Dr Collins, top geneticist, and CHRISTIAN....

[Youwerecreated]

Yeah, so I sashayed over to the religious forum, and sure enough, he's there in the most schizophrenic thread currently going.

I can smell this sort of nut a mile away.

His Ideology blinds him ,and he has nothing but contempt for people like you and i. He is trying to buddy up with all the atheist. God i hope people see through this guy.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yeah, so I sashayed over to the religious forum, and sure enough, he's there in the most schizophrenic thread currently going.

I can smell this sort of nut a mile away.

His Ideology blinds him ,and he has nothing but contempt for people like you and i. He is trying to buddy up with all the atheist. God i hope people see through this guy.

Irony at its finest.


Keep entertaining me .

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yeah, so I sashayed over to the religious forum, and sure enough, he's there in the most schizophrenic thread currently going.

I can smell this sort of nut a mile away.

His Ideology blinds him ,and he has nothing but contempt for people like you and i. He is trying to buddy up with all the atheist. God i hope people see through this guy.

Irony at its finest.


Keep entertaining me .

Thats not true, i love my evolutionist friends or i would not waste my time trying to bring light to their world.

 

[Dr.Drock]

His Ideology blinds him ,and he has nothing but contempt for people like you and i. He is trying to buddy up with all the atheist. God i hope people see through this guy.

Irony at its finest.


Keep entertaining me .

Thats not true, i love my evolutionist friends or i would not waste my time trying to bring light to their world.

You're saying his idealogy blinds him while you're on here telling us T-Rex and lions were herbivores because the Bible says so.

Thus the irony.

 

[Iridescence]

I don't understand why the two (creationism/evolution) cannot be taught in schools with an equal amount of respect. To teach one and not the other steers our children in the direction they will come to think. That is not allowing them 'free thinking' and such as some seem to suggest.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Irony at its finest.


Keep entertaining me .

Thats not true, i love my evolutionist friends or i would not waste my time trying to bring light to their world.

You're saying his idealogy blinds him while you're on here telling us T-Rex and lions were herbivores because the Bible says so.

Thus the irony.

Again, yes a lot of my views are based in scripture. I know of no where in the scriptures where God said the animals are eternal. That he purposely created scavengers and they were not predators praying on the weaker. WE have them in our waters and on land,doing their clean up.

The bible say's also that animal instincts did not happen until after the global flood. But if you saw the debate i posted you would see how those professors from your side left science and didn't even realize they stepped in to the realm of faith. Your theory requires faith why can't you just admit it ?

So if it takes faith to believe in the theory of macro evolution, how is your theory anymore legitimate then mine ?

 

[Dr.Drock]

I don't understand why the two (creationism/evolution) cannot be taught in schools with an equal amount of respect. To teach one and not the other steers our children in the direction they will come to think. That is not allowing them 'free thinking' and such as some seem to suggest.

One is backed by science, one isn't, that's why.



However I take no issue with teaching evolution in a biology class, and teaching creationism in a religion/social studies type class.



So in that realm, both would get an equal amount of attention brought to each subject.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Thats not true, i love my evolutionist friends or i would not waste my time trying to bring light to their world.

You're saying his idealogy blinds him while you're on here telling us T-Rex and lions were herbivores because the Bible says so.

Thus the irony.

Again, yes a lot of my views are based in scripture. I know of no where in the scriptures where God said the animals are eternal. That he purposely created scavengers and they were not predators praying on the weaker. WE have them in our waters and on land,doing their clean up.

The bible say's also that animal instincts did not happen until after the global flood. But if you saw the debate i posted you would see how those professors from your side left science and didn't even realize they stepped in to the realm of faith. Your theory requires faith why can't you just admit it ?

So if it takes faith to believe in the theory of macro evolution, how is your theory anymore legitimate then mine ?

Mine doesn't require faith, it requires an understanding of science.

There are also some things that science is looking into that they don't say they're certain of, evolution isn't one of them, evolution is a fact that's already passed all the necessary questioning and experimentation.

