I believe in both. Intelligent Design is how everything began and evolution is how species evolve over time, but within their own species. In other words, alligators never turne... I believe in both. Intelligent Design is how everything began and evolution is how species evolve over time, but within their own species. In other words, alligators never turned into birds. That's two different species. Even Darwin didn't believe that. They have never found ANY transitional species (like an alligator/bird) to substanciate that belief. (more)

I'm really beginning to like you. You're tenacious, a trait that I have and admire. "Believed to be an common ancestor" ??? That's one thing I love about h... I'm really beginning to like you. You're tenacious, a trait that I have and admire. "Believed to be an common ancestor" ??? That's one thing I love about hack science is all you have to say is "it is believed", "our studies show", "our research points to", "the consensus is", and so on and so on. Question: With what did something else mate with to bring about the human line? Which lineage is the one that brought the ability to "reason" into the equation. How about speech (not even dealing with language) what ancestor contributed speech. Evolution is supposed to be adapting to needs for survival over long periods of time. How was the "eye" adapted, piece by piece over billions of years? Way to many questions with "we believe that" as answers. As for your statement regarding "posting every detail of the creation" the reason you don't see it is because it doesn't exist. There are hugh gaps in the evolution / creation story that needs to be explained and not assumed. Looking forward to hearing from you. I have lots more to think about. (more)

Jesus told us that the path is narrow to salvation and that in the end days Christians will not be very popular. When I read that in my twenties (40 years ago) I never thought ... Jesus told us that the path is narrow to salvation and that in the end days Christians will not be very popular. When I read that in my twenties (40 years ago) I never thought I would see the day that Christianity would not be looked upon favorably. It's really not surprising but it is sad. (more)

Ed, I believe that is the sign for the Texas Longhorns. I believe Jenna and Laura Bush both graduated from there and the other daughter, Barbara and President Bush graduated fro... Ed, I believe that is the sign for the Texas Longhorns. I believe Jenna and Laura Bush both graduated from there and the other daughter, Barbara and President Bush graduated from Yale. (more)

I agree 100%. He's a man of great principles and a heart for God. The same goes for his beautiful wife Laura, his girls and his mom and dad. What a family.

No comparison. Beatles were 5 times more popular with a career that was 1/4 as long. They had many more hit singles and and albums. But I really like the Stones, too.

yeah, we've heard the "common ancestor" story. What was the common ancestor if it wasn't an ape or monkey of some sort? If you mean a common ancestor of anothe... yeah, we've heard the "common ancestor" story. What was the common ancestor if it wasn't an ape or monkey of some sort? If you mean a common ancestor of another species then you are mis-informed. Species can't cross-breed with other species. Not doable. So, that leaves us with an ape or a monkey. You choose. (more)

I'm just having a hard time with the hugh differences between any ape or monkey and man. The differences such as speech, language (over 6,800 languages), reasoning, coordina... I'm just having a hard time with the hugh differences between any ape or monkey and man. The differences such as speech, language (over 6,800 languages), reasoning, coordination, etc. could not have evolved over the short period of time that the first supposedly homo-sapien came into being. Darwins theory of mutations by natural selection would take much more time to develop the above traits than than the approximate 400,000 years. Although I accept speciation within species plausible, I cannot see how it could work to create a totally different species, ie reptile to bird, reptile to mammal, fish to reptile. There is no hard evidence that happens. (more)

You and every other evolutionist keep giving the same Tiktaalik for fish reptile and Archaeopteryx for reptile birds. Did you know that there were already flying birds that full... You and every other evolutionist keep giving the same Tiktaalik for fish reptile and Archaeopteryx for reptile birds. Did you know that there were already flying birds that fully represented the species back when Archaeopteryx was around? If you think about the differences between fish and reptile there should be more than one representative for the transition. There should be millions of transitionals between two distinct species that have totally different breathing systems, skeletons, eyes, ears, mouth, legs, etc, etc, etc. Now IF a fish did become a reptile there should be a few fish with legs or a cold blooded or skin instead of scales. Or maybe a few reptiles with fish tails with front leg and hind fins. There are NO transitional fossil (except one) that can validate the claim of macroevolution

I just checked out talkorigins.com. Here is what they say about the actual transitions reptiles to mammals, quote: "This is the best-documented transition between vertebrate classes. So far this series is known only as a series of genera or families; the transitions from species to species are not known." THE TRANSITION FROM SPECIES TO SPECIES ARE NOT KNOWN................... (more)

The thing you don't understand is this. All of this transitioning involves mutation by natural selection. Do you have any idea of what the rate of anything close to a benefi... The thing you don't understand is this. All of this transitioning involves mutation by natural selection. Do you have any idea of what the rate of anything close to a beneficial mutation is compared to the negative or break-even mutations. There is no known (observed) mutation that have created a positive or beneficial trait in a species. I will admit to variations of changes (bigger/smaller beaks on finches) but nothing like different breathing systems, fins to legs, etc. The human is a good example of how mutations work. Look at all of the genetic dieases in man (over 4,500) that are due to evolution. You are riding a dead horse.

