The 6000 Year Earth

[rossum]

Dr.Lee Spetner, a highly qualified scientist from John Hopkins University .

Who is not infallible and can make mistakes.

Rossum are you a scientist?

I have a science degree though I did not work as a scientist.

This man just proved evolution is WRONG!

If he had done so then he would have a Nobel prize, just as Einstein got one for showing that Newton was wrong. Spetner himself has agreed that in some circumstances mutations can increase information:There is no theorem requiring mutations to lose information. I can easily imagine mutations that gain information. The simplest example is what is known as a back mutation. A back mutation undoes the effect of a previous mutation. If the change of a single base pair in the genome were to change to another and lose information, then a subsequent mutation back to the previous condition would regain the lost information. Since these mutations are known to occur, they form a counterexample to any conjecture that random mutations must lose information.

Source: Lee Spetner/Edward Max Dialogue.
Spetner agrees that mutations can, in some circumstances, generate information. That excerpt was from a creationist source, trueorigins. I can understand your not reading scientific sources, but I really do expect you to read creationist sources.

With my simple example of pi I showed that some mutations can generate information. Dr Spetner agrees that some mutations can generate information.

rossum

 

[StAnastasia]

Dr.Lee Spetner, a highly qualified scientist from John Hopkins University. This man just proved evolution is WRONG!

What’s his proof? Can you articulate it for us?

 

[Orogeny]

Science background? I will stick with the creator of science, God, the Holy Spirit.

And what did He tell you about quantum mechanics? How about physical chemistry? Heart disease?

As for people like me accepting logic, I do if it is not contrary to the Word of God. Do you not know that the wisdom of the world is but foolishness unto the LORD?

Why do you insist that science is contrary to God? What a sad existence it must be to deny God’s creation.

Peace

Tim

 

[heiscominginthe]

And what did He tell you about quantum mechanics? How about physical chemistry? Heart disease?Why do you insist that science is contrary to God? What a sad existence it must be to deny God’s creation.

Peace

Tim

Tim, the only thing that truly matters in this world is salvation. A man can have all the wisdom and knowledge of the world, but if he does not have God, he has nothing. Can the wisdom of the world save a man’s soul?

Don’t fear him who can kill the body, but fear him who can kill the body and toss the soul into hell.

 

[matahari]

Interesting theory, but I don’t believe it at all. The reason the light of the stars are seen in her night sky is simple. Before even the stars and celestial bodies were put in heaven, light was already in place. Genesis 1

---

That ties in with Rev.21:23 " And the city has no need of the sun or the moon to shine upon it. For the glory of God lights it up, and the Lamb is the lamp therof…And its gates shall not be shut by day; for there shall be no night there

Rev:1:8 " I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end says the Lord God "
_____________________________________

 

[matahari]

Yes they can

Mutations can produce new information.

rossum

                     _________________________________________________

Evolutionary scientists have no way around this conclusion that many scientists, including Dr. Spetner have now come to. Mutations do not work as a mechanism for the evolutionary process. Spetner sums it up as follows :

The neo-Darwinians would like us to believe that large evolutionary changes can result from a series of small events if there are enough of them . But if these events all LOSE informationthey can’t be the steps in the kind of evolution the NDT is supposed to explain, no matter how many mutations there are. Whoever thinks macroevolution can be made by mutations that lose information is like the merchant who lost a little money on every sale but thought he could make it up in volume…Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genomeThat surely shows that there are not the millions upon millions of potential mutations the theory demands. There may well not be any. The failure to observe even one mutation that adds information is more than just a failure to find support for the theory. It is evidence AGAINST the theory. We have here a serious challenge to neo-Darwinian theory |emphasis added ]
This is also confirmed by Dr. Werner Gitt, a director and professor at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology.

 

[rossum]

[Spetner said:] Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genome

Mutations have been observed that add Kolmogorov information to the genome. Spetner is incorrect here. Mutations have been observed that add Shannon information to the genome. Spetner is wrong here. Mutations have been observed that add Fisher information to the genome. Spetner is wrong here.

