Another Evolution Question.

BeforeTheFoundation · #11 26th April 2009, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by gluadys

But there are sea mammals that are in the same order as elephants.

Thank you. That is what I thought. I was mainly trying to emphasize this point that you also made.

None of this, of course, means that any of these animals evolved from one another. Is it a matter of common ancestry.

For some reason the anti-evolution crew still believes that evolution says that humans descended from apes, etc.

Mallon · #12 27th April 2009, 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by Doveaman

My problem with evolution is how is it that people believe in it without the actual observation of it taking place, something like our observation of a caterpillar changing into a butterfly.

They seem to be basing their conclusions on similarity of features in bones or whatever else.

It seem to me that evolution is just a big blind guess at what might be possible, but not what actually is, since there is no actual evidence for it.

Do you think convicted murderers should be sentenced to jail on the basis of forensic evidence alone? If no bystanders were there to see the murder, and the murder cannot be repeated, is it even worth prosecuting a suspect when all we have is evidence left at the crime scene to go by? The situation is analogous with the argument you cite.

Should a Christian put his or her trust in such blind faith?

I'm surprised to hear a Christian disparage faith.

Doveaman · #13 27th April 2009, 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by BeforeTheFoundation

For some reason the anti-evolution crew still believes that evolution says that humans descended from apes, etc.

I think many in the evolution crew believe that too.

I was talking to one on another thread.

Is there confusion among the crew?

Avatar · #14 27th April 2009, 11:58 PM

Originally Posted by Doveaman

I think many in the evolution crew believe that too.

I was talking to one on another thread.

Is there confusion among the crew?

Could be.

Let's use our Christianity as an example.

Are there Christians less knowledgeable about Christianity than you?

Are they still Christians?

Are there Christians more knowledgeable about Christianity than you?

Are you still Christian?

Does a less knowledgeable Christian disprove Christianity?

Does a more knowledgeable Christian prove Christianity?

I hope you get the point.

Doveaman · #15 27th April 2009, 11:59 PM

Originally Posted by Mallon

Do you think convicted murderers should be sentenced to jail on the basis of forensic evidence alone? If no bystanders were there to see the murder, and the murder cannot be repeated, is it even worth prosecuting a suspect when all we have is evidence left at the crime scene to go by? The situation is analogous with the argument you cite.

That would depend on the skills of the forensic scientist.

Many innocent people were condemned to death based on so called evidence.

The evidence they had was misinterpreted.

Mallon · #16 28th April 2009, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Doveaman

That would depend on the skills of the forensic scientist.

Many innocent people were condemned to death based on so called evidence.

The evidence they had was misinterpreted.

Right-o. The evidence can indeed be misinterpreted. But the point is that there exists evidence for occurrences that happened in the past, and that reconstructing the past on the basis of this evidence is not simply a matter of faith (as you state in the OP). The best possible explanation is that which accounts for all the evidence, and the evolutionary theory is just such an explanation, taking into account evidence from embryology, biogeography, genetics, palaeontology, population biology, etc.

Doveaman · #17 28th April 2009, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Avatar

Could be.

Let's use our Christianity as an example.

Are there Christians less knowledgeable about Christianity than you?

Are they still Christians?

Are there Christians more knowledgeable about Christianity than you?

Are you still Christian?

Does a less knowledgeable Christian disprove Christianity?

Does a more knowledgeable Christian prove Christianity?

I hope you get the point.

I get the point.

But the thing is, evolution has not been proven conclusively, unlike Christianity.

Evolution is assumed based on what is considered to be evidence, but it's not proven.

The evidence is to weak.

Christianity has been proven without a doubt.

sfs · #18 28th April 2009, 12:15 AM

Originally Posted by Doveaman

I get the point.

But the thing is, evolution has not been proven conclusively, unlike Christianity.

Evolution is assumed based on what is considered to be evidence, but it's not proven.

The evidence is to weak.

Christianity has been proven without a doubt.

When was Christianity proven without a doubt, and how did I miss the demonstration (and subsequent party)?

Doveaman · #19 28th April 2009, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by Mallon

Right-o. The evidence can indeed be misinterpreted. But the point is that there exists evidence for occurrences that happened in the past, and that reconstructing the past on the basis of this evidence is not simply a matter of faith (as you state in the OP). The best possible explanation is that which accounts for all the evidence, and the evolutionary theory is just such an explanation, taking into account evidence from embryology, biogeography, genetics, palaeontology, population biology, etc.

Despite all this it still ends up as a theory.

A theory suggest a possibility that may or may not be true.

'May or may not be true' is not something to base anyone's faith on.

When it becoems a fact I will probably be won over.

Doveaman · #20 28th April 2009, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by sfs

When was Christianity proven without a doubt, and how did I miss the demonstration (and subsequent party)?

I don't know where you were at the time, but all I can say is that I'm sorry you missed it.