Quote:
Originally Posted by Abel  No, I do not. I am not a scientist. You have presented a book written from a presuppostion that evolution is true and can be proven. |
Which book would that be? I don't know of any texts that take this stance. Which book did I reference? I presented papers that cover the detailed evidence of interspecies homology and presented an accessible database run by the national institute of health. I presented data that is reproducible and directly contradicts your theory.
Quote:
I am not qualified to respond, so I will allow those who are qualified to speak:
Creationists holding DOCTORATES IN SCIENCE
(partial list, in alphabetical order)
Agard, E. Theo
Allan, James ...(etc)
|
Hrm. So are you taking the stance now that PhD has some meaning?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Abel You may impress others with your words and your supposed education, but not me. True wisdom comes only from God: James 1:5 "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." |
Again, who cares about the names of people or what titles some un-accredited or accredited institutions have given them. How many nobel laureates or members of the national academy of sciences are on your list there? I'm willing to bet that there are none. How many people from your list have positions at degree granting ABET accredited institutions (I'm willing to bet that a few do). How many have published peer reviewed papers in journals such as Nature, Science, Journal of Experimental Biology, or other prestigious and long lived journals (I'm willing to bet that the answer here is zero where "creationism" is concerned)?
Quote:
|
If you care to, you may read their findings since you are such an open minded scientist. I have neither the time nor inclination to, since I have read and believed the story in the Bible. I too can produce a list leading scientists that hold the creation account as true. But, here's a couple more comments.
|
When have I tried to argue through authority? At every step of our interaction, I have tried to provide data, evidence, examples, visualizations, etc. I have not mentioned the name of a single evolutionary biologist or indicated that advanced degrees were necessary to understand it.
I'd much rather you provide the data that leads these "scientists" to "hold creation account as true..." Then I want you to find scientists that hold evolution as true and not "failed to be disproven." Who cares about the names of individuals?
Quote:
|
A former Evolutionist, Dr. Wilder-Smith debated various leading scientists on the subject throughout the world. In his opinion, the Evolution model did not fit as well with the established facts of science as did the Creation model of intelligent design: "The Evolutionary model says that it is not necessary to assume the existence of anything, besides matter and energy, to produce life. That proposition is unscientific. We know perfectly well that if you leave matter to itself, it does not organize itself - in spite of all the efforts in recent years to prove that it does."
|
False. See self assembling molecules. Learn about thermodynamics, energy barriers, enzymes, and entropy.
Quote:
|
Secular researcher Richard Milton summarized the current world situation: "Darwinism has never had much appeal for science outside of the English-speaking world, and has never appealed much to the American public (although popular with the U.S. scientific establishment in the past).
|
It sure does appeal to them when they get a drug resistant strain of TB (or some other disease) and need medical help.
Quote:
|
However, its ascendancy in science, in both Britain and America, has been waning for several decades as its grip has weakened in successive areas: geology; paleontology; embryology; comparative anatomy. Now even geneticists are beginning to have doubts. It is only in mainstream molecular biology and zoology that Darwinism retains serious enthusiastic supporters. As growing numbers of scientists begin to drift away from neo-Darwinist ideas, the revision of Darwinism at the public level is long overdue, and is a process that I believe has already started."
|
Again! ZERO data. Simply statements of social situations and attitudes of proposed individuals! Your position is brainwashed Abel.
I think this part speaks for itself.