Bibliography: 1. How Did Life Begin? 1. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, by Alexandre Meinesz, translated by Daniel Simberloff, 2008, pp. 30- 33, 45. a. Life Itself—Its Origin and Nature, by Francis Crick, 1981, pp. 15-16, 141-153. 2. Scientific American, “A Simpler Origin for Life,” by Robert Shapiro, June 2007, p. 48. a. The New York Times, “A Leading Mystery of Life’s Origins Is Seemingly Solved,” by Nicholas Wade, May 14, 2009, p. A23. 3. Scientific American, June 2007, p. 48. 4. Scientific American, June 2007, pp. 47, 49-50. 5. Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, by Hubert P. Yockey, 2005, p. 182. 6. NASA’s Astrobiology Magazine, “Life’s Working Definition—Does It Work?” (http://www.nasa.gov/ vision/universe/starsgalaxies/ life’sworkingdefinition.html), accessed 3/17/2009. 2. Is Any Form of Life Really Simple? 7. Princeton Weekly Bulletin, “Nuts, Bolts of Who We Are,” by Steven Schultz, May 1, 2000, (http://www.princeton.edu/ pr/pwb/00/0501/p/brain.shtml), accessed 3/27/2009. a. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” Press Release, October 7, 2002, (http://nobelprize.org/ nobelprizes/medicine/laureates/2002/ press.html), accessed 3/27/2009. 8. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” October 7, 2002. 9. Encyclopædia Britannica, CD 2003, “Cell,” “The Mitochondrion and the Chloroplast,” subhead, “The Endosymbiont Hypothesis.” 10. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, p. 32. 11. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 1989, p. 405. 12. Molecular Human Reproduction, “The Role of Proteomics in Defining the Human Embryonic Secretome,” by M. G. Katz-Jaffe, S. McReynolds, D. K. Gardner, and W. B. Schoolcraft, 2009, p. 271. 13. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, by Radu Popa, 2004, p. 129. 14. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, pp. 126-127. (Box) How Fast Can a Cell Reproduce? 15. Origin of Mitochondria and Hydrogenosomes, by William F. Martin and Mikl ´ os M ¨ uller, 2007, p. 21. 16. Brain Matters—Translating Research Into Classroom Practice, by Pat Wolfe, 2001, p. 16. 3. Where Did the Instructions Come From? 17. Research News Berkeley Lab, (http: //www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/ LSD-molecular-DNA.html), article: “Molecular DNA Switch Found to Be the Same for All Life,” contact: Lynn Yarris, p. 1 of 4; accessed 2/10/2009. 18. Life Script, by Nicholas Wade, 2001, p. 79. 19. Bioinformatics Methods in Clinical Research, edited by Rune Matthiesen, 2010, p. 49. 20. Scientific American, “Computing With DNA,” by Leonard M. Adleman, August 1998, p. 61. 21. Nano Letters, “Enumeration of DNA Molecules Bound to a Nanomechanical Oscillator,” by B. Ilic, Y. Yang, K. Aubin, R. Reichenbach, S. Krylov, and H. G. Craighead, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2005, pp. 925, 929. 22. Genome—The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters, by Matt Ridley, 1999, pp. 7-8. 23. Essential Cell Biology, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts, Dennis Bray, Karen Hopkin, Alexander Johnson, Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, and Peter Walter, 2004, p. 201. 24. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Fourth Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 2002, p. 258. 25. No Ordinary Genius—The Illustrated Richard Feynman, edited by Christopher Sykes, 1994, photo with no page number supplied; note caption. a. New Scientist, “Second Genesis —Life, but Not As We Know It,” by Bob Holmes, March 11, 2009, (http:// www.newscientist.com/article/ mg20126990.100) accessed 3/11/2009. 26. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence—A Philosophical Inquiry, by David Lamb, 2001, p. 83. 27. Associated Press Newswires, “Famous Atheist Now Believes in God,” by Richard N. Ostling, December 9, 2004. (Box) A Molecule That Can Be Read and Copied 28. Intelligent Life in the Universe, Second Edition, by Peter Ulmschneider, 2006, p. 125. 4. Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? 29. Biology and Philosophy, “The Concept of Monophyly: A Speculative Essay,” by Malcolm S. Gordon, 1999, p. 335. 30. New Scientist, “Uprooting Darwin’s Tree,” by Graham Lawton, January 24, 2009, p. 34. 31. New Scientist, January 24, 2009, pp. 37, 39. 32. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” by David M. Raup, January 1979, p. 23. 33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009. 34. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23. 35. Biology and Philosophy, p. 340. 36. National Geographic, “Fossil Evidence,” November 2004, p. 25. 37. The Evolutionists—The Struggle for Darwin’s Soul, by Richard Morris, 2001, pp. 104-105. (Box) What About Human Evolution? 38. The Human Lineage, by Matt Cartmill and Fred H. Smith, 2009, Preface, p. xi. 39. Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New Perspectives on Human Evolution, by Charles E. Oxnard, 1987, Preface, pp. xi, xii. a. From Lucy to Language, by Donald Johanson and Blake Edgar, 1996, p. 22. b. Anthropologie, XLII/1, “Palaeodemography and Dental Microwear of Homo Habilis From East Africa,” by Laura M. Mart´ ınez, Jordi Galbany, and Alejandro P ´ erez-P ´ erez, 2004, p. 53. c. