How to choose between creation and evolution.

[VirOptimus]

Not really. We look at the same facts but arrive at different conclusions. I don't look in the bible to determine if the human eye was purposefully designed; I look at the human eye. You look at the same eye and determine that it evolved over billions of years but present virtually no details of how this occured. I would indeed be delusional if I accepted your position.

No, this is false.

Your position is like looking around, deciding the earth is flat and never accepting data that disproves that position.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No, this is false.

Your position is like looking around, deciding the earth is flat and never accepting data that disproves that position.

I don't have the mental ability to understand the data that supports evolution (I only have an IQ of 135).

 

[Speedwell]

I don't have the mental ability to understand the data that supports evolution (I only have an IQ of 135).

LOL! It's not IQ you're lacking, it's willingness to take the risk that you might find it convincing.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

LOL! It's not IQ you're lacking, it's willingness to take the risk that you might find it convincing.

I also don't have the time (college, post graduate education, fellowships, field work, etc. would be necessary), or the money needed.

Did you read my post #1001? It concerns the molecular structure of tissues. I posted it in response to a "cell biologist" who, citing his credentials, said that tissues aren't made of molecules. I understand almost nothing in that article, but I do understand that changes in the molecular structure is needed to affect certain specialized tissues.

My main point is that there is no way I'm going to study and understand evolution. There's just way too much 'information' and much of it held together by conjecture. I don't have the resources needed for the intense life-long study that would be required of anyone wanting to understand evolution, especially if the conclusion is doubtful from the start.

 

[rjs330]

No poo, sherlock.
It also shows that I'm me and not my sister.



Your direct ancestor indeed is not my ancestor. But we do share ancestors.



And we can also show that my grand, grand, grand,...., grand mom IS yours as well.



It can.



huh?
That didn't even make any sense. Not that the rest made sense, but that one was especially terrible.

Precisely, DNA evidence is precise enough to show who is related and who is not. It shows humans and other humans are related. It shows we are not the same as a chimp or a cow or a spider. It shows humans are humans, cows are cows and spiders are spiders. It doesn't show we are related to cows or chimps. In fact it shows the opposite. It shows that all these creatures are distinctly different from each other.

 

[rjs330]

google observed speciation.

Ive googled. And you know that's not what I'm talking about. What you are seeing is adaptation not evolution from a common ancestor. You see micro evolution of a creature evolving in order to survive yet remaining in the same family. It's not eloving to be something else.

 

[Speedwell]

I also don't have the time (college, post graduate education, fellowships, field work, etc. would be necessary), or the money needed.

Why do you need to do all that? Assuming you had a decent high-school education (including biology) you could read it up yourself, maybe take freshman bio and genetics courses on line or at the local JC. The most important thing for most creationists to do who really want to learn about what the theory of evolution is about is to stop relying on the propaganda put out by the creationist "ministries," AiG, ICR, CMI, etc.

 

[Speedwell]

Ive googled. And you know that's not what I'm talking about. What you are seeing is adaptation not evolution from a common ancestor. You see micro evolution of a creature evolving in order to survive yet remaining in the same family. It's not eloving to be something else.

It's evolving into another species. That's all the change you will ever see in evolution, repeated over and over. Neither "family" nor any of the other taxa are pre-existing categories into which creatures evolve. They aren't created until evolution has already occurred.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Why do you need to do all that? Assuming you had a decent high-school education (including biology) you could read it up yourself, maybe take freshman bio and genetics courses on line or at the local JC. The most important thing for most creationists to do who really want to learn about what the theory of evolution is about is to stop relying on the propaganda put out by the creationist "ministries," AiG, ICR, CMI, etc.

I don't pay any attention to those ministries.

 

[rjs330]

Yeah. So what?



This is vague, but It's not accurate. People who have shared ancestors will share more DNA. I took an Ancestry test as did my 1c 1x and she showed up as a cousin in my Ancestry results. A whole bunch of cousins in my dad's side took tests and they show up as well - all because we have a shared common ancestor.



This simply is false. All DNA can be used to show common ancestry within and between species.



