tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post3989442034339397811..comments2024-03-16T21:32:23.088-04:00Comments on A Sure Word: Ten Lies Evolutionists Tell: Part 1RKBentleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-6297459038874162332018-06-25T06:27:41.868-04:002018-06-25T06:27:41.868-04:00Well, Dawkins quote is what it is. He said a singl...Well, Dawkins quote is what it is. He said a single, out of date order fossil would disprove evolution. I’ve linked to articles showing fossils found where they weren’t expected any the theory keeps chugging along meaning Dawkins lied. <br /><br />And chimp DNA is longer than human DNA. That’s a fact. Do all the research you want. So if it’s 10% longer, it cannot possibly be 98% similar to human DNA. <br /><br />You’ve not said one word to even attempt to show how anything I’ve said is wrong so you’ll understand why I will just ignore it. Thanks for visiting though. <br /><br />God bless! <br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-58881503439662270902018-06-23T17:35:36.912-04:002018-06-23T17:35:36.912-04:00You've really embarrassed yourself here and yo...You've really embarrassed yourself here and you'd better pray this doesn't get into the wider public domain. It's rubbish on so many points I don't even know where to begin. Just astonishing. The frightening thing is there are people out there who will believe this, and they may be in the American Government. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-91990601808807748852016-09-19T19:26:48.322-04:002016-09-19T19:26:48.322-04:00To my anonymous visitor,
You said, “Who did fabri...To my anonymous visitor,<br /><br />You said, “Who did fabricate the picture [of a rabbit in the Precambrian]. Why this fraud?”<br /><br />I found the picture on Google. I'm not sure who made it originally but it's appeared on a lot of sites. I included it here because it captured a point that was being made in my post. It's obviously been photo-shopped. I'm sorry if you don't get it but I doubt anyone really thinks I'm trying to pass it off as real. <br /><br />Thanks for visting. God bless!!<br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-40486667093763677582016-09-19T19:17:03.480-04:002016-09-19T19:17:03.480-04:00MrHyroko,
If I were you, I would applaud Steven J...MrHyroko,<br /><br />If I were you, I would applaud Steven J instead of discouraging him. Thus far, he is the only visitor who has attempted to address any of my points. No one else has even come close.<br /><br />Steven J is sharper than your average evolutionist. I've said on here before that I sometimes consider him a contributor to my blog rather than a visitor. His comments have made my blog better by keeping me on my toes. I don't hold him responsible for the bad arguments made by other evolutionists but I have sometimes scolded him for not condemning their really bad arguments. Judging by the comments made by my other guests, I don't think they are at all concerned that lies are being told as long as creationists are getting bashed. <br /><br />Aren't evolutionists supposed to be all about science? Don't they go wherever the evidence leads? Are you interested in the truth? Chimp DNA is 10% longer than human DNA; it cannot possibly be 98% similar. Why don't you join me in helping stop the spread of lies like this!<br /><br />Thank you for visiting. God bless!!<br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-43528120652986064642016-09-19T19:02:34.936-04:002016-09-19T19:02:34.936-04:00naiv ite or
You said, “You are presuming that you...naiv ite or<br /><br />You said, “You are presuming that your own standards for what constitutes a good design would be the same as a god's. In the hypothetical scenario in which a god exists and does create something, perhaps it would be so complex or fantastic that it would make our species seem the equivalent of random space debris. As you have no means of knowing the standards of a god, you are in no position to claim that life is a divine creation. Moreover there are no empirical indications that a god created life; on the contrary, most everything living can replicate or reproduce without divine intervention.”<br /><br />Just a week or so ago, I wrote a post titled, Five quick arguments for the existence of God. You might read it. In it, I discussed some of the things you talk about here. <br /><br />People used to believe in “spontaneous generation.” Through experimentation, though, (aka, “science), we found every supposed example of spontaneous generation was false. In every case, some previous life form was found to be the cause. Abiogenesis is a fancy name for spontaneous generation. It is still the belief that life can rise from non-living matter. Not only have we never observed this in nature, neither have we been able to accomplish it in the lab under any conditions. <br /><br />Without a shred of evidence from your side to support your argument, why should I reject everything we've learned scientifically and believe an idea that was discarded not long after bloodletting? <br /><br />Thank you for your comments. God bless!!<br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-19990975052111780482016-09-19T18:53:57.829-04:002016-09-19T18:53:57.829-04:00Joel Hess,
I could provide some sources to suppor...Joel Hess,<br /><br />I could provide some sources to support the 70-80% similarity but never mind that now. I have already shown an evolutionist who says chimp DNA is 10% longer than human DNA. That means if they were similar in every other way – which they're not – they could only be 90% similar at most. Are we agreed? If the high similarity isn't evidence that we're closely related to chimps, why do evolutionists feel the need to exaggerate it? Why not just tell the truth – human/chimp DNA is less than 90% similar?<br /><br />Thanks for your comments. God bless!!<br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-83210062139839768742016-09-19T18:42:17.716-04:002016-09-19T18:42:17.716-04:00Steven J,
