Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
he uses the same failed and dishonest arguments against evolution that creationists tend to use.
David Berlinski , secular thinker, a few arguments pro Creation...worth listening, his book review.
anything changed in evolution theory in the last 20 years?Ow, is this guy still at it?
It seems that he's still repeating the same BS arguments as whenI first heared him talk some 20 years ago.
They were already PRATTs then, they are still PRATTs now - even if some of them have been repackaged with an extra camouflage layer of sciency-sounding word salad.
Well, biologists all over the world continue doing research and gathering more knowledge about all kinds of things. There's also this new field called Evolutionary Medicine, which is some kind of new approach to medical science...anything changed in evolution theory in the last 20 years?
evolution is a part of this reality, but it cannot account for the moment of the beginning.Well, biologists all over the world continue doing research and gathering more knowledge about all kinds of things. There's also this new field called Evolutionary Medicine, which is some kind of new approach to medical science...
But you seem to have missed the point.
That point being that the arguments he is still spewing today, were already pratt's 20 years ago (pratt: Point Refuted A Thousands Times).
It means that the arguments he's been repeating for these last 20 years, have already been refuted more then 20 years ago.
In other words: he's very much insisting on getting it wrong.
Why would it?evolution is a part of this reality, but it cannot account for the moment of the beginning.
how can you separate them? how would you know its roots?Why would it?
It's not a theory of beginnings. It's a theory of development. About the process that existing life is subject to.
Nearly daily. Read it here: Evolution Newsanything changed in evolution theory in the last 20 years?
how can you separate them?
how would you know its roots?
Evolution is based upon that very first precursor organism existing. It is based upon chemical combinations EVOLVING into that precursor organism.Why would it?
It's not a theory of beginnings. It's a theory of development. About the process that existing life is subject to.
I do not see it this way, apparently I am not only one. I see theory of evolution (the way it presented) as a greater miracle than any in the Bible. Only limited pieces make sense.Because they are 2 different things.
You don't have to.
I don't need to know how matter came into existance to study the development of rocks after they form from molten lava. In fact, I don't even need to know about the inner workings of volcano's to study such.
Life exists and we can study it.
Having said that: scope, it kind of matters. The scope of evolution is explaining diversity of biological entities. Why isn't there just one species? Why are there many and how do they develop?
Those are the questions that evolution answers.
Where does life come from? => completely different question. In fact, it's a different scientific field altogether.
Evolution is based upon that very first precursor organism existing.
It is based upon chemical combinations EVOLVING into that precursor organism.
Therefore abiogenesis is critical to the atheist form of evolution.
The arbitrary separation of abiogenesis from the theory
is critical because abiogenesis remains a fairy tale.
I do not see it this way
, apparently I am not only one
I see theory of evolution (the way it presented) as a greater miracle than any in the Bible
Explain appearance of the first DNA helix or explain irreducible complexity..You're just wrong.
Yes, other people are wrong also. Curiously, those who also wrongly see it like you do, almost always seem to be evolution science deniers with a religious agenda.
Concerning common descent? No.anything changed in evolution theory in the last 20 years?
No, abiogenesis is testable.The arbitrary separation of abiogenesis from the theory is critical because abiogenesis remains a fairy tale.
Sure, scientific theories are often being continually refined. Why ask?anything changed in evolution theory in the last 20 years?