Dr Spetner has his own idiosyncratic and apparently subjective definition of “information”, under which his statements may well be true. His problem is that on all other measures information in a genome can, and has been observed to, increase.

I have already quoted Spetner saying that some mutations can increase information. I will repeat it here, with added emphases, since it seems that you did not follow what Dr Spetner said:There is no theorem requiring mutations to lose information. I can easily imagine mutations that gain information. The simplest example is what is known as a back mutation. A back mutation undoes the effect of a previous mutation. If the change of a single base pair in the genome were to change to another and lose information, then a subsequent mutation back to the previous condition would regain the lost information. Since these mutations are known to occur, they form a counterexample to any conjecture that random mutations must lose information. (emphases added)

rossum

 

[StAnastasia]

That ties in with Rev.21:23 " And the city has no need of the sun or the moon to shine upon it. For the glory of God lights it up, and the Lamb is the lamp therof…And its gates shall not be shut by day; for there shall be no night there

No it doesn’t tie in with it. Revelation is a first century apocalyptic vision that is utterly irrelevant from a cosmological perspective.

 

[Orogeny]

Tim, the only thing that truly matters in this world is salvation. A man can have all the wisdom and knowledge of the world, but if he does not have God, he has nothing. Can the wisdom of the world save a man’s soul?

The fatal flaw in your own peculiar theology is that you insist that one cannot have God in one’s life AND wisdom and knowledge of the world. You are wrong.

Peace

Tim

 

[avflf]

The main problem with a 4.7 billion year old earth is that it’s too short a period for chance alone to produce all the species that exist now and existed before. Do the math.

 

[heiscominginthe]

---

That ties in with Rev.21:23 " And the city has no need of the sun or the moon to shine upon it. For the glory of God lights it up, and the Lamb is the lamp therof…And its gates shall not be shut by day; for there shall be no night there

Rev:1:8 " I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end says the Lord God "
_____________________________________

Excellent rely. Well done.

 

[heiscominginthe]

The fatal flaw in your own peculiar theology is that you insist that one cannot have God in one’s life AND wisdom and knowledge of the world. You are wrong.

Peace

Tim

You are not arguing with me Tim. You argue with the Word of God.

Man has since the beginning basked in his own acheivements. How many who do discover things give homage to God?

As for saying I am wrong, let us see what the Word of God has to say about it. I can add many more scriptures in support of the Word of God, but I thing you need to pay special attention to the first one in Corinthians. Don’t let your faith stand on the wisdoms of men.

1 Corinthians 2:5 that your faith wouldn’t stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

1 Corinthians 1:19 For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, I will bring the discernment of the discerning to nothing.”

1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the lawyer of this world? Hasn’t God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

 

[buffalo]

The main problem with a 4.7 billion year old earth is that it’s too short a period for chance alone to produce all the species that exist now and existed before. Do the math.

or play the Richard Dawkins Mutation Challenge

 

[rossum]

The main problem with a 4.7 billion year old earth is that it’s too short a period for chance alone to produce all the species that exist now and existed before.

Correct, which is why no biologist will tell you that it was chance alone. Evolution works by random mutation and natural selection; any calculation that leaves out the “natural selection” part is not a correct model of evolution.

Do the math.

No need. If your model is wrong then the numbers are not a reflection of reality.

rossum

 

[humble_in_doubt]

The main problem with a 4.7 billion year old earth is that it’s too short a period for chance alone to produce all the species that exist now and existed before. Do the math.

scientists have done the math, and all the empirical evidence shows a common origin (i.e. every living organism on earth has a common ancestor, probably a single cell organism, appearing roughly 3.9 billion years ago). Moreover, both macro & micro evolution (through natural selection) are known to have occurred.

This stuff isn’t mere theory anymore, it’s fact. There are still a few unknowns that remain in the realm of theory, but a universal common origin and micro/macro-evolution through natural selection aren’t among them (except in the minds of a minority of religious pundits).