This makes zero sense.

DNA showed that your family is related. Exactly. It also shows that humans are humans and not chimps. You can go back very far in your lineage and see who your human ancestors are. But no matter how far back you go you will always be able to tell the difference between a chimp and a human using DNA. Pulling DNA from a chimp and from a human and testing them you will always be able to tell which is human and which is chimp. Thus proving that DNA is source material for seeing what something is. You will never see a test where we look at DNA and are confused as to whether it came from a chimp or a human or a cow.

 

[Speedwell]

I don't pay any attention to those ministries.

Then where do you get your straw man?

 

[rjs330]

It's evolving into another species. That's all the change you will ever see in evolution, repeated over and over. Neither "family" nor any of the other taxa are pre-existing categories into which creatures evolve. They aren't created until evolution has already occurred.

So what that an ant evolved into another ant with bigger jaws. It's still an ant and belongs in the ant family. The peppered moth is still a moth. It will never be anything else. Common ancestry says all things came from one thing. Ants cows bees cats monkeys and humans all evolved from one creature. Yet observation has NEVER show that to have occurred or that it's even possible. It assumes it did because that's the only way it could have in the evolutionists mind.

Whereas God told us how he did it. And all testable verifiable observed evidence bears that what he started still remains. Birds are still birds and have always been birds. Fish are fish and have always been fish. Amphibians have always been amphibians. Spiders gave aways been spiders. All these things will always be what they are. All these things carry common design because that was the material God saw fit to use to create and sustain life on this planet. He didn't create a blob which over millions of years turned into something else which split and turned into something else which split and turned into something else. You can't show how that is even possible.

 

[Brightmoon]

So what that an ant evolved into another ant with bigger jaws. It's still an ant and belongs in the ant family. The peppered moth is still a moth. It will never be anything else. Common ancestry says all things came from one thing. Ants cows bees cats monkeys and humans all evolved from one creature. Yet observation has NEVER show that to have occurred or that it's even possible. It assumes it did because that's the only way it could have in the evolutionists mind.

You can't show how that is even possible.

You know that despite creationist organization disinformation, scientists can show how this happens .for example, wasps and ants are so closely related that some living ants have wings and stingers. We see these intermediate transitionals even among living organisms. So seeing fossil intermediates is just icing on the cake.

Disinformation is deliberate misinformation and yes it’s deliberate.

 

[rjs330]

You know that despite creationist organization disinformation, scientists can show how this happens .for example, wasps and ants are so closely related that some living ants have wings and stingers. We see these intermediate transitionals even among living organisms. So seeing fossil intermediates is just icing on the cake.

Disinformation is deliberate misinformation and yes it’s deliberate.

Why can't ants with stingers just be ants with stingers? Why do they have to be related to the wasp? If they took a blind DNA test of thus ant and a wasp would they be able to tell rhe difference? Of course they would. Similarities do not prove evolution.

 

[tas8831]

Why do you need to do all that?

He doesn't need to - IQ of 135.

COVFEFE!

 

[pitabread]

Similarities do not prove evolution.

It's strictly about similarities. It's about patterns.

 

[Brightmoon]

Why can't ants with stingers just be ants with stingers? Why do they have to be related to the wasp? If they took a blind DNA test of thus ant and a wasp would they be able to tell rhe difference? Of course they would. Similarities do not prove evolution.

They can actually tell identical twins apart due to the fact that they don’t have truly identical DNA. Of course,they can tell ants from wasps but physically they grade into each other which means that the species separated recently (geologically speaking). Superficial similarities like birds,bats and insects having wings still prove deep common descent because the make-a-limb-here gene is involved in the development of all three.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then where do you get your straw man?

People do think for themselves.

 

[tas8831]

To a hammer every problem looks like a nail.

Surely someone with so high an IQ must be familiar with the psychological concept called "projection"?

 

[tas8831]

What I meant was that to an evolutionist everything under the sun evolved, even thoughts. There's no end to it.

More projection.

This is hilarious.

Alpha male = 100% un-self-aware?