Originally posted by AngryManatee
Funny you once again compare two different processes, yet the one you brought into comparison (formation of babies from gametes) also has compelling evidence that supports evolution, primarily concerning the mitotic cell-cycle and the division of the mitochondria within the cells.Please stop comparing two things that have nothing in common.
You omitted my other example about chickens not forming outside of eggs.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You omitted my other example about chickens not forming outside of eggs.
Comparing the environment within an egg to the earth's atmosphere is just a horrible comparison, and no, I did not omit this example. I said "babies" which works for both humans and chickens. Last time I checked, they both develop through cell division in the same processes.
Originally posted by AngryManatee
Are you just plain moronic, or do you just not choose to listen? RNA fragments have been OBSERVED to self-assemble. Not just the nitrogenous bases, not just the pentose sugars, and not just the phosphate groups. The whole deal, codons included.Edit: Where oh where do you get your information from?
Why are we still talking about RNA fragments? I have already exploded this point.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Explain.
Ok, I will give you one example: Energy cannot be created or destroyed. That is a scientific principle that you do not know. If you don't agree with a scientific principle, than you don't know it. You have to understand why something is a scientific principle, and you do not.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Ok, I will give you one example: Energy cannot be created or destroyed. That is a scientific principle that you do not know. If you don't agree with a scientific principle, than you don't know it. You have to understand why something is a scientific principle, and you do not.
That is a postulation that you choose to subscribe to. I do not subscribe to the theory that energy cannot be created or destroyed because I believe in God and He is the Creator of all life and matter.
As long as scientific principles agree with the revelation of the Bible then I will endorse them. If they contradict the Bible then they must be rejected. The law of cause and effect does agree with the Bible that is why I endorse it.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That is a postulation that you choose to subscribe to. I do not subscribe to the theory that energy cannot be created or destroyed because I believe in God and He is the Creator of all life and matter.As long as scientific principles agree with the revelation of the Bible then I will endorse them. If they contradict the Bible then they must be rejected. The law of cause and effect [b]does
agree with the Bible that is why I endorse it. [/B]
But you do not understand causality.