Why Wouldn't God be Free to Tweak a God-Ordained Process?

[Mercer (John Mercer)]

@Guy_Coe

Any honest investigation of the phenomena which posits mere mechanism will be overwhelmed with the inexplicable. That’s okay; keep at it.

Yet we biologists enjoy it and you run away from any real investigation. How do you explain that?

@Guy_Coe

It’s just that, at some point you get moved beyond mere mechanism into wonder at the ongoing display around you.

That is absolutely false. I am in awe of the mechanisms, and I’m sure that the other biologists share my awe. It’s what motivates us!

What compels you to make false claims about the thoughts in the heads of others, Guy? Why not ask us instead of telling us what we think and feel? Why not dive deeper and see the awesome things we’re seeing, instead of reading lousy apologetics and pretending that your position is based on the evidence?

[Mercer (John Mercer)]

@Guy_Coe

It is as if some want to deny of God the very quality they prize in their sacrosanct view of every “randomly evolved” organism --adaptability.

Who would be doing that? Describing evolution as “random” is a creationist thing.

[gbrooks9 (GeorgeB)]

@Patrick

@gbrooks9 What you fail to accept is that evolution is neutral on questions of faith. NEUTRAL.
Creationists are not neutral on questions of faith. So evolution and creationism (ID, TE, EC, OEC, YEC) can’t be “harmonized”. Evolution is accepted by most Christians. Evolutionary science is practiced and advanced by scientists some who are Christian and some who are not.

@Patrick,

You are probably my biggest reason for why we need a sound proof room for zealous Atheist views.

This last post of yours is probably the 7th time you have erroneously characterized my view on Religion, Theology and Science.

I’m not speaking to “harmonizing” Creationism and Evolution as much as I am speaking about building more “harmony” between the PEOPLE who hold these views.

I do not fail to accept that evolution is neutral on questions of faith. And I counter-charge that what you fail to accept is that disputing Intelligent Design is irrelevant to Joshua’s views on Genealogical Adam.

[Patrick]

@gbrooks9

zealous Atheist views.

Thank you, coming from you, I wear my zealous Atheist views as a badge of honor.

If any other atheist (or Christian as I don’t want to discriminate) at PS would like an atheist T shirt, I will buy it for them. Let me know your size.

http://shop.ffrf.org/shirts/bestseller-unabashed-atheist

@gbrooks9

And I counter-charge that what you fail to accept is that disputing Intelligent Design is irrelevant to Joshua’s views on Genealogical Adam.

ID, TE, EC, OEC, YEC all look the same to me. They are all creationism. And since they are all creationism, they are not science.