Re: Well Well Well.... Lookie at what we have here.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:22:05 -0600, "\(M\)-adman" <grat@xxxxxxxxxx>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:

Robert Carnegie wrote:
On Nov 14, 3:21 am, "\(M\)-adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ray Martinez wrote:
On Nov 13, 5:33 pm, "Uriel" <ur...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ray Martinez wrote:
On Nov 13, 5:07 pm, "Uriel" <ur...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ray Martinez wrote:
On Nov 13, 3:33 pm, "Uriel" <ur...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ray Martinez wrote:
On Nov 13, 5:44 am, "\(M\)-adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ray Martinez wrote:
On Nov 12, 1:06 pm, "\(M\)-adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John Harshman wrote:
Ray Martinez wrote:
On Nov 10, 11:20 pm, "\(M\)-adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Reposted from ATC:

THE scientist who led the team that cracked the human
genome is to publish a book explaining why he now
believes in the existence of God and is convinced that
miracles are real.

Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human
Genome Research Institute, claims there is a rational
basis for a creator and that scientific discoveries
bring man "closer to God".

His book, The Language of God, to be published in
September, will reopen the age-old debate about the
relationship between science and faith. "One of the
great tragedies of our time is this impression that has
been created that science and religion have to be at
war," said Collins, 56.

"I don't see that as necessary at all and I think it is
deeply disappointing that the shrill voices that occupy
the extremes of this spectrum have dominated the
stage for the past 20 years."

For Collins, unravelling the human genome did not
create a conflict in his mind. Instead, it allowed him
to "glimpse at the workings of God".

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article673663.ece

Collins, who is obviously a well qualified scientist,
must know something that the
arm-chair-atheist-scientists don't.

Read the link, mkay?

Don't be naive: Collins is going to craft an argument by
using Biblical and ID terminology, asserting the same to
be "effects" produced by evolution.

I predict that it's going to be an ordinary "God created
by evolution" argument attempting to con believers into
accepting Atheism ideology (= evolution).

Evidence of my prediction (taken from above):

"I don't see that as necessary at all and I think it is
deeply disappointing that the shrill voices that occupy
the extremes of this spectrum have dominated the stage
for the past 20 years."

Your prediction is of course correct. He explicitly says
that god used evolution to create the diversity of life.
But do you really think that Collins is an atheist? That
would require him to maintain a lifelong deception. Are
you that paranoid?

Ray's over all premise is correct. Atheism has hijacked
evolution and uses it as a religion. Some of them even
attempt to use the bible as proof of evolution. How does
the well meaning, mankind serving scientists square with
that?

Adman: Atheism did not hijack evolution. Rather, evolution
is Atheism ideology since it presupposes God absent from
nature----that is why species must have evolved (=
horizontal-natural causation)----no God exists to have
created them (= vertical-supernatural causation). You
misread my message.

Here is what you do not understand----genuinely:

If God is involved with species production this is called
Creationism (= Divine-supernatural causation).

If God is not involved with species production this is
called Darwinian evolution (= natural-material causation).

By accepting "microevolution" you are declaring yourself
ignorant concerning the fundamental distinction between
Creationism and Evolutionism since 1859. Species are
immutable because natural- material causation does not
exist. It only exists in the minds of evolutionists.
Variation is designed change, not evolutionary because,
like I said, [unguided] natural-material causation does not
exist in nature. This is why evolution is Atheism ideology,
that is, the IDEA that Divine or supernatural causation
does not exist, meaning Creationism is false. This is why
all Atheists fanatically defend evolution. So called
Christian evolutionists are ignorant or deceived----like
Judas since the defense of evolution by Atheists **tells us
what it really is.** Atheists would never defend Darwinism
to the degree they do if the same in any way, shape or
form, supported Theism or the Bible.

Charles Darwin became an Atheist the moment he concluded for
mutability in the years 1837-1838. This is an easily
provable historical fact. He spent his life in the closet
because Atheism was disreputable in Victorian England and
illegal to propagate. This is why he ended the "Origin"
deistically----to avoid a possible blasphemy charge and
trial. There were *about* 200 blasphemy trials in England
during his lifetime. Didn't know any of these facts? They
have been suppressed by dishonest evolution historians.
Luckily, there are honest evolution historians. All of these
facts, in their abundance, will appear in my forth coming
paper.

Ray

Ray, it is clear that evolution happens within the same
"kind". Just as the bible says "each after his own kind". It
is highly unlikely there was divine intervention for the
existence of the dog. The dog is just a new subset of the
"kind" that originated with the wolf. So Christians would be
foolish to claim evolution (in a more simpler form then
currently defined) does not happen at all.

