How does evolution explain the gaps?

I'll take your response to mean that you do indeed consider "submission" to be a dirty word. Also, I know you do not speak for the bulk of humanity when you say, "I don't think anyone cares." History shows your assessment is wrong and shows that the bulk of humanity has in the past, and continues into this present day, looking for the answer to the "meaning of life" and the majority are not looking to evolution for the answer. As for the question you feel I won't answer.......I did answer it. You just didn't like the answer you were given. Next!ShalomJet------------------
As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?Prof. George Greenstein

I understand that you miss the point of using proper analogies to make an understandable point of view come forth. Nothing falls flatter than the TOE when it faces true scientific study. The only reason the TOE even continues to be presented as a viable explanation of life is because it can't answer even the most basic questions concerning the existance of life. All it really attempts to do is give a modern day version of some very ancient religious beliefs. Even then, it has to pick up the story in the middle, having no concept, or at least no scientific explanation of lifes' actual beginning.So forget about starting with abiogenesis. Take a trip back in time to the moment that life first existed according to the TOE, then please explain the scientific methods used within this scientific TOE that will keep the TOE solvent as you pass through time, ending at the present day.Please give the most verifiable, testable, and scientifically falsifiable examples of how the TOE manages to stay coherent, let alone scientific, as we move from single celled life, (unless the TOE is incapable of going that far back), and how the ability to increase the neccessary informational data occurred, along with the scientific methods neccessary for showing the viability of this being a continuing process, then continue moving through the millions upon millions of years, again remembering to remain in the realm of science, until you arrive at the present day.Do this and you may make a believer out of me yet.ShalomJet------------------
As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?Prof. George Greenstein

Actually, I didn't expect that you would, or even could, supply me with even a single example of a life form evolving from its' beginning, ending at its' present form today. That was one of the points I was attempting to make. Using your scientific literature, you are still left impotent when trying to explain how the TOE is even a viable theory, let alone a scientific one.I, on the other hand, using my religious literature, am fully able to explain an even more indepth timeline, beginning before the emergence of corporial life, and ending at the present day. Now I realize that you would reject this out of hand, due to your revulsion to the idea that "God did it!"You are much more comfortable with the idea that "evolution did it", even though you are not able to understand or explain all of the where's and why's concerning your insistance in this ancient, yet udated, pagan fable. I have at least done my homework when it comes to the thought of evolution as the main reason life exists as it does today.As I have stated numerous times, the idea of evolution is as old as the hills and any indepth study of ancient pagan beliefs will confirm this fact. Granted, the modern day TOE has added new twists and turns in order to make this ancient fable more palatable to what the scriptures refer to as the "darkened minds" of those who are labeled as foolish because "the fool has said in their heart, there is no God."So let's just leave it at that. You continue with your "evolution did it" beliefs and I will continue with my "God did it" belief, sure in the knowledge that I am following the right path, and you are on the path to failure, disappointment, and, like every other living thing that has, does, or will exist, eventual death. The only difference between us concerns what comes afterwards. For you, apparently nothing, according to your beliefs. For me, according to my belief and faith in God, some of us will be raised unto everlasting glory with God, Our Father. And some of us will be raised unto everlasting shame and contempt.Personally, I don't care for what your future holds for you, regardless of which belief, evolution or creation, is championed. I will admit, however, that I wish somehow your eyes could be opened, and that you would return to that which you have abandoned. And I do not mean that you should return to catholicism, but rather that you would return to Christ. Here's to hoping for the seemingly impossible, knowing that "with God, all things are possible."ShalomJet------------------
As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?Prof. George Greenstein

Perhaps you could accept the challenge that others have avoided. Pick a species, any species, and using the evolutionists' accepted definition of scientific methods, start at that species most simple form, the single celled life form, and trace its' transformation through time until you arrive at its' present form.I am sure such an endeavor would be interesting for everyone concerned, including myself. But please don't ask me to outline the failure of the TOE as being scientific. Its' failure is tremendously obvious by its inability to use the very scientific methods that it imposes upon creationists.All you need do is prove the assertion held by all evolutionists the the TOE is scientific. Good luck with your timeline. I believe that you are going to need all the luck that you can muster, assuming that you don't avoid the challenge of tracing the transformation of a single species throughout time.Every other evolutionist I have come into contact with has either been unable, or unwilling to tackle such a simple undertaking. Perhaps you will be different, a step above the rest of the pack, so to speak.ShalomJet------------------
As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?Prof. George Greenstein

