1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Zogby Poll: Most Americans Want Strengths and Weaknesses of Darwinism Taught In Schoo

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Jul 13, 2009.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 2
  1. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    >If I had never seen a Bible or heard of Jesus Christ, or never been to a science class, anyone with half sense can see this was put together by a Creator. It takes a real idiot to think this just started from nothing and evolved.

    This what?
     
    #21 billwald, Jul 14, 2009
  2. Jedi Knight

    Jedi Knight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,135
    Likes Received:
    117
    Amen Brother:thumbsup:
     
    #22 Jedi Knight, Jul 14, 2009
  3. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    This everything - obviously.
     
    #23 targus, Jul 14, 2009
  4. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This misses the point entirely, and either betrays a colossal ignorance of the binding and gagging of dissent that is regulary imposed in educational and "scientific" circles, or you're complicit in it.

    The point was, the weaknesses of Darwinism in all it's forms should be openly discussed when it is taught.
     
    #24 Aaron, Jul 15, 2009
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Probably should have been "portrays"
     
    #25 Revmitchell, Jul 15, 2009
  6. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    The basic problem is this nonspecific use of the word "Darwinism." We don't call physics "alchamedesism." Medicine is not called "Galenism."

    An east coast power reactor was built using a river water for cooling. The down stream river water was several degrees warmer than the upstream river After 10 years or so some kind of little fish was found living up stream and down stream of the plant. It was discovered that when the cool water fish were transplanted into the warmer water, they died. Apparently the down stream fish evolved into a new breed of fish. This demonstrates the weakness of which hypothesis?
     
    #26 billwald, Jul 15, 2009
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    So a fish "evolved" into a fish? That's not the claim of Darwinism (a term widely recognized in the scientific community as a valid description of evolution), and it's not the way that "evolve" is typically used. "Evolve" has a much more loaded meaning.

    The Bible is fully consistent with fish "evolving" into other kinds of fish. However, Darwinism teaches that fish evolved into other kinds of animals, something completely unproved by science.
     
    #27 Pastor Larry, Jul 15, 2009
  8. Jedi Knight

    Jedi Knight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,135
    Likes Received:
    117
    Totally right and science has "evolved" into theory only because of the lack of facts to back up their theory. Science according to Richard Dawkins is based on facts.....so what has become of real science?
     
    #28 Jedi Knight, Jul 15, 2009
  9. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "Darwinists" such as Richard Lewontin recognize that your example is not relevant to the evolutionary discussion and holds no evidence for it. In his book "What is Creation Science?"Henry Morris quotes Lewontin's article "Adaptation" written in the "Scientific American" book, "Evolution" :

    ".....evolution cannot be described as adaptation because all organisms are already adapted."

    "......adaptation leads to natural selection, natural selection does not necessarily lead to greater adaptation."

    ".......natural selection operates essentially to enable the organism to maintain their state of adaptation rather than to improve it."

    "........natural selection over the long run does not seem to improve a species' chances of survival but simply enables it to track the constantly changing environment."

    The failure of your example is that it does not explain the "origin" of the ability to adapt. Therefore evolution is not supported or proven. Even creationists believe in and hold firmly to this type of adaptation.
     
    #29 Revmitchell, Jul 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 18, 2009
  10. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    7,727
    Likes Received:
    873
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Just one more feeble attempt to "PROVE" that God really didn't know what He was talking about!! ("But not to worry, us moderns have straightened it out for you "literalists"!)

    Sheesh!!!!!!!!!! The arrogance of "man" (some anyway) is astounding.:sleep:
     
    #30 just-want-peace, Jul 18, 2009
  11. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's the best you've got to prove your unbelief? Micro, intra-species "evlolution?"

    Wow. You're just looking for excuses to discount the Bible you already don't believe.
     
    #31 rbell, Jul 18, 2009
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 2
Loading...