Evolution, since Darwin, was accepted as being caused by
unguided material causation. UMC says Divine causation is
non-existent in reality. The observation of design that we
both see in every organism and nature as a whole corresponds
directly to Divine causation or ID.

You do not understand. This is the second time and I have had
to repeat myself.

Ray

Ray. I guess it is called micro-evolution from reading these
boards for the last few months..Well.. micro-evolution seems to
take place. Dogs are the quintacential example that evolution
happens on a smaller scale.

Get over it.

Microevolution was accepted as occurring by unguided material
causation (natural selection). The same presupposes Divine
causation to be non-existent in reality. This presupposition is
falsified by the observation of design and organized complexity
seen in every aspect of nature. Small scale change and variation
is designed, produced by mechanisms that reflect Divine power.

Since you accept change all you now need to do is accept the
correct agency of causation and terminology that reflects the
truth.

Ray

There is no argument from me that God is behind micro-evolution.
He gave us an immune system for survival, likewise, he gave us
evolution within the "kind" to insure that the "kind" continues
to survive and that the life cycle remains intact. Micro
evolution happens to insure that the life cycle continues
regardless of the earths conditions.

The side effect is man has discovered how to monkey (no pun
intended) around with the conditions.

IOW, Should the earth's conditions change dramatically, then man
(and others) that are able to adapt quick enough will survive via
microevolution.

If there is anything in the fossil record that proves evolution,
it is the fact that the creatures that could not evolve fast
enough died out while leaving the ones that responded to
microevolution quickly enough alive. The rest that died out
could be mutations that would have died out on their own
anyway.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One huge non-sequitur.

Ray

You are looking more and more like a k00k to me.

One of those people with extreme views that has dominated the stage
for more then 20 years as Collins described.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Since you believe Darwin and not Moses I am relieved. The approval
of your kind would make me a kook----glad I didn't get it.

Ray

I believe the bible as well as Moses. And because i believe in both
is why you may be a k00k.

Moses gave us many laws. Did he give us a law that said two animals
of the same kind could not breed together to get a third animal of
the same kind? umm.. No.

In fact, the bible shows quite the opposite. Jacob used selective
breeding to aquire the necessary goats to break free from Laban.

And you still have not answered how did poodles got on this planet

Jacob's experiment looks more like Lamarckism /or/ magic - he bred
animals in a striped pen and they came out striped, or something like
that. It doesn't count as magic or necessarily reproducible because
he goes on to say (and I wonder if this is a later addition to the
story for this reason), God told him to do this and he'd get striped
animals and so on.

So it's a miracle, and a scientific explanation is not necessary, but
I expect we could make up something superficially plausible! At the
same time I am in great doubt that "Jacob" represents a real person at
all. Who's writing this story down? Traditionally Moses, but that
was supposedly hundreds of years later.

Then you should not believe that your great-times-10 grandfather existed
either.

He must have, I'm here to prove it.

The hebrews were more accurate then most about keeping family
records. They lived as smaller tribes and each tribe knew it's family tree.
There should be no doubt that Jacob is real.

A character in a bronze age fairy story.


All Jacob was doing was selective breeding to get the specific colors he
wanted from the strongest animals. There was no mumbo-jumbo about it. Some
think the striped sticks he used had some supernatural effect. When what was
actually happening is the sticks were attracting the specific color animal
he wanted to the various water troughs. The animals were not caged, they
were free to roam and be herded. The weaker ones (even though they were of
the right color were sent off to Laban's herd that was seperated). The ones
with color patterns he did not want went to Laban's herd. Jacob therefore
used selective breeding to get the specific colors he wanted with the
highest physical attributes. He simply used sticks with specific stripe
patterns to attract specific goats.

And just how do you think that worked?

Now, at the end of this long process (that probably took more him a year or
two to get the right breeding results) people looked at Jacob's flocks and
looked at Labin's flocks and saw a dramatic difference in color, size and
strength. Back then that would amaze most people and they would think the
event was supernatural and blame God for the noticeable differences in the
two herds. Jacob was just smart and had noticed different animals breeding
together gave different results. However, I am sure that Jacob being ahead
of his time could be considered an ability from God. He was of the chosen
family after all.

Evolution can happen. But evolution is not responsible for fish giving rise
to land creatures giving rise to what you see every morning in the mirror

Your divorce from reality is noted.


--
Bob.

.

Relevant Pages