The Forum > Article Comments > Religion and science: respecting the differences > Comments
Religion and science: respecting the differences : Comments
By Michael Zimmerman, published 31/5/2010The teachings of most mainstream religions are consistent with evolution.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 133
- 134
- 135
- Page 136
- 137
-
- All
Posted by Rusty Catheter, Wednesday, 22 September 2010 11:24:40 PM
| |
oh oliver...the discourse/isnt-about computers/it was meant as a simulie...but computers cant/do anything..by them-self
just as by them self...a mutated...corrupted..dna-strand..can do nothing..in/of..itself...even the frankenstinian..of gmo..needs to put its mtation..into a working-cell thats the true/key...no cell-membrain..no life cells cannot of them self...do anything just like ya main/frame.. without...programing/instruction..and electriocty[life-force].. cant do nuthin/neither even such luminaries..such as dorkins/darewin...or say-gain cant do nuthing..to reoplicate...their THEORY/of evolution yes they can theo-rise..how god done-it yes they can THEO-rise...and pro-fess..to know..like ol'crusty but the truth/being..they cant do MACRO-evolution/nor replicate..'it' thus stand/revealed..as theorists [and only one/of-them..had origonal-thinking...origonal...re-search.. only one/did actual researches..on it's teqnical fruits/means and he clearly...knew..the bounds of genus.. and the micro-evolution within species we have many..professional-fessors thinking to-stand on darwinian/broad-shoulders yet they..havnt/even bot-herd..to read/what..he actually concluded its sad really..that so many..get wrong.. what so few..were able to comprehend we dont know/how god done-it thus we get peers..to pretend..they do know then present..micro-evolution..to the ignorants and call it macro-evolution..via its little steps trouble being..the steps cant lead where they need they are going backwards..where de-volution..eventually leads but those taking it on faith..blissfully/blindly..follow..the money[pro] who does the fessing should be cionfessing but can only..name-call there is a sign..for any thinking-man..! he has no/science..only crud/mud/slime/chance thus seeks/his only..high-ground..via insult/bubbles cause...he dont-got/...god/fact..in-fact..he got nuthin and most/surely...realised..this thus..his on-going..redirection... his..grrr-uff/bluff/...is fluff... enough if/you got proof..present-it if.you can replicate...do it make/first...one like-it Posted by one under god, Friday, 24 September 2010 5:52:43 AM
| |
Dear OUG,
The comparison pointed to application programmes sharing a common operating system. One could dissect the code for Word and Excel and reasonably deduce a common operating system. Sames goes for fly eyes and mouse eyes. Deep down the original instructions have a common biological source, it seems. One can do the same with the roots of languages. Cell is on BBC Knowledge tonight, if you have cable. I beleive it will be about creating artificial cells. Posted by Oliver, Friday, 24 September 2010 11:26:58 AM
| |
oh/oliver...we been over this...in mid/may
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703559004575256470152341984.html man-made...DNA not..a man-made cell see ....man/cant make a cell...!*!*!*!*!*! ie cant..make a living cell.. [gods..bio-logical-computer] ONLY..DNA*...! ...[code..*!*!]... we have-been...over/this...before news*...appears...on the new*s and man making...lol..a cell.. would be NEW'sss.. not a crummy/..bbc documentry SEE the doco...follows the document* here AGAIN*..is the document*.. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703559004575256470152341984.html [from 21 may]...about when..we went..this/way..before i dont subscribe..to a dumbed-down...propaganda service i get my news in writing* [that way i can read..it..save/share/quote..it ..not just..be/told...'it' as/if its..some miracle...lol.. /by the..sainted-peers anyhow i could be wrong.. if so please ..feel/free to correct..my ignorance when/if.. they really do..make a cell...not using gods-material even science cant reverse-engeneer...that....yet that dosnt prevent the decievers decieving us they did/can when clearly they cant...! and even if they did they would...still need/to...EVOLVE..it and that has..never*/occured that would...really-be new'...[new's] anyhow..love your/dedication..to a dead-theory think..if they cant* replicate*..it... ie..[evolve..a new* genus*] they are talking about...a theory...not a fact and that/is..the fact and the fact...media...decieves..[lies] name..who/claims to have done/what and see it with your eyes-open think...why do they..need-to decieve its for..amusement..entertaintment... fodder..for the masses who..only want to hear.. that/..what they allready* believe* no/proof*.. presented cause..its a trick/ decievers/decieving pro-fessors..pro-fessing in gods-business..they are messing oh..what a wicked-web...they/are weaving people...should-start learning.. not just..believing Posted by one under god, Friday, 24 September 2010 1:24:06 PM
| |
i hope/your not too disappointed..oliver
