Visitor Messages
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 6 of 6
-
Glad you like the eclipse photo Nova, it's things like that that make me think that even with all the bad stuff that runs rampant in the world, God is still involved and still showing us things to show us he is here and blow our minds; put all the scientists from all the ages together in a room and see if they could create something as cool as that eclipse, I doubt it would happen
-
-
-
-
-
About Me
-
Signature
- http://www.icr.org/article/4352/
Stripped of personification, natural selection can be adapted to explain anything--and therefore explains nothing.
nova on #topix
the only thing darwinism lacks as a religion is prayer to a god!
"It’s time for a new Reformation in the Church—to call the Church back to the authority of the Word of God, beginning in Genesis."-Ken ham
http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...4/already-gone
- http://www.icr.org/article/4352/
![[X]](http://www.christian-chat.net/avatars/-x-.gif?dateline=1254869784&type=thumb){kind=small}
Blog
View nova's BlogRecent Entries
Latest Blog Entry
Posted in Uncategorized
Quote:
|
ScienceDaily (Oct. 20, 2005) — Genetic material derisively called “junk” DNA because it does not contain the instructions for protein-coding genes and appears to have little or no function is actually critically important to an organism’s evolutionary survival, according to a study conducted by a biologist at UCSD. See also: Plants & Animals |
Posted in Uncategorized
Science daily article debunk(light my fire)
...
Quote:
| ScienceDaily (Aug. 10, 1999) — MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL--Fire provided the "spark" for modern human evolution, but not because it allowed our ancestors to eat meat. Rather, it was the ability to cook tuberous roots akin to carrots, potatoes and beets that caused hominids to turn a major evolutionary corner about 1.9 million years ago, according to anthropologists Richard Wrangham of Harvard University, Gregory Laden of the University of |
Posted in Uncategorized
The word "evolution" actually means two quite distinct and separate things (and it is a favorite creationist tactic to attempt to blur the distinction between the two). [/COLOR][/quote]
Is it really? Strange but it seems to me it is creationists who draw a big bold line between micro evolution change with in a kind such as types or species of wolves or breeds of dogs and macro evolution or amoeba to man over billions of years
...
Is it really? Strange but it seems to me it is creationists who draw a big bold line between micro evolution change with in a kind such as types or species of wolves or breeds of dogs and macro evolution or amoeba to man over billions of years
Quote:
| On the one hand, "evolution" |
Posted in Uncategorized
[quote]"[COLOR="Black"]by Lenny Flank
1996
Note this he...
1996
Quote:
| On the other hand, "evolution" is also the word used to indicate the scientific theory of how this process of organism replacing organism occurred. In this sense, "evolution" is not an observable fact; it is a scientific model (more later on the definition of a "model") which purports to explain the fact of evolution (changes in species through time). |
Posted in Uncategorized
My comments in bold dark red
...
Quote:
|
The road of compromise looks attractive at first, but long experience has proved it to be a one-way street. The evolutionists at the end of the road are never satisfied until their opponents travel all the way to the atheistic void at its end. Charles Darwin set the pattern. Starting out as a Bible-believing creationist, he first became enamored of Charles Lyell's uniformitarianism and his "progressive creationism." Soon he abandoned |
Recent Comments
this comment was pure...
