I think the reason I'm not really engrossed in the issue is that one or the other, it wouldn't change the exact reality that I have today, with God and the core experience of my life around both that reality and my resulting "faith".
It would have an impact on some of it but unlike many Christians, I'm not overwhelmed with worry about all the details of "how' God "created" life. It's interesting but not really a deal breaker.
Thanks for your contribution Socks.. its the same to me. Interesting, but not a deal breaker.
But it is a (perceived) deal breaker for quite a lot of us..
While 18 pairs of chromosomes are ‘virtually identical’, chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being ‘remodeled.’4 In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of ‘being remodeled’ as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.
To me, this opens up an entirely different can of worms.. if both sides are correct. somebody, or something had the ability to dice and splice DNA over a million years ago, give or take..
which brings us to today. Super Computers.. able to work in the relm of the human genome..
What kind of dicing and splicing has been going on.. is it a natural progression?
Wow! There are a lot of ideas floating around on thee 2 pages. Some of these ideas seem to speak of the same thing and some not (at least from my perspective)
I'll speak to the "DNA ...junk science?" now. The answer is definitely not. DNA directs the process of protein building within cells. Geneticists have broken the code of the DNA and translated it to coordinating amino acids in the protein. One of the most fascinating things I've ever found during the course of my studies is that similar proteins in various animals is nearly identical. Hemoglobin is hemoglobin is hemoglobin with very few exceptions. The DNA that codes for these hemoglobins is likewise virtually identical. As far as I know, molecules such as insulin, which have the same function in the higher animals (vertebrates) have nearly identical biochemical structure and virtually identical DNA and this is not just among and between the great apes, but in all animals that use them.
Interesting! the physical aspects of man that resemble or are the "same" as other animals makes sense krys. Not that it proves anything that it makes sense but it does.
I have several basic fundamentals that form the tenets of my beliefs and one is that the physical world of life on this planet is all very much alike, very similar and that there is great diversity in how those similarities exist and are in execution. Like, movement. Movement, defined as a form of change. All movement happens in a very restrictive context. A thing changes position, it's x y z coordinates. That change is perceived in relation to something else that holds positions. That change is understood by additional x y z coordinates, time. I could add coordinates for both subjective and objective measurement. It's all very interesting (to me) and incredibly diverse in execution but movement-change happens pretty much the same for everything that moves. So I wonder why that way and and not others? Why is movement-change limited to a thing being "here" and then being "there" through effort or influence....? That's really buggy to me and seems very unlikely in a reality plane that would be without ordered design....There may be other ways we don't know about but that isn't measurable.
So the answer "because that's the way it is" or that's the way it evolved doesn't sound much different to me than "that's the way God designed it" because we can't know of an evolution that included a totally unique and different means of movement that got us to where we are now if we can't know of it, that it existed and there are no artifacts of it's existence.... For things to be the way they are, regardless of how they got that way, doesn't refute or deny that additional aspect of influence, in fact the physical world of movement-change thrives on influence.
Another is the quality of consciousness, which is universally singular. There is a "oneness" to all conscious awareness. Another is the fact that reality only exists as it's understood by it's differences - no two things are the same. If things were in fact the same they wouldn't be two things they'd be one. So nothing is really ever "the same" as anything else, and definitely not anything that is self aware because that awareness of self is actually an awareness of not being something else as much as it is in being aware of it's own self.
While the universe may contain unknown vastness, the universe we do know is one that is the way it is, not the way it's not. There's a border around diversity. And evolution for all it's possibility is really just a theory of probabilities, IMO.
Designer and design can't be removed from the realm of reality without applying extreme prejudice and arrogance IMO. Not that that's what the video guy did, at all. But it's most important to not get tripped up on snakes and talking donkeys in the Bible, because in fact diabolical snakes and talking burros would be the least unusual things possible, IMO if I really remove the border around life and start to think about all the "what if's". Existence could be very different than it is for us, now. But it's not.
Tomorrow's another working day though and I will have to get some rest, regardless. So it's alright, it's alright..../>
I like this thread! I find myself conversing with a squirrel, a wolf and a frog. Perhaps I should revert to the identity I bore in a previous lifetime (pre-internet), the Dink Duck! What a fable Aesop could make of this thread!
Love,
The Dink Duck
Okay, here's a cat giving a miaow.
And I think there is a butterfly about somewhere.
Which my cats would catch and eat, if they could. Better than Go-Cat, apparently.
