Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That Noah took only young dinosaurs on the Ark?
Let's not forget that these were the prevailing opinions of scientists at the time of Darwin. Evolution was only accepted after an overwhelming amount of supporting information was amassed yet here some of us still are getting their science from theology. Maybe they should get their theology from science instead?What does the fossil record really teach concerning the theory of evolution? Do the fossils demonstrate the progression from simple structures to complex organisms? The following facts need to be considered:
Read more at: What does the fossil record teach us about Evolution? • ChristianAnswers.Net
I'm not using theology in my arguments. I'm using recent findings in science. Or are you aware of some research that proves abiogenesis is even a remote possibility.Let's not forget that these were the prevailing opinions of scientists at the time of Darwin. Evolution was only accepted after an overwhelming amount of supporting information was amassed yet here some of us still are getting their science from theology. Maybe they should get their theology from science instead?What does the fossil record really teach concerning the theory of evolution? Do the fossils demonstrate the progression from simple structures to complex organisms? The following facts need to be considered:
Read more at: What does the fossil record teach us about Evolution? • ChristianAnswers.Net
Evolution and abiogenesis are completely different processes and proving or disproving either has no relevance to the other. The OP does not address abiogenesis however to answer your question:I'm not using theology in my arguments. I'm using recent findings in science. Or are you aware of some research that proves abiogenesis is even a remote possibility.Let's not forget that these were the prevailing opinions of scientists at the time of Darwin. Evolution was only accepted after an overwhelming amount of supporting information was amassed yet here some of us still are getting their science from theology. Maybe they should get their theology from science instead?What does the fossil record really teach concerning the theory of evolution? Do the fossils demonstrate the progression from simple structures to complex organisms? The following facts need to be considered:
Read more at: What does the fossil record teach us about Evolution? • ChristianAnswers.Net
Not impressed. It's still a long way from producing even the simplest protein. Something that science is still incapable of doing, let alone the gods of evolution...time and chance. I especially found the last bit funny. It shows nothing of the sort. No RNA has been created. Just the chemicals necessary for them. If you believe that the mere presence of the required chemicals for RNA means that they can self assemble into RNA strands, then you don't understand how difficult a proposition that is. Why don't do a little research on RNA. You'll see just how complex it is.Evolution and abiogenesis are completely different processes and proving or disproving either has no relevance to the other. The OP does not address abiogenesis however to answer your question:I'm not using theology in my arguments. I'm using recent findings in science. Or are you aware of some research that proves abiogenesis is even a remote possibility.Let's not forget that these were the prevailing opinions of scientists at the time of Darwin. Evolution was only accepted after an overwhelming amount of supporting information was amassed yet here some of us still are getting their science from theology. Maybe they should get their theology from science instead?What does the fossil record really teach concerning the theory of evolution? Do the fossils demonstrate the progression from simple structures to complex organisms? The following facts need to be considered:
Read more at: What does the fossil record teach us about Evolution? • ChristianAnswers.Net
Abiogenesis Experiments
In 2001, Louis Allamandola demonstrated that organic material can be synthesized in deep space using a "Chill vacuum chamber"--a lot of biomolecules: nitriles, ethers, alcohols, ring-like hydrocarbons, and others.[8] [9]
In a complementary experiment, Jennifer Blank at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory discovered that: "Through subsequent chemical analysis, the team discovered that the initial amino acids in the mixture had linked together to form peptides, from which proteins can be formed." [10]
In 2010, Craig Venter and his colleagues inserted a wholly artificial chromosome into a bacterial cell and created the first artificial life form (a.k.a. "dial-a-genome").[11] While it may seem like artificial abiogenesis, it nevertheless involved some major cheating: the artificial chromosome was constructed using gene sequences of an existing organism.