your 2 day silence..[seems to indicate..the pro-gram..on bbc.. was more/like i suggested..than..as you/were..led to believe and such is the way-of/things thats egsactly...how we-all..got decieved i have watched too-many...pro-grams... pro-fessing..one-thing.. then delivering..quite/another and thats simply the way...of things see how they trick/decieve... when they simply put-in..some dna..[into gods/computer] its the beat-up's...im sick-of... and the surity..the innocent..hold-for/these..decievers... decieving/us from seeing...all god created.. and in his/creation..gaining a glimse.. of this..amasing-creator..[via his magnificent/creation].. its when we se the love..he put into everything.. that we gain the..certainty..as to his true-nature we soon/learn...he really does sustain..each/living..their life completly-free to-do..with..as we chose..thus able to grasp the simple concepts...jesus..[and so many/others]..have delivered we each..must learn to know..his voice...of love [as/even..a beast..in the stables..knows his masters-voice] must know/that..he alone..loves all living.. cause he/gave-it..the gift..to live but im repeating..the same things just as we all seem/to-be doing ol rusty..cant replicate/nor validate..his theory of macro-evolutions..causing any new/genus.. [different from..its parents...as the defunct-theory/advocates] certainly/not..via...lol..many/little-steps evolve..a cold-blood.fish..into a warm-blood mammel [its really quite absurd..to any thinking man but they/dont..want-us thinking just believing..their grand-deception thus it's..indoctrin-ated..into us..as children for the simple...athiestic..[god-less]..adgenda to succeed one must first blind-us..to the beauty..god created then with the shepards..asleep.. steal the sheep i cant afford..to get angry because we each have our-own..freewill..[right].. to believe..as we chose.. i just feel so/bad..about all those..great-minds.. dwelling/in hell..simply..for decieving.. the good...away from god again..present fact..[if you can] silence indicates..the real truth there simply/aint..any... [for macro-evolution..into..new/genus]...lol Posted by one under god, Sunday, 26 September 2010 10:47:01 AM
| |
i miss your input/oliver
but this topic may have run-its/course i still feel/its not a matter of respecting/the differences but seeing..its the same-system..of peer-revieuw..lording/it-over..the rest religeon..has admittedly..done more wrong[it after-all has missrepresented god...science has also done/this..but more..re/the creation[study/of-which..is good..but cutting off the creator/of all creation..is wrong never the less...they have both led..to the devopment..of life as we know-it...and where they have decieved...they decieved mainly.that they were led-to believe..[they were decieved-too] its true..that..as/we develop...through..certain/stages...we activate..specific-genes...its only when these..belief genes..dont get enacted we get problems take/todays-news..that migranes..have a non working..[or rather non-activated..tresk..?-gene..as its root-cause]... i will suggest..either/a stress-full causal/root.. [or maybe a lack/of it..at early childhood].. but either way..they dont produce the required.stimulous..to get the function just as lack of cosiene..has cause down-syndrome and how only 1..in 4 can not resist..cancer's mutation its much like they shall..in time/find..re the perverse attraction of adults/children..where it is common-knowledge..they need to attract/them before the age of 8...and i even extend..the rite of circumscism...as a root cause of violence... its pains activating..a genomic response...that pre-disposes..them to certain genetic/related symtim-ology...making..the con-cept of peace..all but impossable..for these geno-type other genetic markers are...also of pasing intrest..early child-hood/stress..somehow lengthens the digets..of the finger research has found...that an act of violence[in early child-hood]..pre-disposes..the poor child...to further violence..much later on anyhow/i love science i detest what them/..peers..have turned/..'it'-into ditto...religeon my one surity remains god just know..he alone is truelly/good dont fear love if they say this/or that..[to-wit/peers].....ask for proof if they arnt/living-it...cant/replicate-it..demand to know why anyhow..i must learn to let-go so let the lack of proof...speak for itself Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 28 September 2010 11:01:39 AM
|
Regarding Sagan:
My criticism is valid. It is not within your gift to declare it void. Why not just stick your fingers in your ears and hum?
You used a mined quote of Sagan to support your claims that mutations are not contributory to evolution. You stated that this was what Sagan "thought". I provided extensive alternative quotes to show that what Sagan really holds to be true. You were dishonest about Sagan’s views while hoping to co-opt the authority his name imparts, greater disdain for his actual views I cannot imagine.
Typographic accuracy is not an excusing feature, though it may be a high point in creationist resumes.
Terms like "creative" are not helpful.
If you are citing articles and books, your citation must reflect the content of the full article. It is unprofessional to make assertions based on an abstract. If you are taking issue, you must clearly identify the faulty data or analysis. Needless to say, a citation that clearly does not reflect the author's intent is a serious matter reflecting the capacities of the student.
Were you submitting an assignment with such a poor citation as your quote, I would *require* you to fix it. In lower divisions, if you refused, I would mark that segment down accordingly or mark such a non-complying assignment as fail, depending on the local rules. In a more senior student, were you to be as lacking in contrition as you appear, I would leave it to the head or the dean to question your fitness to remain enrolled. Your "feelings" would be "hurt" instructively.
The miasma of pettifoggery you have enacted in an attempt to confuse the issue simply confirms that you are habitually dishonest in the hope of swaying credulous audiences.
I hope that you find my criticism clear, and despite being protected by anonymity, take it on board in your professional activities.
Rusty