Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

One Smelly Amoeba
Job 9:25-26
"Now my days are swifter than a post: they flee away, they see no good. They are passed away as the swift ships: as the eagle that hasteth to the prey."
Not all dangerous predators can be seen. One of the most dangerous predators in a drop of pond water is Amoeba proteus. This amoeba literally terrorizes its one celled pond mates because they can...

Reply to comment

Seeing that Boyle and Newton were long dead before the publication of the Origin of Species they would have had no chance to to review the idea ( I doubt they would have seeing that they were physical scientist). I don't see the "quotes in their own words" that you have indicated within the article but I do hope that you include them if they exist.

Darwin founded the idea of natural selection and supported it with evidence. The idea of transmutation was around before Darwin yet was not highly thought of due to the lack of evidence at the time. Darwin showed that species changed over time based upon selection of adventitious traits with in a genetic population. Are you suggesting that differing species have no relation to one another and appeared in their current forms without the ability to change genetically and phenotypically? ( I am trying to understand your point). I think that you are possibly thinking of Lamarck's hypothesis or even abiogenesis as a whole.

I have made no claim that all biologist accepted evolution. I have however yet to meet one that has rejected it (Many of them religious). What would you say the percentage of biologist who accept evolution is? Would you say that it is the majority or the minority? Many of the scientist on the discovery institute's list lack a degree in life sciences. Even if you include all of the names posted on the list, assuming they are all valid, it is still a small fraction of the total number of scientist. While I really have no problem with the idea of intelligent design it appears as philosophy rather than a science because it does not test anything.

Finally, I do not like the term "evolutionist" because it makes a scientific theory appear as a social concept (such as Capitalist or Communist among others). I don't know who has been quoting Darwin, Gould or Sagan (Not a life scientist) to you but I would suggest hard data that is peer reviewed. Could you please cite your sources in the future? Does intelligent design have anything that is peer reviewed and testable? If not it does not fall into the realm of science. I furthermore fail to see how evolution is not compatible with christianity because they focus on differing questions (How vs. Why) yet I would love to hear your opinion on this. Good luck to you, Kyle


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options