The Demise of Evolution

[VirOptimus]

There is no point in responding to OldWiseGuy, he is a selfconfessed troll.

Why the poor aren't getting ahead.

 

[SLP]

I suppose is not a bad idea to share how my view of creation was formed from the same evidences that we all see, plus my interpretation of biblical version of creation.

God designed and populated the earth, from preparing the landscape to creating living creatures and humans. The creation certainly took much more than 6 days x 24 hours, it was more like hundreds or even thousands of years. After completion, some changes limited to sizes and appearances can happen as living things adapt to weather or terrain, but otherwise, humans and living creatures were created, not evolved.

In Genesis chapter 1 and 2, the word 'day' does not refer to 24 hours. Instead 'day' denotes a stage of time. The word 'day' is used because it fits the prose of writing in religious manuscript ie you use the word 'stage' in science text book, but for religious writing, you use 'day'. Without knowing this, there will always be a lingering doubt at the back of your mind -- even if you think that the word "day" is figurative, without knowing why the Bible use the word (will come back to this later).

Each 'day' or stage -- if measured in our concept of time today -- can be weeks, years or even thousands of years. Each 'day' is not equal, it probably took less time to create the atmosphere (day 3) than to create sea creatures (day 5).

Our mortality and technology today influence our outlook. Most people live up to 60 or 80 years. Our mortality limited our view : It is quite a stretch for us to think that God could take thousands of years for creation, we want it to happen fast, but we should appreciate that He is timeless.

From living in a world of movies and technology today, we tend to imagine that God used a kind of CGI to quickly cover the earth with trees in 24 hours, then caused thousands of sea creatures to swim the next day, and later, beamed down thousands of land animals. That can happen in a movie, but why would God be in such a haste?

Instead He took pride and pleasure in His workmanship. He made different varieties of shrubs and trees that convert CO2 to oxygen, plus flowers to beautify the terrain. He meticulously designed different kinds of creatures -- horses, chestahs, ant-eaters, giraffes, owls, parrots, frogs, hammer-head sharks, turtles ... to list onlyv10 of the 500,000 different species. God said the creation was good -- but we cannot even begin to appreciate these two words. Instead of using a magic wand, God demonstrated and applies art and science n the intricate process. He is not a machine churning out goods in mass production, instead He was very involved.

The overwhelming evidences of millions of lifeforms around us defy the odds that all these could come together so well without a creator..
Did the creation take 100 years or 50,000 years? I don't know, but the overwhelming evidences of millions of well-made lifeforms is way too convincing to deny that there is God.

Fimally, to explain my interpretation of the word 'day' in Genesis: It is derived from understanding of languages, knowlege of various eastern orthodox beliefs, culture and religions, and knowing the use of words in religious contexts. The major religions such as Hindu, Islam, Buddhism, Chinese beliefs, judaism and Christianity are different, but they did have similar traits in thoughts and manner of writing.

Thanks for reading.

I guess you missed where I wrote that bible verses are not evidence?

 

[SLP]

Are there proof of cellular changes which show that one species evolved into another specie, or one kind evolved into another? For example: such as monkey evolved into human? Or an amphibian evolved into reptiles?

What "cellular changes" do you think there would be?

 

[SLP]

I do try to help others here by sharing my knowledge [sic].

 

[SLP]

It's the textbooks that contain the flaws.

So no examples?

 

[SLP]

Suffice to say that when I hold the theory next to the evidence it doesn't compute.

Then suffice to say that you do not understand it well enough to pass judgement.

And I am assuming that for you, Genesis I and II DO 'compute'?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What is not designed and how do you tell the difference, if everything is designed you are just saying that design = exist, so just say exist and admit that design doesn't exist.
What is not designed?

How does order come from disorder?

 

[roman2819]

I guess you missed where I wrote that bible verses are not evidence?

I emphasized 2 points in my answer.

The millions of life forms - trees, landscapes, and millions of land and sea creatures that turn out so well is overwhelming proof of design by a Creator. (I should have started out saying this, then go on to explain the second point.

The above mentioned is sufficient proof of creation, but i feel that perhaps explaining the next point might help:

That the Bible was not referring to a six-day creation process, and I substantiate it by explaining the use of the word 'day' in religious manuscripts. I feel it is important to explain that.

Now i have a question: Regarding the belief that millions of lifeforms have turned out so well is proof of design by Creator. Is this too simple for evolutionists to believe, such that they have to disagree by saying that lifeforms must have evolved instead? If left on their own, what is the odds or probability that everything can turn out so well in such a coordinated manner? A christian website says it is like striking the power all lottery 7 times, meaning highly impossible.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So would any evidence of evolution change your mind about that at all?

Not as it's currently presented. I do believe in comprehensive adaptation however.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then suffice to say that you do not understand it well enough to pass judgement.

And I am assuming that for you, Genesis I and II DO 'compute'?

To the extent that I understand the narratives, yes.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I have more than mere belief.

I said my beliefs work well for me.

 

[Speedwell]

.

Now i have a question: Regarding the belief that millions of lifeforms have turned out so well is proof of design by Creator. Is this too simple for evolutionists to believe, such that they have to disagree by saying that lifeforms must have evolved instead?