In 2011, Lee Cronin at the University of Glasgow is trying to start an evolutionary process in polyoxometalate-based "cells".[12]
In 2014, a group of researchers managed to produce all four components of RNA by simulating an asteroid impact in primordial conditions.[13]
A 2015 paper showed that the chemical precursors for the synthesis of amino acids, lipids and nucleotides, which would be required in a primitive cell, could have all arisen simultaneously through reactions driven by ultraviolet light. [14]
In 2015, the lander Philae discovered 16 organic compounds, four of which have never been detected on a comet before, on the comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. Many of the organic compounds are important building blocks of life.[15] [16][17]
In 2015, NASA scientists studying the origin of life managed to reproduce uracil, cytosine, and thymine from an ice sample containing pyrimidine under conditions found in space. [18][19]
A 2016 study showed that the building blocks of life can be replicated in deep sea vents. These experiments have for the first time demonstrated that RNA molecules can form in alkaline hydrothermal chimneys.[20] [21]
Other then horses which only proves evolution INSIDE a species be specific and cite for us the evidence that supports mammals evolving from one species into an entirely different species.
You have your evolutionary gods wrong, they are time and natural selection, not time and chance.Not impressed. It's still a long way from producing even the simplest protein. Something that science is still incapable of doing, let alone the gods of evolution...time and chance. I especially found the last bit funny. It shows nothing of the sort. No RNA has been created. Just the chemicals necessary for them. If you believe that the mere presence of the required chemicals for RNA means that they can self assemble into RNA strands, then you don't understand how difficult a proposition that is. Why don't do a little research on RNA. You'll see just how complex it is.
The ToE declares that ALL life descended from a common ancestor. Do you really believe that such diverse lifeforms, such as dinosaurs and mosquitoes have a common ancestor? Give me a break.You have your evolutionary gods wrong, they are time and natural selection, not time and chance.Not impressed. It's still a long way from producing even the simplest protein. Something that science is still incapable of doing, let alone the gods of evolution...time and chance. I especially found the last bit funny. It shows nothing of the sort. No RNA has been created. Just the chemicals necessary for them. If you believe that the mere presence of the required chemicals for RNA means that they can self assemble into RNA strands, then you don't understand how difficult a proposition that is. Why don't do a little research on RNA. You'll see just how complex it is.
One question none of us may ever get an answer to is what the first life looked like. It may have been a very simple molecular chain that could self-assemble additions to the chain but was fragile enough to split apart. That may have been all that was required of the first "life" form to be subject to natural selection. RNA and DNA may have taken a billion years to evolve from that simple start.
How do ID'iot creationists account for any fossil record? A 6,000 year old earth would not have the fossil record that exists.The ToE declares that ALL life descended from a common ancestor. Do you really believe that such diverse lifeforms, such as dinosaurs and mosquitoes have a common ancestor? Give me a break.You have your evolutionary gods wrong, they are time and natural selection, not time and chance.Not impressed. It's still a long way from producing even the simplest protein. Something that science is still incapable of doing, let alone the gods of evolution...time and chance. I especially found the last bit funny. It shows nothing of the sort. No RNA has been created. Just the chemicals necessary for them. If you believe that the mere presence of the required chemicals for RNA means that they can self assemble into RNA strands, then you don't understand how difficult a proposition that is. Why don't do a little research on RNA. You'll see just how complex it is.
One question none of us may ever get an answer to is what the first life looked like. It may have been a very simple molecular chain that could self-assemble additions to the chain but was fragile enough to split apart. That may have been all that was required of the first "life" form to be subject to natural selection. RNA and DNA may have taken a billion years to evolve from that simple start.
Other then horses which only proves evolution INSIDE a species be specific and cite for us the evidence that supports mammals evolving from one species into an entirely different species.
It's not nearly as hard to believe as it is to think your God created a creature to randomly spread disease to both good people and bad people, including babies. The same God that created a wondrous variety of animals only to wipe them out with barely a trace. And do it again and again and again and again.The ToE declares that ALL life descended from a common ancestor. Do you really believe that such diverse lifeforms, such as dinosaurs and mosquitoes have a common ancestor? Give me a break.
God created a perfect universe. The problems you mentioned are the result of sin.It's not nearly as hard to believe as it is to think your God created a creature to randomly spread disease to both good people and bad people, including babies. The same God that created a wondrous variety of animals only to wipe them out with barely a trace. And do it again and again and again and again.The ToE declares that ALL life descended from a common ancestor. Do you really believe that such diverse lifeforms, such as dinosaurs and mosquitoes have a common ancestor? Give me a break.
Meet the Ancestor of All Animals on Earth
