</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by (shunyadragon,)
Advances in the genetics of evolution
Creation Science advocates rarely keep current with scientific advances. Many do not realize that the scientific knowledge of the genetics of evolution is only about fifty years old and it was not until very recently that they have been able to understand and break the code of evolution in genes. The following article sheds some light on the recent advances of science.
Evolution Encoded by Stephe J. Freeland and Laurence D. Hurst in the April 2004 Scientific American.
Because of recent breakthroughs in science the knowledge of the processes of evolution are rapidely advancing. What the 'CS' advocates do not realize is science may come up with a very detailed understanding in of not only evolution, but abiogenisis in the near future. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by (fogus,)
Wow, you certainly give the creationists a lot of time to answer. If only the most recent article you can find has been unrequited, then you do not have much of a case. The modern advances you speak of are only extremely modern. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
This article references a series advances in genetics made over the past fifteen years. This article was provided because it represented a reasonable summary of modern advances in science
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by
My grandfather was incultraded into accepting evolution and therefore rejecting the truth of the bibles history and thus the good news of the gospel. And the arguments that convinced him were discarded by the time my father came around. And the arguments that convinced him of evolution and to reject the gospel were a different set of arguments. And by the time I got to uni [versity] and became an evolutionist they were a different set of arguments again. The arguments come and go, and what doesn’t change is the underlining faith that evolution has somehow happened.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
The accumulated knowledge that supports evolution comes from all the sciences and changes constantly, but the basic arguements have not. The strategraphy argument proposed by Charles Darwin still remains one of the most important foundations of the theory of evolution. We have collected far more data over the years then was available to Darwin that confirm his original proposals.
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by There are plenty of extremely recent arguments that evolution scientists can't answer that come from the creation scientists. Putting the image of the outdated scientist on creation scientists is unfair, unless you consider all scientists to be outdated, because evolutionists cannot stand up to the test you put to creationists. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
I have not seen on sound arguement from AIG or drdino. The website talk.design.org has responded very throughly to all of AIGs claims. Evolutionists have stood up to the claims and the current progress of the research goes far beyond anything the 'Creation Science' advocates could begin to understand.
There is an important point that must be considered about the assumptions of the 'Crestion Science' advocates. There premise is that they support the literal interpretation of the bible from the 'very first verse', regardless of the evidence provided by science. This position is stated by AIG and many of the scientists and the articles they write for AIG state this.