Snow Leopard wrote:
> I don't trust any statistics that add up to >100%.
>
> Besides, your source makes no point. Now, I know people who believe that
> science and faith are incompatible. Let me ask you somethin':
>
> Do you believe in the accuracy of the following:
>
> Every single thermometer used in scientific labs
certainly not, but easy to test
>
>
> The "awakeness" of technicians recording that data that basically "supports"
> your beliefs... your Bible if you will...
>
Certainly not, but easy to test
>
> The accuracy of every telescope, the rate of decay of elements whose half
> lives will outlive your great-great^1000 grand children? The "spontaneous
> generation" of a living thing (the idea of which, we disproved 200 years
> ago) that already had enough intelligence that it, in a /short/ few billion
> years created communism that actually worked....
>
> And
This statement is based on falsehoods that only a child or the uninformed could believe. First off, if you can say for sure that a few billion years ago life did not start from the basic building blocks, but it is impossible to have accurate decay rates for half lives much, much shorter than that. This is a contradiction - and they proved it 200 years ago? This displays a level of ignorance that makes the scope of the question beyond your understanding. But to answer the question, certainly not, but easy to test.
> these bacterial colonies grew, and the screw-ups were better than the
> original, so it grew a tail, and then it got beached, but didn't die... so
> it went back into the water (where the opposite sex found this "survival
> story" very attractive, so it multipled... more than the others that didn't
> have to feed these extraadaptaitions. Then, miracle of miracles, all of the
> correct changes added up, and an amphibian came into being.
>
Once again, this is so fundamentally misunderstood by you that the answers would be meaningless to you. Like teaching spelling to a 1 year old. You need the basic understanding tools to gain from this line of inquiry. But to answer the question - so far a similar but statistically more probable occurance. Of course - as the line of inquiry has only been available for a few years, I expect we have a lot to learn about it.
>
> A few 100 generations later, a few of them became incapable of water life.
> This disadvantagous mutation survived, land animals.
>
Once again, a lack of understanding is your handicap - but this answer is a lot easier - expand your numbers severalfold, and that is what it looks like happened. Lots and lots of evidence to show that that is what happens, maybe you have heard of them, fossiles.
>
> Then, one of them jumps in a tree, stays there a while, jumped down, put on
> a suit, and became a lawyer. That's your grandfather, who married "Lucy."
More of the same, but because you still dont get it at this stage, I dont you ever will - This it what the record looks like effectivly. At least it took you a few paragraphs.
>
> Faith, hmm?
>
Or your view - an omnipotent, omniscient, bring created earth, then the sun then the stars in six days, instantaneously populated the planet, made the stars for mans benefit, and the world flat. The water didnt freeeze when there was no sun in existence. In a matter a 2000 years, man spread and populated the world with 3 races, 1 of which god didnt know existed. Humans went from 2 to 6 billion people in 5000 or so years, despite everyone one and everything getting killed in a flood not recorded in any other history, or even Jewish or Egyptian history.
Look, you need to slay your dragon and get off your magic unicorn before you can see reality. But if you life your fantasy world - please stay - but dont try to drag us there. We gave that up as little children.
Bill Roh
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com