How very interesting that I received four replies, not one of which had any real substance. We weren't discussing footsteps, or rocks, or even begats and begots, for that matter. We were discussing whether the TOE can be considered valid when remaining in the realm of science. I claim that the TOE must abandon the very science that evolutionists demand that proponents of creationism adhere to in order for the TOE to explain the existance of species today, as they relate to those that supposedly lived hundreds of thousands of years ago.Exactly how does one go about attempting to scientifically falsify an assertion of the TOE that is made when it concerns something that supposedly happened 100,000 or 500,000 or 1,000,000 years ago. I do not attempt to explain anything about rocks, or footsteps, or begetting, begatting, and begotting. I rather attempt to explain the existance of life based upon that which I know, namely, the Holy Scriptures. I do not attempt to use purely scientific methods to explain obvious Spiritual Truths any more than an evolutionist would attempt to use Spiritual Discernment to explain the concepts involved within Darwinian evolution.Whether evolutionists wish to admit it or not, there can be no doubt that the TOE must abandon truly scientific methods the further it moves back in time. What cannot be tested scientifically cannot withstand the test of true science and the TOE cannot withstand the test of true science, even using their own accepted definition of same. However, you are all free to attempt to prove me wrong in this matter. Just explain the scientific methods that would be used to test the TOEs' claims concerning events that supposedly occurred 100,000 let alone 1,000,000 years ago. Have at it!ShalomJet------------------
As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?Prof. George Greenstein[This message has been edited by Jet, 02-25-2003]

So as to eliminate the possibility of being accused of taking a quote "out of context" while remaining in line with the future allowance of characters within a signature, I have changed my signature. However, I doubt the evolutionists will appreciate the change.ShalomJet------------------
Signature too long, 100 chars max.

Reference of new signature is supplied. Hope this will satisfy the lot of you to whom this quote applies.ShalomJet------------------
"THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. Psalm 14:1

While it has been some time since I have had access to the internet, I felt your post required a reply. Your statement is a clear indication of the fact that you are not a student of the Bible, not to mention the fact that your reply, taken out of the context of the narrative, would give any reader a false understanding of said passage. I doubt that you will but I suggest you lay your hands on a good concordance, using same as a reference when attempting to quote the Scriptures. That which is not understood, or comprehended, is best left to those who are willing to invest a substantial amount of their time in order to gain a fuller understanding.ShalomJet------------------
"THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. Psalm 14:1

Rather than attempting to answer inquiries which have already been answered numerous times, I shall instead concentrate on a single paragraph of yours.Shraf:The ToE is based upon testable hypothese, has positive evidence to confirm it, and is falsifiable, so it is quite scientific.***Depending upon whose interpretation of data you rely upon, your statement above is both correct and incorrect. Few, if any, hardcore evolutionists approach this problem with a truly open mind. You are a prime example. To evolutionists like yourself, anyone relying on their faith in the Scriptures, marrying that faith to the mountains of evidence confirming creation by intelligent design as the only viable explanation for the existance of life, is either crazy, or stupid, or both.Accepting that, you must obviously have included yourself, according to your previous beliefs, in that same arena. On the other hand, creationists like myself understand that the champions of that bankrupt theory known as the TOE are either extremely misled, or at least are willfully ignorant of the Truth. To each their own!***Shraf: Please explain how hundereds of thousands of professional scientists would continue to persue an unscientific theory.***Money talks, plain and simple. Evolutionists tend to disregard facts in favor of obvious fantasy when their grant money, and even their jobs are on the line. The TOE is a fallacy, is most surely not scientific, at least not in total, and every day more scientists are becoming aware that the TOE is a dead end road. As to the rest of your post, it is obvious to me that you are blinded to any Truths revealed that do not fully support your position, regardless of the mountains of evidence that refute the TOE in part, and in whole.It is most interesting to watch any of the numerous BBC programs concerning evolution and listen to the claims made therein that could never be falsified scientifically. Supposition, conjecture, guesswork, and extremely bold, false statements are presented as established fact and are the benchmark of these new age programs that seek to indoctrinate children at a very early age into the fantasy world known as the TOE!***ShalomJet------------------
"THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. Psalm 14:1

Shraf, you are, IMHO, the epitome of the "BLINDED DUE TO WILLFUL IGNORANCE" crowd. As usual, you open with a poorly veiled attempt at insult before moving on to your questions.POINT BY POINT ANSWERS FOR SHRAF...ANSWER #1. No.ANSWER #2. No.ANSWER #3. Simply by using the God given abilities of logic and reason.ANSWER #4. Puhleeeez! Are you suggesting that the foundations of Biology and Genetics were baseless and/or non-existant before the TOE?True to form, you credit me with a statement that I don't recall making. My statement read as follows..."every day more scientists are becoming aware that the TOE is a dead end road." However, for some unknown reason, that same statement appeared on your computer screen in the following, altered manner.......[SHRAF: Perhaps you would like to back up your claim that "more and more" scientists are turning away from the ToE in favor of religious explanations?]Maybe it's me, or maybe it's you or your computer but I looked and looked and yet I could not find where I supposedly made the above statement. Please be kind enough to point out to me in which post I made the above statement. Thank You.As to your ending statements, please refer to message #40 again. Perhaps you simply skimmed the post, or perhaps your speed reading skills need some polishing. Which ever is the case, please read message #40 again for total clarification.ShalomJet------------------
"THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. Psalm 14:1

TIME TO STOP PLAYING GAMES.
Honest evolutionists will admit the TOE has numerous problems, though many feel uncomfortable admitting this publicly.We all know of the evidence that favors Biblical accounts of past events over the TOE. Sedimentary layers that are separated by oceans and yet match up perfectly. Animals and insects that totally defy the idea of evolution, and in fact prove to be an impossibility according to the tenets of the TOE. [Please don't play the ignorant card and ask me to name that with which you are already, or at least should be, familiar. That's assuming that you are one of the few honest and truly open minded evolutionists.] Fossilized trees protruding through several sedimentary layers, indicating a global flood the laid sedimentary layers very rapidly, not over millions of years. As I stated in previous posts, both evolutionists and creationists prefer accepting evidence that supposedly supports their views while rejecting evidence that obviously contradicts their views. This is nothing new. It has been that way for many millennia. It will continue until Christs' return in Power and Glory.YOU STATED: "You may or may not be aware that the "science" presented on TV is not presented for scientific edification, but rather for entertainment. The claims of the BBC or any other media conglomerate do not represent the same caliber of knowledge as published, scientific theory. In the same way that Jerry Falwell does not represent the views of all believers, the BBC does not represent the claims of all science."I never meant to suggest that the BBC, or any other entity, spoke for all proponents of the TOE. I simply pointed out a single example of the attempts to indoctrinate the very young into a mindset that accepts the TOE as an established fact, which it most surely is not. To be fair, organized religion does exactly the same thing, indoctrinating the very young with false teachings and doctrines. Just ask Shraf. She's an ex-catholic who I am sure has had more than a lions share of false teachings and doctrines foisted upon her.In closing, let me state that many evolutionists, and to be fair, many creationists, tend to navigate towards mob mentality, accepting the majority opinion regardless of the need to investigate further. I thank God that a certain individual rejected that "mob mentality" and insisted that the world was round and not flat, (as is made obvious in the Scriptures, upon which he relied heavily).ShalomJet

Agreed!------------------
"THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. Psalm 14:1

Well, I do appreciate the fact that you are at least willing to admit that the TOE is in fact a "dead end".Funny how that worked out! ShalomJet------------------
"THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD. Psalm 14:1[This message has been edited by Jet, 07-06-2003]