BaylorJacket said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Quote:

---

When it comes to scientific topics, I learn new things nearly daily and update my position on them. Your use of the word "evolution" regarding my position is actually an excellent description - and something I hope to continue doing.

---

Your position actually isn't "evolution", it's more like design. As in designed to always move away from God despite the evidence.

I can't decide if the design is intelligent, though.

---

Lmao - alright, I admit this was funny.

In all serious though, if I truly am designed to move away from God despite the evidence, that is kind of God's problem for designing me that way. Not much I can do about it

---

Have you considered that you're designed to have free will?

If you didn't have free will and you were made to worship God, you would be a slave and God would know his worshippers aren't worshipping him out of love.

There's no love without free will.

Random?

A string of happy little accidents just happened to be perfect or design? Which is more logical?

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1wCFMqpz1LjfnKE7/?mibextid=NqTh7c

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

---

what came first, the eye or the optic nerve?

Of the 20 components that make up the clotting cascade, what came first? Without even on of these twenty, the system fails.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

---

what came first, the eye or the optic nerve?

Of the 20 components that make up the clotting cascade, what came first? Without even on of these twenty, the system fails.

---

Are you capable of providing an engaging answer to what i posted?

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

---

what came first, the eye or the optic nerve?

Of the 20 components that make up the clotting cascade, what came first? Without even on of these twenty, the system fails.

---

Are you capable of providing an engaging answer to what i posted?

---

Are you capable of answering my questions?

Here's another for you; can you tell me how the monarch butterfly evolved through mutations? What possible mutations provided for GPS that the animal could understand? What possible mutations provided for the caterpillar digesting itself but then becoming a totally different animal with new parts. What possible mutations cause every 5th or 6th generation to live months rather than weeks but still manage to return to the same tree six generations removed?

This thread is proof that nothing agitates the atheist more than running into the assertion that he may be more than a hairless ape.

When you're dead, it's tough to pass on genetics

Ant colonies have many types of ants that fill different roles, including ants whose job is to defend the colony against attackers. But for about 15 species of ants in Southeast Asia known collectively as "exploding ants," defending the colony entails more than biting attackers with their mandibles.

Worker ants from these species have large, poison-filled glands that run through their whole bodies. When under threat, they will violently contract their abdominal muscles to blow themselves up and spray a sticky poison. It's this corrosive chemical irritant, rather than the explosion itself, that immobilizes or kills the attacker.2 Unfortunately, it also kills the ant.

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

---

what came first, the eye or the optic nerve?

Of the 20 components that make up the clotting cascade, what came first? Without even on of these twenty, the system fails.

---

Are you capable of providing an engaging answer to what i posted?

---

How can he, or anyone else for that matter be able to answer that? Your comment made absolutely no sense.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

The more I get into this subject, the more I believe that reality is idealism: the universe is fundamentally mental in nature and spacetime is held within consciousness, not brain consciousness, but reality itself is fundamentally consciousness.

We've already proved that the probability that spacetime being fundamental is precisely 0% based on Donald Hoffman's user interface theory using evolutionary game theory. Running thousands of evolutionary computer simulations in which digital organisms whose perceptual systems are tuned exclusively for truth are outcompeted by those tuned solely for fitness. Organisms that see the truth have a 0% chance of survival. This is a mathematical theorem. Because natural selection depends only on expected fitness, evolution shaped our sensory systems toward fitter behavior, not truthful representation.

In other words, you are consciousness using spacetime to experience itself.



We also know that there are objects outside of spacetime called amplituhedron that perfectly project down to spacetime, along with decorated permutations. Spacetime is not fundamental. Physicalism is paradoxical in nature and absurd. Infinite regress is impossible because it rules out causality.

Really I think the substrate of reality is almost platonic in nature and ultimately its language. Logic is ever present to reality and self referential logic/syntax at infinite scale gives rise to consciousness (GOD). We're all just a subset of that infinite consciousness, made in God's image.

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

Best one on ID I've read

SIGNATURE IN THE CELL - DNA and the Evidence For Intelligent Design

Stephen C. Meyer -

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

---

I don't disagree with that.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

---

what came first, the eye or the optic nerve?

Of the 20 components that make up the clotting cascade, what came first? Without even on of these twenty, the system fails.

---

Are you capable of providing an engaging answer to what i posted?

---

Are you capable of answering my questions?

Here's another for you; can you tell me how the monarch butterfly evolved through mutations? What possible mutations provided for GPS that the animal could understand? What possible mutations provided for the caterpillar digesting itself but then becoming a totally different animal with new parts. What possible mutations cause every 5th or 6th generation to live months rather than weeks but still manage to return to the same tree six generations removed?

---

I went a step beyond answering your question, to show why the answer doesn't matter. Can you answer your own question?

