During...er....conversations with Ryan Anderson he, being an apostate atheist, doesn't like the ministry
Answers in Genesis but he did mention that they had an interesting article about
arguments that should not be used to oppose evolution and support creationism. I agree. Shocking! The article is really a series. I provided a link below to a list of those articles. The funny thing is I'm not sure why he brought it up considering that I didn't make any of these arguments with him or anyone to support that
God created us and that we did not evolve from lower lifeforms.Of course these arguments are very bad should be avoided like the plague.
Get Answers - Answers in Genesis
I brought it up because you were using very bad, plague like arguments that no one should use.
ReplyDeleteIt was not to say AiG had already addressed your arguments.
I disagree. I would define a bad argument as one that can be explained and reconciled and does not support the premises at all. You know? Like Yours. The bottom line is that your explanation for why we can trace all of us back to one woman rests on premises and conclusions that you can't prove. Classic definition of a bad argument.
ReplyDeleteThere are lots of "theories" that improve your lifestyle and that you take for granted (like Quantum Mechanics) that have have premises you cannot "prove". It's a matter of how well the available evidence fits the model.
ReplyDeleteI've studied quantum mechanics at Berkeley. Ive actually seen it's principles in a laboratory. I've actually done much of the math for myself. I'm far more convinced on Quantum Mechanics than I am on evolution.
ReplyDeleteSo you are saying you've also studied genetics at Berkeley and seen the principles in the laboratory?
ReplyDeleteI think you chose not to believe evolution is a valid model because it doesn't work with your aspirations in your church. Do your elders have an opinion on QM? Probably not, but I'm sure they do on evolution.
I'm not saying that I've studied genetics or evolution at Berkeley. Notice how you bring up genetics when I was talking about evolution? Genetics can be studied in the laboratory. Macro evolution - watching a population of species evolve from one form of life to another - is not. My elders in my church have many skills and knowledge. Science is one of mine. It's less than honest to assert that we have just as much proof for common ancestry for every living thing as we do for genetics or quantum mechanics. I'm confident that I know more about both than you do.
ReplyDeleteI think your confidence is misplaced, especially since you don't think there's genetic evidence for evolution.
ReplyDeleteWhat I don't understand is that you (I think) already believe in an old earth/universe. Macro-evolution, besides being a non-sense term, is simply micro-evolution (another non-sense term) plus long ages.
And what I was saying about your elders is that you are free to believe the truth about QM or any other number of fields because they don't care about those fields. But I bet they all hold strong opinions on evolution.
ReplyDeletefirst, there is genetic evidence for adaptation and change...not for common ancestry for Roses and people. Macro evolution is a term that is not nonsense. It's used in the field. Read a few books. I do believe the universe is more than 6000 years old because of evidence and the Bible does not conflict with this. We can't use the Bible to establish the age of the earth. And my elders are not attempting to keep/control anyone. They follow the evidence like I do. And unlike you.
ReplyDelete