You said, “yes, this is the Quine-Duhem...Steven J,<br /><br />You said, “yes, this is the Quine-Duhem thesis at work: since an experiment cannot test a single hypothesis in isolation, any seeming falsification can be treated as a falsification of some auxiliary hypothesis (e.g. for a Precambrian rabbit, that the stratum in question was Precambrian). This is a feature of any test for any theory, however, not some special exemption carved out for evolution or the old Earth.... And you need to distinguish between finding a fossil from a group that is older than any previously-known member of a group, and finding it before the primitive precursors implied by the the nested hierarchy of life existed.”<br /><br />Dawkins said a single fossil out of date order could prove the entire theory wrong. I linked to his quote. Based on your comments, I'm going to assume you agree with me that his assertion is not true.<br /><br />You said, “How much similarity exists depends on how one measures it. The smallest figures are reached by calculating the minimal number of mutations needed to account for the differences. Since a single mutation can duplicate a long stretch of DNA, or insert or delete it, or relocate it to a different part of the genome, one can validly count as "one difference" what by another method might count as tens of thousands of differences.”<br /><br />The evolutionary source I cited said, “the chimp’s genome is estimated to be about 10 percent larger than the human’s.... [T]he tips of each chimpanzee chromosome contain a DNA sequence that is not present in humans.” Therefore, at least some of the additional length cannot be attributed to gene duplication. If you want to say that some of the chimp's DNA has been deleted from ours, then I say you're merely speculating. And again, I remind you that the study states clearly, “The combined alignments were chained and only best reciprocal alignments were retained for further analysis.” In other words, the parts that weren't similar weren't analyzed. How can you claim to know what accounts for the differences?<br /><br />God bless!<br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-17579802224770439772016-09-19T11:01:42.136-04:002016-09-19T11:01:42.136-04:00Who did fabricate the picture. Why this fraud? htt...Who did fabricate the picture. Why this fraud? http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Trilobite-Pictures/trilobites1/Trilobites-33c.htm<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-70981915473620412512016-09-18T22:54:32.349-04:002016-09-18T22:54:32.349-04:00Steven J. I wouldn't even bother wasting your ...Steven J. I wouldn't even bother wasting your breath on these idiots. They won't understand 1/4 of what you say anyways.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11624586445552808688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-65296808454499473852016-09-18T22:01:46.019-04:002016-09-18T22:01:46.019-04:00"...You're right that design is the consp..."...You're right that design is the conspicuous, divine fingerprint we see all over nature."<br /><br />You are presuming that your own standards for what constitutes a good design would be the same as a god's. In the hypothetical scenario in which a god exists and does create something, perhaps it would be so complex or fantastic that it would make our species seem the equivalent of random space debris. As you have no means of knowing the standards of a god, you are in no position to claim that life is a divine creation. Moreover there are no empirical indications that a god created life; on the contrary, most everything living can replicate or reproduce without divine intervention.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09223022644654273156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-32459490396240486652016-09-18T21:46:12.886-04:002016-09-18T21:46:12.886-04:00To answer your question, "Let me just conclud...To answer your question, "Let me just conclude by saying that, if a 98% similarity is evidence that we're related to chimps, what does only a 70-80% similarity mean?" What it would mean, even if it were true, which it is not, is that we are less closely related to our chimp cousins than previously thought. Not that we aren't related at all.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-74188358523779595902016-09-17T02:14:48.778-04:002016-09-17T02:14:48.778-04:00Note that the point of human-chimpanzee genetic si...Note that the point of human-chimpanzee genetic similarity is that when one uses the same method of measuring it, humans are more similar to chimps than gorillas are to chimps. That was not entirely shocking to evolutionists (as long ago as Darwin, evolutionists had considered that we might be more closely related to one than to the other), but I think creationists would find it interesting, even troubling. Or take the fact that the similarity between humans and chimps, genetically, is about the same as the similarity between house cats and tigers, which many young-Earth creationists regard as the same "kind," descended from a pair of ur-felids aboard Noah's Ark.<br /><br />How much similarity exists depends on how one measures it. The smallest figures are reached by calculating the minimal number of mutations needed to account for the differences. Since a single mutation can duplicate a long stretch of DNA, or insert or delete it, or relocate it to a different part of the genome, one can validly count as "one difference" what by another method might count as tens of thousands of differences.Steven J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15638850493907393069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-59587631934631239252016-09-17T02:06:13.161-04:002016-09-17T02:06:13.161-04:00First, yes, this is the Quine-Duhem thesis at work...First, yes, this is the Quine-Duhem thesis at work: since an experiment cannot test a single hypothesis in isolation, any seeming falsification can be treated as a falsification of some auxiliary hypothesis (e.g. for a Precambrian rabbit, that the stratum in question was Precambrian). This is a feature of any test for <i>any</i> theory, however, not some special exemption carved out for evolution or the old Earth. Gravity has faced a few similar cases, from irregularities in the orbit of Uranus to reports of levitation; I do not think its survival is proof that it is some unfalsifiable fairy tale protected from testing.<br /><br />And you need to distinguish between finding a fossil from a group that is older than any previously-known member of a group, and finding it before the primitive precursors implied by the the nested hierarchy of life existed. Thus, placental mammals can exist before the oldest known fossils, but not, e.g. before the "mammal-like" reptiles of the Permian or, preferably, before the placental-marsupial evolutionary split estimated to be ca. the mid-Jurassic. Likewise, genus <i>Homo</i> can come before <i>Homo habilis</i>, but it would be very awkward if it shows up before the australopiths, or before the estimated human-chimp split less than seven million years ago.Steven J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15638850493907393069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-56354586662462238392016-09-15T22:34:26.504-04:002016-09-15T22:34:26.504-04:00Dan,
Thanks for your comment and encouragement. ...Dan,<br /><br />Thanks for your comment and encouragement. You're right that design is the conspicuous, divine fingerprint we see all over nature. <br /><br />Please keep visiting. God bless!!<br /><br />RKBentleyRKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6030110973061875792.post-54564949438140640082016-09-15T09:03:27.178-04:002016-09-15T09:03:27.178-04:00Good research. It's all about divine design, i...Good research. It's all about divine design, isn't it!dan storyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03003707794028890588noreply@blogger.com