My answer is that I don't know whether the chicken or egg came first, because I wasn't there to see it. I don't know the fullness of how the universe works, and that's what I'd need, to provide an answer that would convince you. You ask questions not to get answers, but to reassure yourself that you are right.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

---

Who suggests otherwise? Do you understand what evolution is?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

MT_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

---

I'm curious as to how you see this as showing evidence of design. It shows evidence that camouflage is highly adaptive, but that fact in and of itself says nothing of the origin (many times over) of camouflage. It can be just as simply explained by mutation + selection as it can by intentional design coming from a god, so why does this provide evidence for one and not the other, in your mind?

---

When I see great art, I know there was an artist. When I see great engineering, I know there was an engineer.

The stripes on a single zebra may help repell biting flies but, they actually bring attention to the zebra. The stripes on a heard of zebras cause confusion (dazzle) and therefore provide protection. This hypothesis completely works against the idea of a successful mutation.

---

That falls apart when held up to logic. What you mean is, when you see art you understand, you know there was an artist. When you see great engineering you understand, you know there was an engineer. Basically you are able to validate the assumptive knowledge of a designer when you have experience with the design.

This in and of itself just says you know what you know. It has nothing to do with a cosmic God. Even worse, you thinking that your knowledge validates God.... is exactly what atheists are always raging about. We used to know it was a religion of faith, not knowledge, but along the way, theology then doctrine happened, and after that it is sure hard to not start to let a little knowledge trickle into the religion. We should be in awe and wonder at all we don't understand, but instead we tell everyone how it is and who God is. Because when we see camouflage we know there was a camouflager?

---

what came first, the eye or the optic nerve?

Of the 20 components that make up the clotting cascade, what came first? Without even on of these twenty, the system fails.

---

Are you capable of providing an engaging answer to what i posted?

---

How can he, or anyone else for that matter be able to answer that? Your comment made absolutely no sense.

---

Up until this point I've never more than glanced at your username. I thought it was BustyTarper. I was about to reply OK Busty but then realized I've had the wrong idea about you.

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

---

Who suggests otherwise? Do you understand what evolution is?

---

I think we all agree that the one piece missing is the "spark" what started it all? Even the Big Bang, what instigated the explosion? What played into creating life from the requisite parts? That is the question I have.

I'm a simpleton but I'll never understand:
- So we have to believe to fish, male and female, spontaneously and together decided to jump onto the beach, could magically breath the air, and procreated an entire planet
- If we evolved from monkey, why are there still monkeys

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

---

Who suggests otherwise? Do you understand what evolution is?

---

virtually every atheist shouts evolution as a reflex reaction to intelligent design or creation. They have no clue as to the origin of life. Their answers to every tough question are multiverse (zero evidence) and evolution (no origin).

They don't just suggest otherwise, they demand otherwise before starting.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

---

Who suggests otherwise? Do you understand what evolution is?

---

I think we all agree that the one piece missing is the "spark" what started it all? Even the Big Bang, what instigated the explosion? What played into creating life from the requisite parts? That is the question I have.

---

quantum mechanic says that you can create a spark of light in a vacuum. They have done it but it is on such a minute level. Reproducing anything to mimic the instantaneous birth of the universe is impossible. There is no way to create a level of nothingness in order to accurately test.

The jump from nothing to something, the jump from non life to life, the jump from single to multicell organisms, the jump to symbiotic organ systems functioning as a whole from single function multicell organisms, from humanoid to human.. all drastic jumps forward that have weak explanations at best.

4th and Inches said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

This is a spin-off from another thread.

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20

I have zero proof, just as I believe y'all will have zero proof. I do however have evidence and, as has has been my life experience, we do not base our lives on proof but on evidence.

So, here goes:
For spreading seeds, The maple samaras (yea) Dandelions (boo).

For our bodies, The clotting factor

For navigation generations apart, The monarch butterfly
For camouflage, the Great potoo and the zebra

I believe all of these show evidence of design and, there are literally millions more.

Now support it, shoot it it down or offer up your own.

---

Two excellent books

Language of God
Believing Scientist

May not answer questions but hearing from those that came to the conclusion God is behind everything after working in that field I find more credible than just believing.

Also do believe on evolution, but within an intelligent design

---

evolution may be a process but, the is ZERO evidence as an origin.

---

Who suggests otherwise? Do you understand what evolution is?

---

I think we all agree that the one piece missing is the "spark" what started it all? Even the Big Bang, what instigated the explosion? What played into creating life from the requisite parts? That is the question I have.

---

quantum mechanic says that you can create a spark of light in a vacuum. They have done it but it is on such a minute level. Reproducing anything to mimic the instantaneous birth of the universe is impossible. There is no way to create a level of nothingness in order to accurately test.

The jump from nothing to something, the jump from non life to life, the jump from single to multicell organisms, the jump to symbiotic organ systems functioning as a whole from single function multicell organisms, from humanoid to human.. all drastic jumps forward that have weak explanations at best.

---

That is where I think you find God's influence. The rest is a top set in motion, that the other parts are simply tools