#scientific creationism

[piouseye]

Of Tall Tales and the Humble Mitochondrion

Of Tall Tales and the Humble Mitochondrion: concerning evolution, creation, creative storytelling, the X-men, other hopeful monsters, and mitochondrial DNA.

Back in August, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) posted a discussion to YouTube entitled These Scientific Papers Destroy Evolution. In the discussion, Dr. Mark Stengler asserted that three papers from secular scientific sources favor creation and work against evolution. He did not discuss any paper’s findings in detail, but the Institute has provided links to all three papers. In this…

[uservillanelle]

EMMA D'ARCY as TOMMY THE TALENT (2023) dir. Thomas May Bailey

[ilikedetectives]

Having a snake OC for my Durge run is hilarious because scientifically speaking this is accurate:

Lily *sticks her forked tongue out to smell the air then retreats*: ust-nor, you're ovulating *tail swaying happily*

Minthara from across the room almost choked on her Ulaver wine: and what are you going to do with this discovery?

[redysetdare]

Genuinely why do people think that Wagstaff created WX-78 when it looks like, from WX's own video, that they created themselves? Like their human form looks to have been the one who made the robot body and came up with the technology to transfer their conscious into the robot. the most Wagstaff did was probably wake them up or oversee the transfer? Why do people act like Wagstaff is some creator/father figure to WX when it seems like he barely played a role in their creation and was at most a business partner with them when they were human???

[collgeruledzebra]

idk if anyone's brought this up before but im pretty sure riz's description of the dying god is referencing the watchmaker analogy

[salvadorbonaparte]

ok i agree with you about most of what you listed, but whats wrong with believing in ghosts? thats a pretty common belief spanning most cultures and religions

I don't know how to answer this without making some people very angry

[the-idiot-17]

ok Ima say something a little controversial

why do people look at evolution as If it is steadfast knowledge? I mean evolution does have ground, yes, but to say evolution is 100% proven to be true would be false.

I could make the same argument for creationism btw, "Oh but look at all this evidence toward a creator" yes yes evidence exists for both cases but that's not my point

My point is that people blindly put faith in a system of science that is a THEORY, evolution is a theoretical possibility for how the world came to be just as creationism is a theoretical possibility.

As I just pointed out yes there us evidence but evidence is nothing without the big picture. We have no clue how the world actually came to be and we shouldn't be fighting eachother over it.

A true scientist would go out of their way learn everything they can about the known universe and pick up all the little clues before deciding whether or not to support evolution theory or creation theory, it's basic math. (The dyscalcular person says)

All I'm saying is that I believe we let our views of the world get mixed too much into science, of course a Christian is more likely to study creationism and of course an atheist is more likely to study evolution. I'm not saying people don't do otherwise I'm just saying that's the most likely to be true.

Also as people who are not of science, we need to stop blindly trusting the world when it says the earth was made this way or that.

For hundreds of years people believed the sun circled the earth, they even has false evidence to prove themselves correct.

Im not saying that the sun circles the earth, I'm just saying that I believe everything and anything has the chance to be wrong, any if our world views could be shattered at any point in time.

Any thanks for listening to my Ted talk, I'm not a scientist, I'm a 15 year old sitting in my room ranting about shut I don't know.

Dont come after me.

[ramenwithbroccoli]

hey girl did it hurt? when he loved you so much he gave you immortality, but not enough to ask if you actually want it?

[queenlucythevaliant]

Some off-the-cuff thoughts on overspiritualizing patterns in science

I remember watching a talk in middle school youth group about laminin, the "molecule that holds your whole body together" which was supposedly shaped like a cross. The suggestion, basically, was that the cross's image was integral to our molecular makeup and that this was part of God's design in a very Significant way. I was a burgeoning STEM girl, so I taped a diagram of a laminin up next to my bed for a while.

(As I would later find out, the whole laminin thing had/has some reach among Christians. There are T-shirts and everything)

Fast forever to spring of my freshman year as a microbiology student. I take my first course in cell bio, and I learn that laminins are actually one of many families of ECM glycoproteins. They aren't really any more significant in "holding the body together" than collagens, elastins, or fibronectins. They're very important, yes, but ultimately just one type of adhesive protein among many. And! They also do a bunch of other stuff that's way cooler than just. Adhesive.

While some laminins do bear resemblance to a cross when diagramed, it's really only because they have three subchains. Some are t-shaped, but others are y-shaped, and those don't look anything like a cross. Also, when they're in situ rather than in a nice, neat diagram, they tend to be all floppy and then they look even less cross-like.

Source

And when I learned about this I was oddly relieved. It felt like I was right about something that I couldn't even put into words, and that somehow the field of what I could call glorious had grown wider.

Christians are called to see and marvel at the presence of God in creation. I love doing that! I see God left and right through my scientific studies. Yet I also know that the human brain is pattern-seeking and that we are prone to pareidolia. I honestly don't know that there's a substantive difference between seeing the cross in some laminins and seeing Jesus on a piece of toast. It's all just seeing patterns that arise from something else (in the case of laminins, being able to bind three different molecules at once) and attributing spiritual significance. God is sovereign and maybe in the grand scope of his vision for creation it means something, but in terms of seeing God's hand in science I just find it so... small?

You could spin so many four-chain or four-domain proteins or goodness knows how many other molecules into images of the cross if you pick the right diagram. You could take every pattern of three in nature (and there are many!) as an image of the Trinity. If you really, really wanted to, you could take every six in organic chemistry as a sign of the beast, which would be hilarious in its misguidedness. It just becomes so literalistic and dull so very fast.

Look! Wouldn't you rather talk about the fact that laminins begin to appear along the edge of a developing lung at just ten weeks of human embryonic development, suggesting that they play a role in alveolar morphogenesis? That they're present in the neural stem-cell niche, which makes them an attractive candidate for helping to treat degenerative neurological conditions? I want to go back to whoever gave that talk that I watched in youth group and shake him and say, "God did that, and you're still hung up on the fact that laminins have three subchains?"

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

https://quranx.com/55.13-14

So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny? He created man from clay like [that of] pottery.

Almokhtasar fi Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Karim:

[ratgingi]

finally designed more ginglings . have children baby daughter edition murrey's, outis', and kara's, respectively

[piouseye]

From Intelligent Design Novice to Fan: A Quick Postmortem of Some Twitter Discussion

From Intelligent Design Novice to Fan: A Quick Postmortem of Some Twitter Discussion @DiscoveryCSC @JMcLatchie_ #Twitter #IntelligentDesign #ID #creation #evolution #civility #CivilityMatters #Christian #apologetics

Retweeting and commenting on the last in a series of articles by the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CSC)’s Dr. Jonathan McLatchie, a molecular and cell biologist, got me briefly embroiled in some discussions with the disciples of a YouTube “science educator.” Though the “educator” himself contributed the first tweets, the way he conducts himself on Twitter…

[boneless-mika]

The most annoying thing Christian missionaries have done is describe language in-depth because now we owe one of the largest databases of language to people who I don't think are very good

[ace-of-spaders]

[adinafay]

Am I the Weird One???

Okay y'all, we're all out here with multiple saves but are all your Tav's/Durges completely new/individual? Or are you just playing the same character(s) with slightly different stories?

Because apparently all my friends are making entirely new characters every time?????

And then I'm just over here creating AUs of the same three people flmao.

[bahoreal]

the FLASHBACKS i had to my atmospheric chemistry courses kdbsshsb god. i can tell you the albedo, aliens. wait hold on im curious