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, p. 22. 40. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), “Patenting Hominins—Taxonomies, Fossils and Egos,” by Robin Derricourt, 2009, pp. 195-196, 198. 41. Nature, “A New Species of Great Ape From the Late Miocene Epoch in Ethiopia,” by Gen Suwa, Reiko T. Kono, Shigehiro Katoh, Berhane Asfaw, and Yonas Beyene, August 23, 2007, p. 921. 42. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, Volume 46(1-2), “New Findings—New Problems in Classification of Hominids,” by Gyula Gyenis, 2002, pp. 57, 59. 43. New Scientist, “A Fine Fossil—But a Missing Link She’s Not,” by Chris Bead, May 30, 2009, p. 18. 44. The Guardian, London, “Fossil Ida: Extraordinary Find Is ‘Missing Link’ in Human Evolution,” by James Randerson, May 19, 2009, (http:// www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/ may/19/ida-fossil-missing-link), accessed 8/25/2009. 45. New Scientist, May 30, 2009, pp. 18-19. 46. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), p. 202. 47. Science and Justice, Vol. 43, No. 4, (2003) section, Forensic Anthropology, “Anthropological Facial ‘Reconstruction’—Recognizing the Fallacies, ‘Unembracing’ the Errors, and Realizing Method Limits,” by C. N. Stephan, p. 195. 48. The Human Fossil Record—Volume Three, by Ralph L. Holloway, Douglas C. Broadfield, and Michael S. Yuan, 2004, Preface xvi. 49. Scientific American Mind, “Intelligence Evolved,” by Ursula Dicke and Gerhard Roth, August/September 2008, p. 72. 50. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, “How Neandertals Inform Human Variation,” by Milford H. Wolpoff, 2009, p. 91. 51. Conceptual Issues in Human Modern Origins Research, Editors G. A. Clark and C. M. Willermet, 1997, pp. 5, 60. a. Wonderful Life—The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, by Stephen Jay Gould, 1989, p. 28.
This post was edited by texasescimo at January 17, 2017 7:27 AM MST
It is interesting to learn about the opinions of the various scientists but I will stick with the scientists who found sufficient evidence to develop the scientific Law of the Conservation of Energy; that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed.
There have always been some crackpot scientists who try to refute Einstein theory of relatively, Darwin theory of evolution and other various scientificly established facts.
Thar ya have it!
This post was edited by Kittigate at January 17, 2017 1:45 PM MST
1- If someone has a very clear scripture to back up his claim with then they would quote just the relevant scripture which should be so clear and unambiguous that it would settle the matter for good. He wouldn't inundate the place with unnecessary scripture.
Jesus announcing that he is the son of God 2- The only verse where the phrase "I am God's son" is attributed to Jesus is John 10:36. However notice that he is NOT here saying, "I am God's son". He said "because I SAID, ‘I am God’s Son’" What does that mean? Does that mean he DID actually make that astounding claim in such clear and unambiguous terms, "I am God’s Son" and the author didn't record it? If Jesus DID make that amazing claim and the author recorded it, then where's the verse? Anywa, read the passage and you'll see what Jesus meant. He meant "so what if I called myself God's son? How can me calling myself God's son be blaspheming when God Himself told His prophets "Ye are Gods"?" The relevant part of the passage goes like this "If he [God] called them gods to whom the word of God came ....How then can you accuse Me of blasphemy’ for stating that I am the Son of God?" You see, context makes it much clearer.
3- In the above passage Jesus was referring to Psalm 82:6-7 where God Himself states, “I said, ‘You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High." The accusers of Jesus knew that God was not blaspheming when He said “you are gods”. They knew that the word “god” is used as a metaphor. Judges too were in a position of authority ranking them not as just sons of god, but as gods. Again with the word god being used metaphorically. Another example of metaphoric use of language is in Exodus 4:16 (and Exodus 7:1) in which Aaron is described as the mouth of Moses and his prophet while Moses is referred to as God to Aaron. Also, as I clarified in my last post, the phrase "son of God" is a metaphor for anyone who is led by the spirit of God. The Bible gives that title to many people. Adam is also referred to as son of God.
4- Jesus refers to himself about 80 times in the Gospels as "son of man". Now if he wanted to call himself son of God he could have easily referred to himself as son of God in at least a few of those instances. He doesn't. Not even once.
Jesus dying for the sins of mankind 5- I have yet to see a single verse in the Bible where Jesus clearly and ambiguously says that God had sent him to die for the sins of mankind. You would have thought that a unique and astounding mission like that would have deserved at least one clear and unambiguous declaration by God Himself or failing that, at least by Jesus.
Kittigate 