The Narrow Path Ministries

Asimov, since I have only limited use of a computer I'm going to wrap up this debate here. You may have the last word. But I will leave you all with a few thoughts. 1. To borrow from Doug Wilson. The Christian and the atheist both live in the same kind of house. We both agree that the floor is strai...

You do agree that non-rational forces are creating their opposite - rational minds? Correct? And it is not an argument from ignorance, it is an argument from observed facts. What observed facts? I am not agreeing on anything, I'm pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. There is no flaw in my logi...

Cuttlefish - these things are amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... rch=Search

Hello again Asimov. 1. Why is it not contradictory? And since you can not offer an example I feel justified in stating so. Argument from ignorance. You are not justified because I can't prove you wrong. A contradiction is a logical term when a statement asserts and denies the same thing. "It is rai...

The two driving forces of evolution are natural selection and random mutations. Random mutations cause the physical changes and natural selection saves them. There is also genetic drift and gene flow in terms of mechanisms of evolution. Do genetic drift and gene flow create new parts? Now is there ...

In science there is no "knowledge in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth.... This may not reflect a weakness in science. It may simply indicate the...

A couple of quotes: Karl Popper, one of the twentieth century's greatest philosophers of science, wrote: First, although in science we do our best to find the truth, we are conscious of the fact that we can never be sure whether we have got it.... We know that our scientific theories always remain h...

vestigial organs have always caused problems for evolutionists as well; e.g. the human appendix or male nipples. if evolutionary theory is correct, men either nursed babies in the past (but nipples havent yet been selected out) or we will in the future. yuck. i agree with you that NS does not seem ...

james wrote: Is there any evidence that RMs can create such parts. i am no evolutionist, but one would likely ask "what do you mean by 'parts'"? tradtionally, evolutionists dont believe, for example, that a fish was suddenly born with lungs and legs due to a RM. they would say the process was more ...

The two driving forces of evolution are natural selection and random mutations. Random mutations cause the physical changes and natural selection saves them. Now is there any evidence that RMs can create the new parts necessary to go from let's say a single cell to a man? I'm not speaking of RMs act...