To me a mammal, reptile, bird are species. A reptile can't breed with a bird, or bird with mammal, There is evidence of some inbreeding but the offspring are sterile. If inbreeding were possible then I could more easily understand macro-evolution. (more)

Your beneficial examples are dealing with something in itself is a negative mutation. I could adapt to eating bark off of a tree all day long but it's not going to be consid... Your beneficial examples are dealing with something in itself is a negative mutation. I could adapt to eating bark off of a tree all day long but it's not going to be considered a beneficial mutation. It's called adaptation for survival. The E. coli will always be a bacteria and bacteria will always be a bacteria. They will never grow legs or breathing systems, they will always be bacteria.

You never showed me anything that proved legs to fins. You are giving examples of what scientists believe happened but in every case they have found a transitional fossil it's usually only a matter of time before it's proved to be a distinct species all along. You can't have the transition you speak of and give ONE fossil for your proof. That's wishful thinking at best. (more)

Again I will say that one fossil does not make a case for fins to feet. Paleotologists have been looking for the one fossil transition between each species but one fossil is not... Again I will say that one fossil does not make a case for fins to feet. Paleotologists have been looking for the one fossil transition between each species but one fossil is not even considered a weak case. It's no case.

microevolution is observed every day
macroevolution has never been observed. The only thing we have as evidence for it is what scientists try to put together without evidence.

If I came to you with one fossil that showed similarities of two species and told you that this was the "missing link", wouldn't you be a bit skeptical?

The ONE Reconstruction of Acanthostega is a very nice representation but falls way short for undeniable proof. IF it were a transitional then there should be millions of additional fossils showing different levels of transition. You believe that this one fossil is proof enough and I say there are fish today that walk on the bottom of the ocean. (more)

There have been millions of fossils found to date. You can't tell me that science is betting all their marbles on one fossil for lack of finding. If this type of transition ... There have been millions of fossils found to date. You can't tell me that science is betting all their marbles on one fossil for lack of finding. If this type of transition actually took place there should be millions of even the one fish, Acanthostega. Evolution, as you know is supposedly millions of years. After millions of years of evolution there is ONE fossil? Give me a break. You and I will just have to agree to disagree. I appreciate you kind debate. Maybe another time. (more)

Until proven otherwise I will take the Bible literally. Why should I think that I know more than God who created all things. The written Bible has nothing in it that would top... Until proven otherwise I will take the Bible literally. Why should I think that I know more than God who created all things. The written Bible has nothing in it that would top creation. I think each Christian has to make up their own mind on what they believe, it is a personal relationship with God and not "all marching in step" religion like you (Korinthian) believe. And besides, unless it is an issue regarding the free gift of God for eternal life with Him then what we might believe now regarding the rest and what we WILL find out later is not important. Now, let me ask you a question. Your belief that all life sprang up from nothing by no one from nothing into the fine speciman that you are today, where do you get your evidence of that? Could it be that you are being duped by man and his pride instead of real, factual evidence? As I have said before, you have much more faith than I to believe that ALL things came from nothing. From GOO to YOU via the ZOO. Lord, Help me have more faith to believe something like that. Thanks for the great question, Korinthian. I feel, day by day, you are becoming a BELIEVER. (more)

Typically if it's biased then it goes the way of the secular humanist, so that's why I picked it. It would not be a site that I would use either.

Obviously... Typically if it's biased then it goes the way of the secular humanist, so that's why I picked it. It would not be a site that I would use either.

