Chick-fil-a

[cale]

I've looked into evolution, and will continue to do so, but it just doesn't make sense. There are no middle ground species etc etc, and there had to be SOMETHING to start evolution. Ie, I can see the sense in creationist evolution, and I also agree that at the very least, creatures had adapted and evolved to their surroundings, but not the extent of total evolution. But to each his own. I don't think we need to get into things that have nothing to do with the thread topic haha.

Lolol, you've "looked into" evolution eh? I'll be sure to have my friend contact you when he's working on his phd thesis for marine biology in a few years, since you're so informed on the subject.

I've looked into quantum mechanics, it just doesn't make sense. Therefore Einstein and Feynman are wrong.

Not sure if you're serious and genuinely stupid or a troll.

[FunfGan]

Lolol, you've "looked into" evolution eh? I'll be sure to have my friend contact you when he's working on his phd thesis for marine biology in a few years, since you're so informed on the subject.

I've looked into quantum mechanics, it just doesn't make sense. Therefore Einstein and Feynman are wrong.

Not sure if you're serious and genuinely stupid or a troll.

I meant it doesn't add up, as you can see it the other thread. But regardless, I said I'm looking into it. Also, I'm so flattered that you all care so much about the opinions of an 18 your old kid on the internet :D

[cale]

I meant it doesn't add up, as you can see it the other thread. But regardless, I said I'm looking into it. Also, I'm so flattered that you all care so much about the opinions of an 18 your old kid on the internet :D

And your qualifications which give you the ability to make that call are what exactly? Because you've got essentially the entire academic world who actually do falsifiable testing on the subject going against you, the 18 year old kid on the Internet as you put it. Sorry...but I'm siding with the scientists on this one, not the child who's religious views force him to contest the single strongest theory as to the origin of species and their evolution.

Stick to subjects you know and are capable of understanding, you're in over your head.

[markseven]

And your qualifications which give you the ability to make that call are what exactly? Because you've got essentially the entire academic world who actually do falsifiable testing on the subject going against you, the 18 year old kid on the Internet as you put it. Sorry...but I'm siding with the scientists on this one, not the child who's religious views force him to contest the single strongest theory as to the origin of species and their evolution.

Stick to subjects you know and are capable of understanding, you're in over your head.

Looks like someone's butthurt that an 18YO kid (no college yet, I assume) is able to go toe-to-toe with self-proclaimed intellectual. :p

[kronus]

Looks like someone's butthurt that an 18YO kid (no college yet, I assume) is able to go toe-to-toe with self-proclaimed intellectual. :p

I'm not really seeing any toe-to-toe-going here...

[Bimmerguy91]

I like chicken sammichs and waffle fries

[cale]

Looks like someone's butthurt that an 18YO kid (no college yet, I assume) is able to go toe-to-toe with self-proclaimed intellectual. :p

Toe-to-toe huh? It appears as though your concept of toe-to-toe is as equally poor as your own understanding of the science. I remember your stumbling over it in past threads. Best to stay out of this one as well, I don't think you can use adolescence as an excuse like funFgan can.

[FunfGan]

And your qualifications which give you the ability to make that call are what exactly? Because you've got essentially the entire academic world who actually do falsifiable testing on the subject going against you, the 18 year old kid on the Internet as you put it. Sorry...but I'm siding with the scientists on this one, not the child who's religious views force him to contest the single strongest theory as to the origin of species and their evolution.

Stick to subjects you know and are capable of understanding, you're in over your head.

Where do you stand with the many(albeit a small number in the grand scheme of things) Christian Scientists?

Also, Richard Dawkins himself said that there could have very well been a more intelligent being behind the world and it's creation. Though, he finds it more likely that it was Aliens(from where...?) rather than a sole, omnipotent being.

[kronus]

Where do you stand with the many(albeit a small number in the grand scheme of things) Christian Scientists?

They're not real scientists, even if the word's in the name ;)

[markseven]

Toe-to-toe huh? It appears as though your concept of toe-to-toe is as equally poor as your own understanding of the science. I remember your stumbling over it in past threads. Best to stay out of this one as well, I don't think you can use adolescence as an excuse like funFgan can.

Intimidation and belittling... traits of an intellectual?

[FunfGan]

They're not real scientists, even if the word's in the name ;)

Then why/ how have they made advances in "real" science?

One such scientist discovered Buckyballs, another made significant discoveries in several galaxies, yet another the Bethe-Weizsäcker formula. So none of those are "real" discoveries?

[cale]

Where do you stand with the many(albeit a small number in the grand scheme of things) Christian Scientists?

Also, Richard Dawkins himself said that there could have very well been a more intelligent being behind the world and it's creation. Though, he finds it more likely that it was Aliens(from where...?) rather than a sole, omnipotent being.

I have no problem with them, considering many Christian biologists accept evolution as do many leaders in the theist world. If they are able to seperate their religious beliefs from influencing their research (most are) great, although there are large numbers who use their "research" to push their beliefs. Research usually just ignorant misunderstandings of others work. There is very little debate in the academic world to the validity of evolution, that says something.

Ah yes, galactic seeding. Evolution nor myself are going to make claims as to what sparked the first living organism, thats an entirely different science. Evolutions failure to explain that which it never intends to explain in the first place is not proof of if being a failed theory.

[kronus]

Then why/ how have they made advances in "real" science?

One such scientist discovered Buckyballs, another made significant discoveries in several galaxies, yet another the Bethe-Weizsäcker formula. So none of those are "real" discoveries?

oh, you mean this one?

Skeptical of religion most of his life, Dr Smalley became a Christian only in his last years, partly due to his intensive study of intelligent design.

Get back to me when the healing through prayer thing works out.

[FunfGan]

I have no problem with them, considering many Christian biologists accept evolution as do many leaders in the theist world. If they are able to seperate their religious beliefs from influencing their research (most are) great, although there are large numbers who use their "research" to push their beliefs. Research usually just ignorant misunderstandings of others work. There is very little debate in the academic world to the validity of evolution, that says something.

Ah yes, galactic seeding. Evolution nor myself are going to make claims as to what sparked the first living organism, thats an entirely different science. Evolutions failure to explain that which it never intends to explain in the first place is not proof of if being a failed theory.

Ah, do to avoid any misunderstanding/ interpretations, you're simply arguing evolution purely on it's own, as apposed to everything simply being as it was the past however many years, correct? I believe I made the common(and wrong) presumption of grouping evolution with the big bang theory/ whatever you'd like to refer to it as. Therefor, by making that assumption, ruling out the fact that a form of creationism makes sense with evolution.

Am I understanding correctly now?

[kronus]

The word you're looking for is abiogenesis.