Originally Posted by Ronin4hire
As I said before... I'm not a scientist.
But because some bacteria showed a resistance to certain anti-biotics long before they were invented doesn't mean anything. All it means is some bacteria have been resistant to antibiotics before they were invented.
And when these bacteria become resistant via the process you describe... what do you think happens when the bacteria reproduces? The genetic code of the cell changes so that it is resistant does it not?
Is this not evolution? The evolving of genetic code? I mean I don't know how you can make a distinction between micro and macro evolution based on this.
Um, genetic code didn't Evolve. It is transferred from one bacteria to the next.. without any cell needing to reproduce. This is a natural process of Bacteria. It is not a mutation as naieve people like to assume.
In Lamens terms.. (to be kind to your alleged unscientific nature), The bacteria did not alter itself because it saw a threat to itself, when faced with an anti-biotic.
Also.. reproduction is not a process of Evolution lol. Kids who have brown hair, haven't evolved from their parents who had brown and blonde hair. That is Natural Selection.. as I have outlined before. NS exists without the Theory of Evolution.
If you didn't yet read up on the Evolution, or more aptly, Neo-Darwinist Evolution.. I believe you should, because your understanding of it seems sorely lacking at the moment.
Since mutations are the backbone of Neo-Darwinism.. this process I just described is contrary to it.
I didn't think I needed to spell out the link between the two but its a pious/religious practice to be Chariatable.
Eitherway, you do like to contradict yourself don't you? I'm trying to tell you clearly how bacteria do not prove Evolution exists, so you tell me that you're not a scientist.
Surely if you have the patience to explain something 'scientifically', you must also have the patience and virtue to listen to another persons scientific explanation, without needing to complain how you're not a scientist.
Originally Posted by Ronin4hire
Science is not an entity it's a field of study and a process. It certainly is a more reliable process than say... I don't know... reciting a dubious thousand year old document and taking it's word as truth.
Evolution is not necessary for an atheist to attack religion. All an atheist needs to do is to scrutinize religion itself. If it were allowed on here I'd do so but I'm not.
I'll say it again... if you applied just a fraction of the scrutiny which you apply to science in your lame attempt disprove the theory of evolution as you did to your own religion I'm quite confident that you'd be an atheist too. (Of course I expect you to deny this so no need to reply)
Science is a reliable process because you say so?
For arguments sake, the hundreds of Muslim scientists that exist (and who existed to further science, years before any Westerner saw these disciplines), are all somehow blind because they follow a 'dubious' thousand year old 'document'.
You really think if it was so dubious, that these intelligent people would also be Atheist, as you say.
Nevermind the thousands of scholars and authors who it has taken to study these 'dubious' documents, who can only see how much logic and sense there is there. The millions of ordinary intelligent people who see sense in what they believe, everyday. Solutions to humanity, that neither Science nor those extremely academic Atheists (who have brightened up humanity so much in the past 20 years or so. Lol.), can ever provide.
Yea I guess your ever confident persona will like to assume that I will denounce my religious ways after my 'lame attempt' to disprove the theory of Evolution, if I spent as much time studying my religion. (which coincidentally, I have.)
Tell me please.. how is it that throughout the years, not a single Atheist has been able to successfully convert a counterpart Muslim (just as intelligent and schooled), to his/her way of thinking, or dent the religion in any way.
Indeed, such a failed attempt at attacking me shows your own immunity to any sort of sense.
Now, please demonstrate the arrogance I was talking about earlier on in this thread, some more.
Originally Posted by burkhartdesu
Why is it impossible for spirituality and science to coexist?
That's because Marxists hijacked the whole 'process' years ago, so it would suit their materialistic ways of thinking.