I have an Idea for a new Christian Branch.

chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
James Shepard said:
And as a scientist, I do not believe science is wrong.
Click to expand...

you are talking about nature
and
should see how nature is perfect
science is just our limited understanding of it

man is not perfect
man has free will
this is all about testing and perfecting that free will
 
W

Wick Stick

Well-known member
Science isn't "what we understand." Science is a systematic approach to problem-solving.

It's not what we got. It's how we get it.
 
George Affleck

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
alwight said:
The point here James is that it won't matter how rigorous, well evidenced and factual scientific conclusions may be, a literal interpretation of Genesis is all that matters to fundamentalists...
Click to expand...

You will have to also admit then that "it won't matter how rigorous, well evidenced and factual" information is that supports the Bible, "a literal interpretation of Genesis" is, for long agers, out of the question.
 
G

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
James Shepard said:
Wow, I am an oncologist. I actually save people and try to keep them with their families and not causing them pain. I try my best but I do fail sometimes and it is very sad when I fail as i can never detach myself from the patients so I always feel hurt. What do you do? DO you actually do anything?
Click to expand...

How do we KNOW what you do for a living? I could say I'm a brilliant
neurosurgeon or a millionaire entrepreneur. People can be anything or
anyone they choose to be on the Internet.
 
glorydaz

glorydaz

Well-known member
James Shepard said:
Actually you are not far off. They are dated by the layer in which they are found and carbon dating as well as we know for an undisputed fact how long it takes carbon to decay.
Click to expand...

You're simply in the wrong thread. Instead of trying to start a new branch of religion, go over to the threads where this stuff is being explained. Listen to Stripe and 6days for instance. They know a heck of a lot more than you seem to.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Grosnick Marowbe said:
How do we KNOW what you do for a living? I could say I'm a brilliant
neurosurgeon or a millionaire entrepreneur. People can be anything or
anyone they choose to be on the Internet.
Click to expand...
on-the-internet-nobody-knows-youre-a-dog-meme.jpg
 
alwight

alwight

New member
George Affleck said:
You will have to also admit then that "it won't matter how rigorous, well evidenced and factual" information is that supports the Bible, "a literal interpretation of Genesis" is, for long agers, out of the question.
Click to expand...
I'd be very happy to consider any rigorous, well evidenced and factual information that tended to indicate a literal interpretation of Genesis. But I'm not sure how I could have missed it all my life.:liberals:
 
George Affleck

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
alwight said:
I'd be very happy to consider any rigorous, well evidenced and factual information that tended to indicate a literal interpretation of Genesis. But I'm not sure how I could have missed it all my life.:liberals:
Click to expand...

Came across this the other day.
I thought it was interesting.
let me know what you think.

Genetic Entropy

There doesn't seem to be a proper intro to it, but it gets better.
 
alwight

alwight

New member
George Affleck said:
Came across this the other day.
I thought it was interesting.
let me know what you think.

Genetic Entropy

There doesn't seem to be a proper intro to it, but it gets better.
Click to expand...
Interesting,
yes I watched the video and clearly Sanford seems currently at least to be a creationist first and a geneticist second.
I got the impression he wanted to find ways that would confirm his religious belief from his knowledge of genetics.
My own albeit instinctive belief is that natural selection is the real driving force not genetics, which to my mind simply records and implements the changes it doesn't dictate evolution.
A trained geneticist (of plants?) may well have enough detailed knowledge to see real or perhaps unreal problems that I might never understand.
But since I am no geneticist I went to find an alternative view hopefully from someone without an overarching religious agenda. Do geneticist agree that there is such a thing as genetic entropy?


JOHN SANFORD’S GENETIC ENTROPY AND THE MYSTERY OF THE GENOME

The errors in Genetic Entropy [24]are so pervasive that it might take a whole new book to fully expose them [93]. I’ll break it down to the topics listed below:

(1) Kimura’s Distribution of Mutations

(2) Evidence for Beneficial Mutations

(3) Gene Duplication

(4) Natural Selection: What Sanford Claims

(5) Natural Selection: What Studies Show

(6) Evidence for Genomic Deterioration

(7) Synergistic Epistasis and Other Theoretical Considerations

(8) Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of John Sanford


Full text:
https://letterstocreationists.wordpress.com/stan-4/
(Scroll down a bit, I haven't read it all myself btw)

Actually I have often thought myself that there probably isn't the same selective pressures on humans that there once were and that it might be likely that genetically a decline was a possibility. But I don't agree that it is inevitable and that there even is such a thing as an unavoidable genetic entropy. I would hope instead that with better genetic knowledge things may even get better.

I suspect that Sanford is attempting to construct genetic reasoning to justify his religious belief rather than provide accurate evidence.
But I may return to this after some more thought.:think:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top