Recommended Posts
Ham
Duels with inaccurate firearms at twenty paces might do the trick. At the best, you both can be lucky enough to miss.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Thanks for your contribution Socks.. its the same to me. Interesting, but not a deal breaker.
But it is a (perceived) deal breaker for quite a lot of us..
I like the rest of your post as well..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
from Socks link.
This seems to be a pretty good argument as well..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
To me, this opens up an entirely different can of worms.. if both sides are correct. somebody, or something had the ability to dice and splice DNA over a million years ago, give or take..
which brings us to today. Super Computers.. able to work in the relm of the human genome..
What kind of dicing and splicing has been going on.. is it a natural progression?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
On a global point of view it would make sense..
depending on which conspiracy theory one current subscribes too..
Maybe this is not the place..
There is too much to analyze. I need some help here..
so we have a World food Producer.. producing terminal seed. That is, the sower is always bound to one supplier of the seed..
some claim it causes guaranteed infertility within three generations.. in human terms that will be about or less than 100 years..
maybe the status quo must go..
It's just a (an insane) thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
Wow! There are a lot of ideas floating around on thee 2 pages. Some of these ideas seem to speak of the same thing and some not (at least from my perspective)
I'll speak to the "DNA ...junk science?" now. The answer is definitely not. DNA directs the process of protein building within cells. Geneticists have broken the code of the DNA and translated it to coordinating amino acids in the protein. One of the most fascinating things I've ever found during the course of my studies is that similar proteins in various animals is nearly identical. Hemoglobin is hemoglobin is hemoglobin with very few exceptions. The DNA that codes for these hemoglobins is likewise virtually identical. As far as I know, molecules such as insulin, which have the same function in the higher animals (vertebrates) have nearly identical biochemical structure and virtually identical DNA and this is not just among and between the great apes, but in all animals that use them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
oops double post
Edited by krysLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Interesting! the physical aspects of man that resemble or are the "same" as other animals makes sense krys. Not that it proves anything that it makes sense but it does.
I have several basic fundamentals that form the tenets of my beliefs and one is that the physical world of life on this planet is all very much alike, very similar and that there is great diversity in how those similarities exist and are in execution. Like, movement. Movement, defined as a form of change. All movement happens in a very restrictive context. A thing changes position, it's x y z coordinates. That change is perceived in relation to something else that holds positions. That change is understood by additional x y z coordinates, time. I could add coordinates for both subjective and objective measurement. It's all very interesting (to me) and incredibly diverse in execution but movement-change happens pretty much the same for everything that moves. So I wonder why that way and and not others? Why is movement-change limited to a thing being "here" and then being "there" through effort or influence....? That's really buggy to me and seems very unlikely in a reality plane that would be without ordered design....There may be other ways we don't know about but that isn't measurable.
So the answer "because that's the way it is" or that's the way it evolved doesn't sound much different to me than "that's the way God designed it" because we can't know of an evolution that included a totally unique and different means of movement that got us to where we are now if we can't know of it, that it existed and there are no artifacts of it's existence.... For things to be the way they are, regardless of how they got that way, doesn't refute or deny that additional aspect of influence, in fact the physical world of movement-change thrives on influence.
Another is the quality of consciousness, which is universally singular. There is a "oneness" to all conscious awareness. Another is the fact that reality only exists as it's understood by it's differences - no two things are the same. If things were in fact the same they wouldn't be two things they'd be one. So nothing is really ever "the same" as anything else, and definitely not anything that is self aware because that awareness of self is actually an awareness of not being something else as much as it is in being aware of it's own self.
While the universe may contain unknown vastness, the universe we do know is one that is the way it is, not the way it's not. There's a border around diversity. And evolution for all it's possibility is really just a theory of probabilities, IMO.
Designer and design can't be removed from the realm of reality without applying extreme prejudice and arrogance IMO. Not that that's what the video guy did, at all. But it's most important to not get tripped up on snakes and talking donkeys in the Bible, because in fact diabolical snakes and talking burros would be the least unusual things possible, IMO if I really remove the border around life and start to think about all the "what if's". Existence could be very different than it is for us, now. But it's not.
Tomorrow's another working day though and I will have to get some rest, regardless. So it's alright, it's alright....
/>
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Okay, here's a cat giving a miaow.
And I think there is a butterfly about somewhere.
Which my cats would catch and eat, if they could. Better than Go-Cat, apparently.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.