re: Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham

Thomas Aquinas
immovable mover

I'm going to post this again because it got stuck at the bottom of another page. It's not something that I thought of, so I can't take credit.

quote:

---

I once heard a really intelligent point, which I will paraphrase and probably screw up: "If we choose to believe in science alone, does that mean that anytime the Bible contradicts science, we should throw away all of the Bible as false? Or if we choose to believe in the Bible alone, does that mean that we should throw away all of science if science disagrees with something in the Bible? The third option is that maybe we should take the Bible and science as two separate entities that seek to answer different questions."

---

quote:

---

You have absolutely no evidence, no proof, for your statements. Back to guesses and suppositions.

---

what's your definition of marcoevolution?

quote:

---

Where did God come from?

---

SEC Crazy told me that a long, long, long time ago Nick Saban and Paul "Bear" Bryant had buttsex and the next turd The Bear laid was god

I think your point is equally unimpressive in that you assume the same thing that a creationist assumes.....that some thing has always existed

quote:

---

I have asked him this twice, he still wont answer

---

Did you submit in writing? APA format?

quote:

---

You have absolutely no evidence, no proof, for your statements. Back to guesses and suppositions.

---

First, I have a bachelors in biology with a minor in microbiology and a masters in biology. I have at least some clue what I'm talking about.

Second, evolution at its core consists of genetic mutations and gene duplications being selected for or against based on an organisms environment and capability to survive and reproduce. The same genetic changes and selection process that allow bacteria to become resistance to antibiotics are the ones that, over long periods of time, allow for speciation events and branches in the evolutionary tree.

Third, we absolutely have observed macroevolution (not that we need to, genetics and microbiology provide nearly limitless data on evolution). For example, we have very clearly observed speciation events between salamanders who have been separated by the human development in California and are now so different they can no longer interbreed despite being able to do so in the lifetime of many on this board.

quote:

---

The elephant-pine tree thing would be evidence for macro, Darwinist, evolution.

---

The easiest argument to explain that a pine tree and an elephant came from a common ancestor would be to say that they both contain a genetic code that is conserved throughout all species, and that within that genetic code, the same codons code for the same amino acids.

quote:

---

my disbelief in a God has nothing to do with science.

---

And that is perfectly okay. I'm just saying that it's futile to use science to disprove God or God to disprove science.

quote:

---

What's your evidence, your proof, of macro evolution?

---

As I said, it's vast and well understood and involves multiple scientific fields.

Human chromosome #2 is a direct fusion of two chimpanzee chromosomes, indicating common ancestry and a later fusion event in humans absent in our closest living cousin the chimp (which, not coincidentally, have 48 chromosomes to our 46).

Much of our "junk" DNA (introns, non-coding regions, etc.) is identical in thousands of other species.

Human mitochondria have been genetically shown to be descendents of bacteria engulfed by an early eukaryote that then entered into a symbiotic relationship with each other. The same is true of chloroplasts in plants.

I could go on for pages.