T-Rex and lions being herbivores is an example of blindly following an idealogy with zero science backing it, which for some reason you accused the other poster of doing when you've been doing it constantly.

 

[Woyzeck]

I don't understand why the two (creationism/evolution) cannot be taught in schools with an equal amount of respect. To teach one and not the other steers our children in the direction they will come to think. That is not allowing them 'free thinking' and such as some seem to suggest.

Oh no. The terror. Teaching actual science in a science class. What is the world coming to.

 

[Iridescence]

Creationism is not less science than evolution. I'm really confused as to the thinking of some others posting. If something evolves it is still being created. An example: parents create their children. Children are of both parents and yet they are also of themselves. In a lab where 'evolution' is sped up those that work toward their goals to do so are creationists. Perhaps my ignorance glares too brightly for my words to be considered by 'the more educated ones'.

 

[AllieBaba]

Mathematics, genetics and science provide us wonderful insight into the mind of God. Real science will never contradict the Bible or the existence of a Creator, and never has.

The guys who think it does are zealots in their own right, worshiping any scientific theory as fact just because it's a *scientific theory* and forgetting that when you make assumptions based upon unproven theory, you aren't actually following the science at all.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Creationism is not less science than evolution. I'm really confused as to the thinking of some others posting. If something evolves it is still being created. An example: parents create their children. Children are of both parents and yet they are also of themselves. In a lab where 'evolution' is sped up those that work toward their goals to do so are creationists. Perhaps my ignorance glares too brightly for my words to be considered by 'the more educated ones'.

Yes it is, I repeat, evolution can be proven, creationism cannot be.



Maybe you see creationism to be as much true as evolution, and that's fine, but that doesn't mean it can be backed by science and should thus be left out of a science class.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Mathematics, genetics and science provide us wonderful insight into the mind of God. Real science will never contradict the Bible or the existence of a Creator, and never has.

The guys who think it does are zealots in their own right, worshiping any scientific theory as fact just because it's a *scientific theory* and forgetting that when you make assumptions based upon unproven theory, you aren't actually following the science at all.

Science has contradicted the Bible, many times, but it was never and likely will never contradict the existence of a creator.

Is the SECOND PARAGRAPH of the bible a scientific impossibility? | Outdoor Solar Lights

Genesis1:2,3

2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness.

So basically what it’s saying is that the earth was already "created" before the Sun (our star) was "created" which can’t happen. Obviously you need a star so the planet can stay in orbit in its respective solar system, and without one, it wouldn’t exist anyway, and it would just float around the universe if it did..


Here's one obvious example, more can be provided if you like (which I doubt you will).

 

[Youwerecreated]

I don't understand why the two (creationism/evolution) cannot be taught in schools with an equal amount of respect. To teach one and not the other steers our children in the direction they will come to think. That is not allowing them 'free thinking' and such as some seem to suggest.

One is backed by science, one isn't, that's why.



However I take no issue with teaching evolution in a biology class, and teaching creationism in a religion/social studies type class.



So in that realm, both would get an equal amount of attention brought to each subject.

Dr. You need to watch the whole video and then tell me how your whole theory is supported by science.

There is plenty about your theory that takes a leap of faith to believe.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You're saying his idealogy blinds him while you're on here telling us T-Rex and lions were herbivores because the Bible says so.

Thus the irony.

Again, yes a lot of my views are based in scripture. I know of no where in the scriptures where God said the animals are eternal. That he purposely created scavengers and they were not predators praying on the weaker. WE have them in our waters and on land,doing their clean up.

The bible say's also that animal instincts did not happen until after the global flood. But if you saw the debate i posted you would see how those professors from your side left science and didn't even realize they stepped in to the realm of faith. Your theory requires faith why can't you just admit it ?

So if it takes faith to believe in the theory of macro evolution, how is your theory anymore legitimate then mine ?

Mine doesn't require faith, it requires an understanding of science.

There are also some things that science is looking into that they don't say they're certain of, evolution isn't one of them, evolution is a fact that's already passed all the necessary questioning and experimentation.

