Creation vs. Evolution

[MichaelCadry]

Yes that's it Michael.
It's quite hard to try to explain and use examples of quote tags without causing unwanted effects if you use the full tag, hence my "*" instead of "E".

I understand what you mean,

Alwight, God Bless You Good Friend!!

See what happens!! Well, I was trying for a box within a box. This will have to do for now.

Michael

eek!!

 

[alwight]

Yes that's it Michael.
It's quite hard to try to explain and use examples of quote tags without causing unwanted effects if you use the full tag, hence my "*" instead of "E".

See what happens!! Well, I was trying for a box within a box. This will have to do for now.

Michael

eek!!

Like that?
You were so close Michael, it only required a "[/QUOTE]" after the "instead of "E"."
Try and edit it now but note that editing your post may not work quite how this one did. Make sure you have appropriate start and end tags for each quote and close the nested quote before you close the outer one. If I could show in person it would be much easier.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Like that?

You were so close Michael, it only required a "

" after the "instead of "E"."

Try and edit it now but note that editing your post may not work quite how this one did.

Make sure you have appropriate start and end tags for each quote and close the nested quote before you close

the outer one.

If I could show in person it would be much easier.

I DID IT!! I Know how to do it now. But I will need some more practice. Yippee!!

THANKS ALWIGHT!!!

In God's Love For You!

Michael

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Can someone explain to me what Yorzhik is arguing, he seems to be skipping a step but is hesitant to state what it is?

 

[noguru]

Can someone explain to me what Yorzhik is arguing, he seems to be skipping a step but is hesitant to state what it is?

No. His muddled thinking will get him exactly what he deserves.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

When I make a declaration: "It is," and follow it immediately by a qualifier: "unless," that means the answer to the preceding question: "Is it?" could be: "No."

The use of the term "unless" suggests that you would concede his statement if the condition was met. So have you?

I almost forgot stripe never answered this.

 

[Silent Hunter]

I almost forgot stripe never answered this.

. . . and never will.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

. . . and never will.

He usually doesn't.

 

[MichaelCadry]

No. His muddled thinking will get him exactly what he deserves.

How ya doing buddy?? I giving you some more good rep pts. as long as it will let me. I hope that makes your day. I enjoyed your other posts too (on a different thread). I hope your response to this post of mine is positive, instead of negative. No, it wouldn't let me give you any more good rep pts. It's been too soon.

God Bless You Tons, Brother!

Michael

:cheers:

:angel:

 

[noguru]

How ya doing buddy?? I giving you some more good rep pts. as long as it will let me. I hope that makes your day. I enjoyed your other posts too (on a different thread). I hope your response to this post of mine is positive, instead of negative. No, it wouldn't let me give you any more good rep pts. It's been too soon.

God Bless You Tons, Brother!

Michael

:cheers:

:angel:

Takeiteeaasy, brother.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Takeiteeaasy, brother.

Hey noguru,

No problem. I went to give you some good rep pts. and I had done it a few days prior, so it said I have to spread some around, or words to that effect. Remember we're both Christians.

God Bless You Tons!!

Michael

 

[Yorzhik]

Can someone explain to me what Yorzhik is arguing, he seems to be skipping a step but is hesitant to state what it is?

No, the idea is clear and there are no missing steps. The only part missing is your desire to follow the science where it leads.

 

[gcthomas]

No. Spontaneous reactions cause the media the message is on to distort.

Shannon says that noise can be corrected for to an arbitrary level of precision. Are you arguing against Shannon's theory now?

(You always were, you know, but you've gone quiet on it now that you have read some of it and know what it means for your preconceptions, perhaps.)

 

[noguru]

No, the idea is clear and there are no missing steps. The only part missing is your desire to follow the science where it leads.

Nope, that is your failure.

You see how easy it is to post that.

Now, how does one discern who is telling the truth in this regard? A person who is not afraid of the truth is not fooled by lies for very long.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

No, the idea is clear and there are no missing steps. The only part missing is your desire to follow the science where it leads.

So how exactly does the uniform expenditure of energy from heat diffusion, cause a distortion of chemical messages leading to mutational load?

I think there is an unstated premise somewhere. From what I gather it sounds like a long-winded way of saying "Mutations happen therefore crippling mutational load".

 

[Yorzhik]

Shannon says that noise can be corrected for to an arbitrary level of precision. Are you arguing against Shannon's theory now?

You can answer your own question. What level of precision is used when the germ cells are created or when the germ cells combine?

(You always were, you know, but you've gone quiet on it now that you have read some of it and know what it means for your preconceptions, perhaps.)

So far you haven't said anything that challenges what I said, so if there's any reason I've gone quiet that would be it.

 

[Yorzhik]

So how exactly does the uniform expenditure of energy from heat diffusion, cause a distortion of chemical messages leading to mutational load?

Because when the message is transferred there are reactions that were not intended. And sometimes they get by the error correction system for the same reason. The reactions that were not intended happen because there was a path for spontaneous energy flow.

Or, as Prof. Lambert puts it if we consider each mutation a small catastrophe, "Further, you know now that all the chemical catastrophes that hit us are similarly caused because the substances involved in the disaster obey the second law."

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Because when the message is transferred there are reactions that were not intended. And sometimes they get by the error correction system for the same reason. The reactions that were not intended happen because there was a path for spontaneous energy flow.

Or, as Prof. Lambert puts it if we consider each mutation a small catastrophe, "Further, you know now that all the chemical catastrophes that hit us are similarly caused because the substances involved in the disaster obey the second law."

From what I gather it sounds like a long-winded way of saying "Mutations happen therefore crippling mutational load"?

 

[Yorzhik]

From what I gather it sounds like a long-winded way of saying "Mutations happen therefore crippling mutational load"?

So you agree that mutations happen and the reason they happen is because of the 2nd Law?

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear noguru,

Where are you? Congrats on winning that Bronze Membership. Do you know who gave it to you yet?? I can't wait to hear all of the details. Somebody out there thinks you're special, and of course, you ARE!!!

In Christ's Love,

Michael