As I said there is no natural or rational reason. Eternity is in God.
Of course.
You can’t hear commas. The fact, the axiom of uniformity from eternity in God or not needs no argument. There is no parsimonious alternative.
I think they’re all nuts and climate change is political, a holdover of the 60’s hippy movement. It would take another thread to discuss, though.
Yes, you can. (Diction refers to the written, as well.)
You presume that God is continuously cranking out universes? (That’s a surfeit of universes and not
parsimonious. )
Right again, but in 66 years that’s the first usage other than with regard to speech I’ve encountered.
God cannot change. And surfeit is tad of an understatement with regard to infinite.
I expected you to say something to that effect.
And you cannot allow God to intervene in providence unless he is in a boat.
Rational, yes. You’re learning. I don’t see the connection. He doesn’t allow Himself to obviously. Nowt ter do wi’ me.
No, I just knew that you would say something. You always do.
It has to do with time.
It’s only ‘obvious’ because your presuppositions obviously exclude it.
I hope for your sake it is sometime. It’s way cool.
I’m happy it works for you and will for the rest of your life.
I don’t see what time has to do with it. Not even your invariant version.
Here ya go:
https://biologos.org/articles/testing-common-ancestry-its-all-about-the-mutations
What you mean to say is that no amount of evidence will change your mind.
Did you read the paper?
It’s a hypothesis, right?
1 Like
How would you know an explanation is wrong? Would you look at the predictions made by the hypothesis and see if it matches observations?
First, you need to decide if observations and hypothesis testing can lead to explanations.
Second, Alu transposons are not retroviruses.
Third, we can observe endogenous retroviruses inserting randomly in the genome. We can even take the mutations out of ERV’s in the human genome and get functional retroviruses from them, and those retroviruses insert all over the place in the human genome.
Infectious disease research, to be exact. In fact, I am working on adenovirus right now which is a retrovirus.
3 Likes
It is if you include instant coffee.
1 Like
Without wanting to get into a discussion here, for the lowdown on the global-warming movement, just ask Patrick Moore, one of the seven founding members of Greenpeace, who distanced himself from them ages ago.
I would suggest the 1896 paper by Svante Arrhenius where he did the first rough calculations of how increasing carbon dioxide increases the heat trapped in the atmosphere.
http://poncevideo.sdsu.edu/arrhenius_paper_1896.pdf
We’ve known for over 100 years that increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will lead to global warming.
5 Likes
Does practicing medicine require evolution to be true?
Medicine is a scientific discipline. It requires following the evidence and dealing with what it shows rather than insisting on beliefs for which there isn’t a shred of measurable evidence anywhere or insisting on beliefs which ignore the overwhelming evidence from every measurable direction.
Otherwise what you have is the practice of witchdoctors, exorcists, and alternative medicine, which I am not entirely opposed to. Frankly they often follow the Hippocratic oath better than medical doctors do – doing less harm just as they tend to do less help as well. Even if the disease causing demons are in our minds (or in the subjectivity of the spiritual), that doesn’t make them less real to those who suffer from them.
Now THAT is intriguing.
1 Like
Start another thread. This one isn’t about climate change.