Macroevolution

Warden_of_the_Storm · Nov 27, 2015

bhsmte said:
I don't watch videos and you should not post videos without including your own summary of what it states.

So, tell me in your own words, why evolution is "impossible"?

I don't think I've ever seen any creationist actually follow through with the request for putting why evolution is false in to their own words.
Although considering my memory, I could be wrong.

lesliedellow · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
I suppose still soft dino tissue or C14 in coal also has no relevance.

The discovery of soft tissue in fossils proves only that soft tissue can be preserved in a way not previously suspected.

As for C14 in coal: http://www.oldearth.org/bookreview/tnb/thousands_not_billions_3.htm

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

bhsmte said:
I don't watch videos and you should not post videos without including your own summary of what it states.

So, tell me in your own words, why evolution is "impossible"?

-57 said:
Watergaps.
http://www.pastoren.no/wp-content/uploads/WIND-WATER-GAP.jpg

Then I suppose I'm done with you on this topic... and you choose to remain ignorant.
NEXT

bhsmte · Nov 27, 2015

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
I don't think I've ever seen any creationist actually follow through with the request for putting why evolution is false in to their own words.
Although considering my memory, I could be wrong.

Me either.

They claim, evolution is too complex to have happened, yet, they believe a supernatural being just basically created humans out of nothing and that is readily accepted.

You gotta love this stuff.

bhsmte · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
Then I suppose I'm done with you on this topic... and you choose to remain ignorant.
NEXT

Well, if you have no explanation of your own, it doesn't say much.

RickG · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
I've already mentioned the video presented in the OP. Why did you disregard it?

I did not disregard the video, however; my response to you had nothing to do with the video nor the information contained within it. How about reviewing my initial post to you (#21) and provide a more appropriate response to what I said. Thank you.

bhsmte · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
Then I suppose I'm done with you on this topic... and you choose to remain ignorant.
NEXT

Major league irony!!!! !

Warden_of_the_Storm · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
Then I suppose I'm done with you on this topic... and you choose to remain ignorant.
NEXT

But you're basically telling us, by posting links and videos when asked for evidence, "I'm not doing your work for you. You go do it!"
The onus is on you to actually state what the evidence is.
It's called having a discussion.

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

lesliedellow said:
The discovery of soft tissue in fossils proves only that soft tissue can be preserved in a way not previously suspected.

As for C14 in coal: http://www.oldearth.org/bookreview/tnb/thousands_not_billions_3.htm

Your link never explained the coal.

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
But you're basically telling us, by posting links and videos when asked for evidence, "I'm not doing your work for you. You go do it!"
The onus is on you to actually state what the evidence is.
It's called having a discussion.

It was already explained.
Meyers in his book goes into great detail. I'm just asking how the organella evolved.

lesliedellow · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
Your link never explained the coal.

You can't have read it then.

granpa · Nov 27, 2015

I've given you all the information you need.
The answers you're looking for are all there dude.
If I can figure it out then I know you can.
Nobody gave me this information when I was starting out

Warden_of_the_Storm · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
It was already explained.
Meyers in his book goes into great detail. I'm just asking how the organella evolved.

But people are asking YOU, not Meyers, not anyone else, just you, to explain why evolution is impossible.
And you are not answering that question.

RickG · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
Last I read the bible says Adam was formed from the dust the Eve from Adams rib....this certainly isn't evolutionism.

You deny 1 Cor 15:47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven.

Many Christians do not interpret the creation account in a literal sense. Personally, I view it as a story about the creation viewed form the perspective of people who have no understanding of their physical environment or the scientific principles we know today that govern it.

May I ask, aside from evolution, do you have a problem with the scientific consensus that the earth is 4.54 billion years old? Just curious.

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
But people are asking YOU, not Meyers, not anyone else, just you, to explain why evolution is impossible.
And you are not answering that question.

In a previous post I said the process described it to complicated, sophisticated and complex to have evolved via a process that contains random mutations changing the information.

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

RickG said:
Many Christians do not interpret the creation account in a literal sense. Personally, I view it as a story about the creation viewed form the perspective of people who have no understanding of their physical environment or the scientific principles we know today that govern it.

May I ask, aside from evolution, do you have a problem with the scientific consensus that the earth is 4.54 billion years old? Just curious.

...I could make the same argument pertaining to rising from the dead on day 3. Science says it's impossible.

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

granpa said:
I've given you all the information you need.
The answers you're looking for are all there dude.
If I can figure it out then I know you can.
Nobody gave me this information when I was starting out

Grandpa, did you watch the video in post 59?

Warden_of_the_Storm · Nov 27, 2015

-57 said:
In a previous post I said the process described it to complicated, sophisticated and complex to have evolved via a process that contains random mutations changing the information.

Yes, but you have given zero evidence that it is too complicated or too sophisticated (nit picky here: complex and complicated practically mean the same thing).
You are basically saying "I don't understand it. Therefore it doesn't work." It's an argument from incredulity, also called 'lack of imagination'.

-57 · Nov 27, 2015

RickG said:
May I ask, aside from evolution, do you have a problem with the scientific consensus that the earth is 4.54 billion years old? Just curious.

Yes. I've presented soft dino tissue and c14 in coal as two of many examples.

bhsmte · Nov 27, 2015

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
Yes, but you have given zero evidence that it is too complicated or too sophisticated (nit picky here: complex and complicated practically mean the same thing).
You are basically saying "I don't understand it. Therefore it doesn't work." It's an argument from incredulity, also called 'lack of imagination'.

I wonder if the winners of Lotto, don't get to keep the money, because the odds were so much against them winning?

Macroevolution

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Noahide/Rationalist

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Similar threads