Science, Creation & EvolutionAge of the EarthNo, it is not true at all. Sarfati is out of his element and is making errors (purposefully or via ignorance) of interpretation. Oh, I get it - the old "you must actually SEE something occur for it to have occurred." I am sure that our public defenders and defense attorneys will enjoy using that TRUTH in court as they defend their guilty clients. If you come across a fallen tree in a forest but you did not see it fall, do you conclude that it just grew that way? Wait - you did not see it grow, either, so it must have been CREATED that way! But wait, you did not see it created, either... Oh dear, what is a fellow to do? Well, you could make a logical inferrence... Nah - creationists are gainst having to think about stuff... Actually, the occurrance of gene duplications is a fairly well established phenomenon. Even the more well informed creationists accept the phenomenon. Even your hero Sarfati treatsthe phenomenon as a given (I will ignore for now the sheer stupidity of that article.) So, you may want to think a bit more about what you wantonly dismiss. You might find yourself at odds with your fellow creationists that actually know something about the subject. Does misrepresenting people come easy for you? Yes, it must as you do it so often. You cannot even seem to keep two issues separate in one thread. Here, let me help you out on this so as to help you avoid distorting and mistrepresenting me so often. I had written, in respinse to some half-baked throw away comment from AT: "Did you know that nearly half the human genome arose via duplications?" AT then responded with a silly underinformed non sequitur: "is that another one of your "scientific" conclusions? i thought you didn't start with your conclusions? how could such a thing that allegedly happened in the past ever be tested? you almost sound "religious" now. look out." To which I replied: " didn't. Can't you read anything but AiG propaganda and misrepresentations?" Which brings us up to date. Let's see how AT replied to my last statement: In REALITY, my original question asking whether or not AT knew about gene duplications was in reference to increasing 'information' (still undefined by the creationist, by the way) . I aksed if he knew that almost half the human genome had arisen via duplications. This conclusion was drawn by actually analyzing the data, and observing huge segments of nearly identical sequence within the genome. I have already linked to the paper in question, so will not do it again. Pity that eyewitness testimony is so unreliable and empirical tests and experimentation results can be vewrified and repeated. Funny how the creationist trots out these double standards so handily. Talk about your circular reasoning.... We know the bible is true because it says so in the bible. ... I'm looking at the manin the mirror... |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame