jonathansampson said:
Dr Herbie said:
*snip*
Herbie, please trail back through my posts and show me where I invoked the Creator to explain anything. With regards to my latest example, HC2/CHMP12,13 - no Creator is invoked, so where is my leap in that example? I make no leap, I simply state what the data seems to suggest. Humans had another set of chromosomes. Evolutionists make the leap that this demonstrates a relationship between Homo Sapien and his cousin, the chimp. So who is making a leap here?

Creationists don't have to explain where God came from, just as Evolutionists don't have to explain where life came from. It's irrelevant, and you know that having your degree in Evolutionary Biology. What we are discussing is the descent and diversity of life. The origin of life, or the origin of God are interesting topics, but irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

jonathansampson, i thought you said you are a creationist? ..how do you define "creationist" ..i though it means somebody who believes in the jewish explanation of the world ..the whole "GOD created the world in 6 days and rested on the seventh" ..you dont have to mention GOD ..merely saying "i am a creationist" implies believing in jewish GOD and that he created the world the way the book of genesis says .. or what exactly do you mean when you call yourself that?

if you look at our natural world, the world seems to be made of simple entities joined together to form complex entities ..if you believe that GOD created everything in six days 6000 years ago(isnt this what creationist believe?) ..then you will have to logically see that HE first seemed to make the basic entities and then add them up to whatever we have today ..and science, to the most part, explains how these complex entities come together..sometimes science can explain them very well, sometimes it cant ...

science upto now can not explain where these basic entities came from ..same as religion can not explain where GOD came from .. "he was just there" is not really a logical statement to make" ...its more or less that a logician saying "this is true and it doesnt need to be proven" with their axioms

you can always point to specific events and show how evolution is wrong but the bigger aspect of the theory is sound ..and there are assumptions that are made to smooth out the bigger picture ..you may look at these aspects to disprove the theory but whatelse do you have that can take its place ..

if you look at the world, if GOD did it, then he had to have done it in stages, HE had to first build the simplest parts, tweak them a little to differentiate them and then add them up in an interesting way to what we have today ..

you can look at the cromosomes btw chimps and humans and prove that evolution didnt happen ..but if you look at animal "family tree" ..you will see some sort of a pattern ..how do you explain this pattern on a grand scheme of things .. if GOD created the the world and everything in it, HE had to fist have and then followed a master plan and science is trying to explain this master plan ..

maybe evolution is not the best theory, but what is out there attempts to explain in detail how living organisms evolved and the differentiation btw them ..

we can look at the periodic table and see the elements in it ..we can say "GOD did it" ..but how? ..logically, he seemed to start with a single proton and just add them from there throwing neutrons to stabilize the atom ..and them he used the atoms to form complex entities(compounds and molecules) and he move from there ..building stuff ontop of whatever he already had

looking at cromosomes btw chimps and humans and then disprove evolution is more or less equivalent to looking how small the universe is from laws of relativity perspective and say the cheotic quantum mechanic world is wrong ..

evolution may be wrong, maybe imperfect, maybe it needs to be more refined ..but it is the best scientific explanation of how complex entities were formed and differentiate themselves in a biological level ..the core piece of the theory is a fundamental pillar in science ..

if you are to explain how complex entities are formed using religion, you will end up with a lot of "because GOD wanted it that way" or "because he just felt like it" ..you will have to have a lot of "opinions" on how things fit together on a grand scheme of things and you seem to have an issue on how evolutionalists theorise how pieces came together ..it just seem odd to me saying that ..evolution is wrong therefore creation is wright ..can you come up with a detailed explanation of an alternative theory?

what do you think about intelligent design? ..to me, it seems the only way to logically explain how complex entities came together the way they did is by using intelligent design ..scientists just wont have it because its just not possible to "add" GODs hands in scientific experiments and theories ..but it doesnt seem  to be that hard comming from religion point of view ..

by GOD, i am assumption the jewish GOD ..if that wasnt clear cause the whole debate will just crumble if we were talking about another GOD from another civilization because they probably have their own and different explanation of the world