 

[matahari]

scientists have done the math, and all the empirical evidence shows a common origin (i.e. every living organism on earth has a common ancestor, probably a single cell organism, appearing roughly 3.9 billion years ago). Moreover, both macro & micro evolution (through natural selection) are known to have occurred.

---

If you took a headcount you might be surprised how many scientists do not agree with you. Then among those who promote evolution their private and professional opinions may differ …:

How many scientists keep their jobs as long as they toe the evolution line ?

 

[Orogeny]

You are not arguing with me Tim. You argue with the Word of God.

How can that be when I believe in the Word of God? No, I am arguing with YOUR interpretation of the Word that seems to require you to reject science.

Man has since the beginning basked in his own acheivements. How many who do discover things give homage to God?

So you reject all science because of this lack of public homage?

As for saying I am wrong, let us see what the Word of God has to say about it. I can add many more scriptures in support of the Word of God, but I thing you need to pay special attention to the first one in Corinthians. Don’t let your faith stand on the wisdoms of men.

1 Corinthians 2:5 that your faith wouldn’t stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

1 Corinthians 1:19 For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, I will bring the discernment of the discerning to nothing.”

1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the lawyer of this world? Hasn’t God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

So you honestly believe that knowledge is evil? Well, I don’t and your quote mining of Scriptures shows nothing other than your willfull ignorance of God’s incredible creation.

Peace

Tim

 

[StAnastasia]

How can that be when I believe in the Word of God? No, I am arguing with YOUR interpretation of the Word that seems to require you to reject science.So you reject all science because of this lack of public homage?So you honestly believe that knowledge is evil? Well, I don’t and your quote mining of Scriptures shows nothing other than your willfull ignorance of God’s incredible creation. Peace,Tim

Tim, here’s a dentist, ignorant of biology, who rejects knowledge, and was duly rejected even by Texas!:

“The Texas state Senate on Thursday rejected the governor’s nomination of Republican Don McLeroy to be chairman of the State Board of Education, according to yesterday’s Dallas Morning News. McLeroy is currently serving as chairman under an interim appointment. A two-thirds majority was required to approve the nomination, and the vote was one short–19-11 to confirm. McLeroy-- who believes in creationism and who does not believe global warming is taking place-- has been criticized for trying to promote his religious views on curricular issues. McLeroy denies that he has pressed his views in the consideration of education policy. McLeroy supporter Sen. Steve Ogden accused Democrats of applying a religious test in rejecting the nomination. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]”

religionclause.blogspot.com/

 

[Orogeny]

Tim, here’s a dentist, ignorant of biology, who rejects knowledge, and was duly rejected even by Texas!:

“The Texas state Senate on Thursday rejected the governor’s nomination of Republican Don McLeroy to be chairman of the State Board of Education, according to yesterday’s Dallas Morning News. McLeroy is currently serving as chairman under an interim appointment. A two-thirds majority was required to approve the nomination, and the vote was one short–19-11 to confirm. McLeroy-- who believes in creationism and who does not believe global warming is taking place-- has been criticized for trying to promote his religious views on curricular issues. McLeroy denies that he has pressed his views in the consideration of education policy. McLeroy supporter Sen. Steve Ogden accused Democrats of applying a religious test in rejecting the nomination. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]”

religionclause.blogspot.com/

Unfortunately, I am all too familiar with that guy. I, for one, am happy that he has been removed from his chairmanship.

Peace

Tim

 

[heiscominginthe]

How can that be when I believe in the Word of God? No, I am arguing with YOUR interpretation of the Word that seems to require you to reject science.So you reject all science because of this lack of public homage?So you honestly believe that knowledge is evil? Well, I don’t and your quote mining of Scriptures shows nothing other than your willfull ignorance of God’s incredible creation.

Peace

Tim

I believe in this world there are things that are true and things that are false. I believe there is science that is true and science that is false. I believe their are teachings that are true and teachings that are false.

You keep saying my interpretation on one hand and then attack when I use scripture. As I said before, your argument is not with me, but the Word of God.