be disproved by the physical, I've never worried about such a thing, and I do not try to prove God in any direct way. If one wants to confirm the spiritual they'll have to rely on the spiritual, I've never proposed any other way.

Texas Wrote:Since this appears to be the situation that Christianity finds itself in, it is inevitable to expect others to simpy point out the absurdities that accompany such beliefs.

What absurdities, the things you deem that way, why should your opinion dictate what is absurd in scriptures, does my opinion hold less value than your's?

Texas Wrote:If I worshiped the Sun, you couldn't prove the claims I make about it wrong, but you would probably find it quite easy to throw out little quips that would draw attention to what you think to be foolish. You can believe whatever you want! I also don't know if asking people to refer to your bible for valid objections is at all a reasonable request. Anymore than I could expect you to refer to my magic sunglasses that allow me to see the Sun's omnipotent state.

Well I do think that science would say the sun would not be omnipotent, seeing how it is in a stationary position and can't effect most of the universe. Science has determined it has a limited life.

Texas Wrote:From a naturalistic standpoint, it seems quite ridiculous to me that you think the bible to be on equal footing with empirical claims of the observable. The observable and confirmable are there to be seen and do not make pretend to be answers for anything that cannot be confirmed.

I do not believe the Bible to be on equal footing with empirical claims of the observable, the Bible is far superior to anything else, it leads to life eternal and no empirical claim of the observable does that.
The Bible is serious about the observable and spiritual, to pretend with God is risky business.

Texas Wrote:You believe God to be the answer for the things that science has not yet proved. Why exactly should anyone who rejects your theories to fill gaps of ignorance with God be expected to do anything at all to help you prove what you have not been able to prove with your own claims?

I do not expect God to give me, you or anyone else answers to the unknown sciences. I'm interested in His revelation of Himself to me in our relationship. Then I can share my knowledge of Him with others.
I do not expect anyone to help me prove God and why would I, I already know He is real. I can't prove Him to you or anyone else, I do not try to explain science through God.

Texas Wrote:That seems quite unreasonable. We reject your Bible as a circular support for your God. If you think that there is merit to your God or your Bible you must establish truth in one or the other before you can expect anyone else to acknowledge them as credible sources of truth.

The scriptures never try and prove God, so how can you say you can see that the Bible tries to. Just because you reject the Bible that's suppose to make it false, a bit uppity on your part wouldn't you say.
Try this for truth God promised to restore the nation of Israel where it once stood when Rome destroyed it. The nation of Israel is the only nation restored to it's original place after 2000 yrs. no other nation has come back after that amount of time, this is Biblical prophecy. Just a bit of truth from scripture.

Texas Wrote:My question to you is quite simple:
How do you know that anything the bible says about things not yet proved by science, are true?

I'm asking you a direct question. Before you can expect me to open your book and even read a sentence of it, you will need to provide a good answer to this question with a solid logical foundation.

Who are you to demand an answer from me, frankly I couldn't care less if you never responded to any of my post, your uppityness is showing up again.
Here's your answer do with it as you wish. I do not use the Bible for science, I use what I consider viable science and evolution is not it, there are scientist who do not believe in a God who do not believe evolution is the answer, very respected scientist at that. The Bible is a spiritual book about life with God and since there is no other about the God of Christians it's the only book you can use in an argument. I do not use the Bible in scientific argument, I do state I'm a creationist.

(July 4, 2013 at 8:39 pm)Godschild Wrote: there are scientist who do not believe in a God who do not believe evolution is the answer.

Name one.

(July 4, 2013 at 3:27 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(July 4, 2013 at 1:17 pm)Godschild Wrote: In all that I did not see where you said one specie changes into a different one, the flu virus adapted to a vaccine, yet it is still a flu virus. domesticated dogs came from wolves yet both are still canines. Natural selection is obvious, it's there so a specie can survive in it's environment, it doesn't need to change into another specie it only needs to adapt to it's changing environment.

I suggest you re-read the sentence I left in the post you responded to.

Speciation is simply a matter of enough changes where a threshold is reached.

But not crossed.

Yeah that's how it works. You reach the finish line but that's not crossing it.

(July 4, 2013 at 8:43 pm)Godschild Wrote: But not crossed.

As the wavelength of visible light gets longer, it goes from violet to red. Look at the spectrum below and indicate the precise point at which light stops being violet and starts being red.

(July 4, 2013 at 8:43 pm)Godschild Wrote: But not crossed.

What do you imagine stops it?

(July 4, 2013 at 9:11 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(July 4, 2013 at 8:43 pm)Godschild Wrote: But not crossed.

What do you imagine stops it?

God's design, how His design works is beyond all of us, if it wasn't we would not be arguing about this.