Is that a trick question? They are polar opposites.[b said:Quote[/b] (Mike King @ Jan. 01 2005,4:42)]Alpha Wolf,
The only reason that God does not speak to you is you have no relationship with him. The bible is clear on that one. Can you show me where science and the bible conflict?
no because you'll say they're metaphors.[b said:Quote[/b] ] Can you show me where science and the bible conflict?
They conflict everywhere. The question is, do the bible and science agree on any point?[b said:Quote[/b] (Mike King @ Jan. 01 2005,4:42)]Alpha Wolf,
The only reason that God does not speak to you is you have no relationship with him. The bible is clear on that one. Can you show me where science and the bible conflict?
so? people aren't perfect. There are scientists who believe things I don't. That doesn't mean they're right or that they are true scientists.[b said:Quote[/b] ]There are an overwhelming number of scientists who are Christians
when that poetry is written as historical fact then yes...[b said:Quote[/b] ]If you firmly believe in order to accept Christianity and having to take poetry as historical fact you will never reconcile the 2
sure but if they're too long I'll read them later My head sort of hurts from trying to read too much too fast (the talkorigins.com pages)[b said:Quote[/b] ]Would you like the study notes?
We never went from rock to human and if you mean going from inorganic to organic.. it was pretty easy. I've e-mailed a scientist from AMNH for a more thorough explanation of how the first bacteria got to be, but for now that question can be answered by my explanation or self replicating RNA.[b said:Quote[/b] (Jeremiah Harris @ Jan. 01 2005,5:32)]I'm sorry but macroevolution (going from rock to human) has absolutely no proof. All I have seen is stuff like a fly having 4 wings instead of 2, the DNA for the wings is already there it just put them in the wrong spot, there was nothing new added.
The first cell wasn't capable of sexual reproduction, it reproduced asexually. I don't think we've asked a question yet...[b said:Quote[/b] ]Next question how was first cell capable of sexual reproduction? And how was the gene pool in that first cell larger enough to produce such a divers array of living things?
more "highly developed" (there's no such thing.... even if there was, roaches would be more "highly developed" than humans because BOY can they survive!) but assuming there is such a thing as more "highly developed", that is not the same as bigger, faster, or able to go to higher ground.[b said:Quote[/b] ]The more "highly developed" organisms would be able to find higher ground (in the flood) therefore wound not have near the rate of petrifaction and be higher up in the "layers".
But you do not find lions among llamas, etc. Right now there are many places with very similar climate and organisms from others parts of the would would do very nicely in other parts of the world. (Ie. cane toads are from south america but do GREAT in australia, etc)[b said:Quote[/b] ]1. Like organisms require a similar environment to survive so it make since that you would find them in similar area of rock.
Jerimiah, your site doesn't work with me.[b said:Quote[/b] ] One other thing it is not always the case hundreds of trees have been found standing through millions of layers worth of starts such as this
what john said.[b said:Quote[/b] ]Next question how was first cell capable of sexual reproduction? And how was the gene pool in that first cell larger enough to produce such a divers array of living things?
Yes, it did have the exact DNA (usually... sometimes extra chromosomes slipped into the daughter cell) which then mutated.[b said:Quote[/b] ]But if it reproduced asexually then the daughter cells would have the exact same DNA right?
Nobody said that. Like I said before, sometimes there are extra chromosomes, etc in daughter organisms. That's how the chromosome number increased over time.[b said:Quote[/b] ]"The gene pool didn't have to be large."
So are you saying that one single cell could have the genetic code for the tens of billions of unique organisms found today?