Obviously you aren't going back far enough. This land was in the possession of the Jews over 3,000 years ago. They were there as early as 920 BC. Long before any Palestinians. It was the Romans in around 135 AD that ran them out of Jerusalem and into exile. By my figuring they possessed the land for over 1,000 years. It's in DEUTERONOMY 30, 3-5 that prophesied their being gathered together and returned from captivity. It also says that they will NEVER lose their homeland again. Time will tell. (more)

This violence and the heavy cost of World War II led Britain to turn the issue of Palestine over to the United Nations. In 1947, the U.N. approved the partition of the British M... This violence and the heavy cost of World War II led Britain to turn the issue of Palestine over to the United Nations. In 1947, the U.N. approved the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine into two states: one Jewish and one Arab. The Jewish leadership accepted the plan, but Palestinian Arab leaders, supported by the Arab League, rejected the plan, and a civil war broke out. Israel quickly gained the upper hand in this intercommunal fighting and declared its independence on May 14 1948. Five Arab League countries (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Transjordan and Iraq) then invaded Palestine, starting the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The war resulted in an Israeli victory, with Israel capturing additional territory beyond the partition borders but leaving Jerusalem as a divided city; the territory Israel did not capture was taken over by the Arab League countries. The war also resulted in the 1948 Palestinian exodus, known to Palestinians as Al-Naqba.

The above information pulled from Wikipedia. I'm sure you will consider it a neutral source. (more)

As I have pointed out twice already the UN split the country into two equal parts. The Palestinians are the ones that rejected the plan. It has been the Palestinians that have b... As I have pointed out twice already the UN split the country into two equal parts. The Palestinians are the ones that rejected the plan. It has been the Palestinians that have been the ones totally against what was accomplished 60 years ago. There were numerous jewish settlements in Palestine as far back as the 1700s. The "Elephant in the Room" to me is the total distain that the Arabs have for the Jews. Being a Christian I'm totally aware of the beginnings of both ethnic groups and how they got to where they are today.
You make it sound like the Israeli's are just chomping at the bit to have a disagreement with Arabs. I think that history pretty much tells the story with all the conflicts from the inception of their state. The Arab rejected the original plan set by the UN and a civil war broke out due to their lack of need to negotiate, Five Arab League countries (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Transjordan and Iraq) then invaded Palestine, starting the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The war resulted in an Israeli victory, with Israel capturing additional territory beyond the partition borders but leaving Jerusalem as a divided city; the territory Israel did not capture was taken over by the Arab League countries. The war also resulted in the 1948 Palestinian exodus, known to Palestinians as Al-Naqba.

There were other wars later as well as numerous treaties to establish peace, and all broken by the Palestinian leadership. They don't want peace.

It's been the Arabs time and time again that have refused to even recognize Israel as a state or even the hallocaust and their main objective is to annihiate them.

What I'm seeing is a group of people desparately trying to survive in an area predominately Arab. I believe the Palestinians are catching the most flack due to their location. But let's face it, there are at least 6 other countries that would rather nuke the Israeli's than negotiate with them. (more)

Gulliver, you should travel up one post above mind where they told me to shut up, already, so out of humor I added to mine with the lol. So disregard the "shut up already&q... Gulliver, you should travel up one post above mind where they told me to shut up, already, so out of humor I added to mine with the lol. So disregard the "shut up already" and give the answer it's due based on what it says.

Hamas is a terrorist organization who's main goal is to annihilate Israel and nothing short of that. That makes for a bad bargaining situation. Hamas is a little bit worse that the PLO was. Yasser Arafat, the PLO Chairman was well known for diverting the funds for the Palestinians directly into his personal account. He had no desire either for any kind of peace.

You speak of Israel being aggressive towards the palestinians to throw out Hamas. I think the Palestinians would like to throw out Hamas. See the videos below regarding Hamas and how they treat their own.

Israel has no reason to punish the Palestinians, they have wanted peace for decades with only false treaties that were broken at will by the Palestinian leadership. Sorry, I can't have any simpathy for those that continually allow their leadership to ruin all progress made. (more)

Yes, they have had their state for decades and along with that 3 different wars brought on by their neighbors that have continually said that they won't stop until Israel is... Yes, they have had their state for decades and along with that 3 different wars brought on by their neighbors that have continually said that they won't stop until Israel is destroyed. Israel is just trying to protect themselves as usual. Hamas is just following through with their "death to Israel" march and no matter what you give them it is never enough. They have been lobbing rocket into Israel for weeks before this present cease fire was established. Israel was being aggressive because "enough is enough"
Let's list all the treaties the Palestinians and others have broken:
SCR 242, 1967
Camp David, 1978
Madrid Conference 1991
Israeli-Syrian talks
Oslo Agreement, 1993 Camp David, 2000
Taba, 2001
Saudi plan, 2002
Road Map, 2003
Geneva Accord, 2003
Bush, 2008 ................................ shut up already lol (more)