T-Rex and lions being herbivores is an example of blindly following an idealogy with zero science backing it, which for some reason you accused the other poster of doing when you've been doing it constantly.

Not true,sorry. I am not afraid to say many of my beliefs are based on faith.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I don't understand why the two (creationism/evolution) cannot be taught in schools with an equal amount of respect. To teach one and not the other steers our children in the direction they will come to think. That is not allowing them 'free thinking' and such as some seem to suggest.

One is backed by science, one isn't, that's why.



However I take no issue with teaching evolution in a biology class, and teaching creationism in a religion/social studies type class.



So in that realm, both would get an equal amount of attention brought to each subject.

Dr. You need to watch the whole video and then tell me how your whole theory is supported by science.

There is plenty about your theory that takes a leap of faith to believe.

No there isn't, any number of basic evolution related google searches will provide you all the proof you need provided by the highest scientific scholars the world has ever known.

It takes as much of a leap of faith to take the theory of evolution seriously as it does the theory of gravity. Both have been equally tested, both have passed to the same degree.

I think it'd be funner to be a theory of gravity denier, then at least I could think I could fly.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Again, yes a lot of my views are based in scripture. I know of no where in the scriptures where God said the animals are eternal. That he purposely created scavengers and they were not predators praying on the weaker. WE have them in our waters and on land,doing their clean up.

The bible say's also that animal instincts did not happen until after the global flood. But if you saw the debate i posted you would see how those professors from your side left science and didn't even realize they stepped in to the realm of faith. Your theory requires faith why can't you just admit it ?

So if it takes faith to believe in the theory of macro evolution, how is your theory anymore legitimate then mine ?

Mine doesn't require faith, it requires an understanding of science.

There are also some things that science is looking into that they don't say they're certain of, evolution isn't one of them, evolution is a fact that's already passed all the necessary questioning and experimentation.

T-Rex and lions being herbivores is an example of blindly following an idealogy with zero science backing it, which for some reason you accused the other poster of doing when you've been doing it constantly.

Not true,sorry. I am not afraid to say many of my beliefs are based on faith.

Exactly, which is why I don't know why you concern yourself with science.

When basic, elementary level science can easily prove T-Rex wasn't a herbivore, and yet you still claim that it likely was despite science, it proves you don't take science seriously when it goes against your Bible.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I don't understand why the two (creationism/evolution) cannot be taught in schools with an equal amount of respect. To teach one and not the other steers our children in the direction they will come to think. That is not allowing them 'free thinking' and such as some seem to suggest.

Oh no. The terror. Teaching actual science in a science class. What is the world coming to.

What about all the faith it takes to believe in such science ?

 

[AllieBaba]

One is backed by science, one isn't, that's why.



However I take no issue with teaching evolution in a biology class, and teaching creationism in a religion/social studies type class.



So in that realm, both would get an equal amount of attention brought to each subject.

Dr. You need to watch the whole video and then tell me how your whole theory is supported by science.

There is plenty about your theory that takes a leap of faith to believe.

No there isn't, any number of basic evolution related google searches will provide you all the proof you need provided by the highest scientific scholars the world has ever known.

It takes as much of a leap of faith to take the theory of evolution seriously as it does the theory of gravity. Both have been equally tested, both have passed to the same degree.

I think it'd be funner to be a theory of gravity denier, then at least I could think I could fly.

Define your terms.

Yes we have seen evolution in species; that is not debatable.

But when it comes to evolution that leads to NEW species, there is absolutely zero evidence for it and we've never seen it. So no, the theory of evolution as an explanation for speciation has not been proven. At all.

And you're lying when you pretend it has.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Creationism is not less science than evolution. I'm really confused as to the thinking of some others posting. If something evolves it is still being created. An example: parents create their children. Children are of both parents and yet they are also of themselves. In a lab where 'evolution' is sped up those that work toward their goals to do so are creationists. Perhaps my ignorance glares too brightly for my words to be considered by 'the more educated ones'.

Oh no, you hit the nail on the head.