Summations Only

There must be something in that, and it's quite a modern thing. The idea that belief needs to be proven objectively would be alien to an 18th century Christian. It smacks of a real deep centred insecurity.

The natural world was a much more mysterious place in the 1700's. When modern science found natural and mindless processes for much of nature it left little room for God in some peoples' eyes. There was even those who didn't like Newton because he proposed an indifferent, impersonal, and mechanistic process for the movement of planets. When you fall into the trap of believing in a God of the Gaps, that God disappears when knowledge fills those gaps.

You obviously don't know the difference between a theory and a practical use for a theory. Your mind is so deep in theory that that you've forgotten there's a real world out there.All you've done in your previous posts (4 9 12 13 17) is offer evolutionary explanations for certain observations in nature. And this is your idea of "useful"? All you're doing is theorising! Whether your theorising is correct or not isn't the point; the point is it's just paper-science, and it's no more useful than toilet paper. Here is a simple example of what you're doing: the observation is made that giraffes have long necks; an explanation for the long neck is then proffered - a longer neck confers a survival advantage which natural selection favours; longer necks are a heritable trait so therefore eventally longer necks dominate in the population. Conclusion: Long necks can only be explained by evolution. How is this useful? It's just talk. Here is an example of a useful application of "evolution": A dog breeder wants to produce the biggest Rottweilerso possible, so he chooses only the biggest pups from a litter for future breeding. He repeats this process with each successive generation.Do you see the difference? The first example is just theorising about evolution; the second example is a pracitcal, real- world application of evolution (albeit dog breeders don't use the word, "evolution").I suspect that like most students of biology, you've been indoctrinated by the cult of Darwinism to consider theoretical arguments for evolution to be proof-positive that Darwinism is "useful" and therefore a "fact". This is how a cult operates - unsuspecting victims are conditioned to think uncritically in a certain way, until it becomes de rigueur. They don't realise their error until someone from outside the cult points it out to them; and even then the penny might not drop because their faulty reasoning is so ingrained.

You seem to have assumed that Dredge is a YEC - Dredge is not a YEC. Dredge is an OEC.

Do you believe that Adam and Eve were real, historical people, as described in Genesis?

You have this arse-about-face.Science has accepted the fact of evolution for over a century. There is overwhelming evidence for it and there is no other competing theory. Therefore when a feature like the giraffe's neck is seen the assumption is that the process of evolution produced it.That's generally the end of it because the case is closed for 'proofs' of evolution - there's no money to be wasted in continuing to prove something already proven. But during their day-to-day useless work sometimes scientists discover things that adds to its confirmation. One such pice of evidence is the the giraffe's laryngeal nerve. (To further demonstrate how useless the theory of evolution is, without it we wouldn't have a clue why this nerve is so stupidly built. With it, we know.)

quote:

---

This video, including comments by Richard Dawkins, documents a necropsy (an autopsy on an animal other than a human) carried out in a classroom on a giraffe. In this video, we follow the pathway of the recurrent (inferior) laryngeal nerve, an important nerve that is a branch of the Vagus nerve (tenth cranial nerve). The recurrent (inferior) laryngeal nerve, which branches off the Vagus nerve at the base of the brain, travels down the neck, around the arteries of the heart and travels back up the neck to ennervate the larynx, or voice box, thereby providing motor function. The purpose of doing this exercise is to show that there is no so-called intelligent designer because the pathway of this nerve is completely illogical unless, of course, you accept that evolution is the reason for this nerve’s convoluted pathway through the body.

---

http://scienceblogs.com/...22/the-laryngeal-nerve-of-the-gir

My apologies. So you agree that the earth is over 4.5 billion years old and that life on earth has been around for over 3 billion of those years?Enjoy

Of course not. Genesis 2&3 is a "Just So" story meant to explain why we fear snakes, why childbirth seems more painful for humans than the other animals, why we are not still hunter gatherers, why we seem to have a moral based society and why women should be subject to men.Creation is simply a plot device just like the God character in the story.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

You asked how the theory of evolution is useful in the field of biology. I did just that.Since you are so enamored with definitions, let's look at the definition for biology:"the science of life or living matter in all its forms and phenomena, especially with reference to origin, growth, reproduction, structure, and behavior. "
Biology Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com"Biology is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, evolution, distribution, identification and taxonomy."
Biology - WikipediaBiology includes the history of species, the origin of species, and how species changed over time. The theory of evolution is very useful for figuring those things out. The entire purpose of science is to offer testable explanations for groups of facts. Producing theories is what science is all about. It's a testable explanation for a group of facts which is the entire purpose of science. It is also useful to biology because it explains the origin of giraffes. One of the purposes of biology is to explain why there are giraffes, and this explanation fills that purpose. I have been taught that theories supported by mountains of evidence are solid theories. Is this not correct?

Dredge has no idea how old the earth is and Dredge believes that life on earth was created about 5778 years ago.

"Evolutionary biology has been severely hampered by a speculative style of argument that records anatomy and ecology and then tries to construct historical or adaptive explanations for why this bone looked like that or why this creature lived here. These speculations have been charitably called "scenarios"; they are often more contemptuously, and rightly, labeled "stories". Scientists know that these tales are stories; unfortunately, they are presented in the professional literature, where they are taken too seriously and literally." - Stephen Jay Gould.(Richard Ellis, Aquagenesis: The Origin and Evolution of LIfe in the Sea. Penguin Books, 2001, p.204)Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Many people say that evolution is fact and that there is a mountain of evidence to prove it. Should Christians just cave in and admit that Genesis is a myth? This episode [Creation magazine Live] examines and refutes key evolution evidences such as:
● Embryo similarity
● The Miller/Urey experiment
● Peppered Moths
● Homology
● Horse evolution
● Fossil record
● Dinosaurs
● Archaeopteryx
● Whale evolution
● Tiktaalik
● Vestigial organs
● Ape men
● Natural selection
● Mutations
● Chimp/human DNA 98% similarity
● Junk DNAEdited by CRR, : No reason given.

Yes, honest Christians should understand that Genesis 1 & Genesis 2&3 are fictional.First, Genesis is not one story but a collections of folk stories. Second, based on the overwhelming evidence found both in reality and in the Bible itself, of course the tales found in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2&3 should be understood as "not factual".That does not mean they have no value or purpose but the fact the there are two entirely different and mutually exclusive creation tales should be the first clue that "creation" is not what is relevant, it is a plot device. When you add in the fact that two entirely different gods are described in the two stories any honest Christian should see clearly that the stories are folk tales, "Just So" stories and then look to see why two mutually exclusive stories were included.

Quote Mining!

See Life before 5778 years ago, Message 487 of Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 as this is off topic for this thread.Enjoy