Irreducible Complexity: another Nail in Evolution's Coffin

[Sunni Man]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1iCjKWzeEE[/ame]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We were all black in Africa, then in the blink of an eye, as soon as we migrated north of Sicily humans all turned white! the when we migrated to Asia, we turned yellow! and the red in America (Does this make sense to anyone?)

 

[Sunni Man]

We were all black in Africa, then in the blink of an eye, as soon as we migrated north of Sicily humans all turned white! the when we migrated to Asia, we turned yellow! and the red in America (Does this make sense to anyone?)

Adaptation to the environment is not evolution.

 

[eagleseven]

We were all black in Africa, then in the blink of an eye, as soon as we migrated north of Sicily humans all turned white! the when we migrated to Asia, we turned yellow! and the red in America (Does this make sense to anyone?)

God made us different colors so that we would kill and enslave eachother based upon skin pigment for thousands of years.

What a clever God.

(Does this make sense to anyone?)

Ever hear of Vitamin D?

 

[Old Rocks]

With a time period of 4 billion years in which to evolve, incredible complexity is a given.

 

[KissMy]

Old Rocks used to worship this chart. It is nothing more than just a cartoon.

 

[antagon]

irreducible.

 

[konradv]

They said the same thing about the eye, but that's been shown to be false. I'm sure that this process is not irreducible and, if it is, it only proves that God created bacteria, while evolution provided the means to further complexity. None of this happened "suddenly" despite what some may say.

 

[Big Fitz]

Don't expect to change anyone's mind. faith in evolution is just as much a religious belief as faith in intelligent creation.

 

[rdean]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1iCjKWzeEE

Astrology is scientific theory, courtroom told

Astrology would be considered a scientific theory if judged by the same criteria used by a well-known advocate of Intelligent Design to justify his claim that ID is science, a landmark US trial heard on Tuesday.

Under cross examination, ID proponent Michael Behe, a biochemist at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, admitted his definition of "theory" was so broad it would also include astrology.

Astrology is scientific theory, courtroom told - science-in-society - 19 October 2005 - New Scientist

Because ID has been rejected by virtually every scientist and science organisation, and has never once passed the muster of a peer-reviewed journal paper, Behe admitted that the controversial theory would not be included in the NAS definition. "I can't point to an external community that would agree that this was well substantiated," he said.

Behe said he had come up with his own "broader" definition of a theory, claiming that this more accurately describes the way theories are actually used by scientists. "The word is used a lot more loosely than the NAS defined it," he says.


WHAT'S YOUR SIGN????

 

[konradv]

Don't expect to change anyone's mind. faith in evolution is just as much a religious belief as faith in intelligent creation.

LOL!!! Whenever you can't prove someone wrong you call it a "religion". Does that make stupidity your religion? If you don't have a decent argument, that's your problem, not mine.

 

[Big Fitz]

Konradv, stupidity? Dude, you're a friggen Bishop in the church of Stupidity. You still have to choose to believe the data people came up with as true.

That is faith. But, you know, I'm not going to address your Christophobia anymore.

You don't like the way reality is, and that you have religious beliefs, sucks to be you man.

 

[geauxtohell]

Both Behe and his "theory" of irreducible complexity (not truly a scientific theory) are viewed as laughable by the establishment due to the asinine assumption that every evolutionary "piece" could only function for the end part. Ken Miller lays it out here:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieKDLtrBXs0[/ame]

Then, it didn't help Behe's cause that a lawyer was able to make him look like a scientific nitwit on the stand at Dover.

 

[konradv]

Konradv, stupidity? Dude, you're a friggen Bishop in the church of Stupidity. You still have to choose to believe the data people came up with as true.

That is faith. But, you know, I'm not going to address your Christophobia anymore.

You don't like the way reality is, and that you have religious beliefs, sucks to be you man.

LOL!!! Getting to you, aren't I? You don't have any decent arguments, so you have to resort to invective. That's the true sign of the religious bent. It may suck to be me, but at least I have a decent mind and use it.

 

[Sunni Man]

I am a very religious person and have alot of faith.

But, belief in evolution would take way, way more faith than even I could come up with!!!

 

[konradv]

I am a very religious person and have alot of faith.

But, belief in evolution would take way, way more faith than even I could come up with!!!

Don't need faith. We have science and our own eyes. To deny evolution is to say God lies to us. What explanation do you have for the fossil record?

 

[RDD_1210]

I am a very religious person and have alot of faith.

But, belief in evolution would take way, way more faith than even I could come up with!!!

How do you figure? Evolution may not have all the facts figured out perfectly (yet) but it does have scientific data to back up its claim.

What do you believe? That God placed Adam and Eve on the planet and we all came from them? THAT takes a lot of faith to believe in.....it's based upon nothing except what some people wrote in a book. Who is using more faith?

 

[Sunni Man]

Don't need faith. We have science and our own eyes. To deny evolution is to say God lies to us. What explanation do you have for the fossil record?

The fossil record doesn't prove evolution.

It just shows that species some species continue and others die out.

 

[konradv]

Don't need faith. We have science and our own eyes. To deny evolution is to say God lies to us. What explanation do you have for the fossil record?

The fossil record doesn't prove evolution.

It just shows that species some species continue and others die out.

But it also shows that not all species appeared at the same time. You never find trilobite fossils and dolphin fossils together, despite both being sea-dwelling species. That definitely shows that not all species were created at the same time, as Genesis tells us. How do you explain that?

 

[Leweman]

I wonder how many years of evolution it would take for a working mousetrap to spontaneously appear.