That's still a false dichotomy.

If left on their own, what is the odds or probability that everything can turn out so well in such a coordinated manner?

!00%, obviously.

A christian website says it is like striking the power all lottery 7 times, meaning highly impossible.

And no math to back it up.

 

[Jimmy D]

Now i have a question: Regarding the belief that millions of lifeforms have turned out so well is proof of design by Creator. Is this too simple for evolutionists to believe, such that they have to disagree by saying that lifeforms must have evolved instead?

It's not that it's too simple, it's the fact that the all the evidence from biology, paleontology, molecular biology (DNA etc), anatomy, biogeography, etc, etc shows beyond all reasonable doubt that life has been evolving for millions of years.

There is zero scientific evidence against common ancestry, only the theological objections of a couple of noisy religious subsets.

 

[roman2819]

What "cellular changes" do you think there would be?

I have said this before, i will say it again, and with a few related questions about evolution.

Cellular changes that clearly demonstrate that a species evolved into another. Now, if some is going to say that the presence of item A (eg a certain tissue) found in 10 species is proof of evolution, my question would be: Could it also mean that the Creator designed item A to be part of these species?

My question regarding evolution : What are the main features or beliefs of Evolution? For so many years, evolution has been presented as the alternative theory to creation, that it means no creator, and everything happen on its own. But Some people in this discussion say this isn't true -- and if so, why didn't evolutionists come out to correct this belief which is held by majority of people in different parts of the world? I cannot it help but ask: Is this an evolutionist strawman? (the counter claim of creationist strawman, a term coined by some people here) .

So would you explain the main features of evolution? It cannot be unexplainable and complex. If i am told to go read myself, then I can only say perhaps no one knows enough to even explain the main features. I also hope to see clear opinions on does evolution believe that one specie can evolve into another, and what are examples? Do evolution include changes in kinds? Does evolution believe in no god and if not, what is evolution trying to say?

 

[Speedwell]

My question regarding evolution : What are the main features or beliefs of Evolution? For so many years, evolution has been presented as the alternative theory to creation, that it means no creator, and everything happen on its own.

That's still false and since you've been corrected on several occasions, it's now an intentional falsehood, i.e. a lie.

So would you explain the main features of evolution? It cannot be unexplainable and complex. If i am told to go read myself, then I can only say perhaps no one knows enough to even explain the main features.

Randomly distributed heritable variation acted on by natural selection.

I also hope to see clear opinions on does evolution believe that one specie can evolve into another, and what are examples? Do evolution include changes in kinds? Does evolution cont

There s no such thing as "kinds" and the singular form of "species" is the same as the plural. "Specie" means something else entirely. At least learn that much.

 

[roman2819]

Both the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution are very well established major theories, with enormous levels of verification and evidence. The ToE is stronger, probably, than the BBT, but it's sort of like saying 'steel is fairly strong but titanium alloy is stronger' - either one will serve for tableware with no danger of failure due to stress. At this point there are no known major issues with either theory. Details to be filled in? Yes. Serious difficulties? No.

I do not rule out that the Big Bang might have happened. If it did happen, it does not mean that there is no God. I suppose you know that science and God can coexist I certainly believe that science is discovering more about God's creation.

In Genesis God said to Abraham, your descendentsvwould be as numerous as the stars, if you can count them. Initially scientists thought they could count the number of stars in the galaxy but later they realized there is too many. This is an example of accurate and elegant statement found in the bible.

 

[roman2819]

It's changes in DNA. ALL the changes in evolution are in DNA.

And yes, we can compare the different DNA of different species. In closely related species, the DNA is very similar. The more distantly related the species are, the more differences there are in the DNA.

Regarding similar DNA, could they mean that God created them that way, with similar DNA? Similarity does not point to evolution exclusively, does it?

Some people believe that the presence of item A (eg a certain tissue) found in 10 species is proof of evolution. My question would be: Could it also mean that the Creator designed item A to be part of these 10 species?

Perhaps you can offer some pointers here : What are the main features or beliefs of Evolution? For so many years, evolution has been presented as the alternative theory to creation, that it means no creator, and everything happen on its own. But some people in this discussion say this isn't true. IF so, why didn't evolutionists come out early to correct this belief which is held by majority of people in different parts of the world? I cannot it help but ask: Is this an evolutionist strawman? (the counter claim of creationist strawman, a term coined by some people here) .

So would you explain the main features of evolution? It cannot be unexplainable and complex. If i am told to go read it up myself, then I can only say perhaps no one knows enough to even explain the main features in a few words. I also hope to see clear opinions on whether evolution believe that one specie can evolve into another, and what are examples? Do evolution include changes in kinds? Does evolution believe in no god and if not, what is evolution trying to say? Quite a few people say I misunderstood evolution, they kept saying what evolution is not... Not this andv not that. So kind say in a few concise sentences : What are the main points of evolution?

 

[Speedwell]

I do not rule out that the Big Bang might have happened. If it did happen, it does not mean that there is no God. I suppose you know that science and God can coexist I certainly believe that science is discovering more about God's creation.

The existence of God is an unfalsifiable proposition. What that means is that nothing which science has discovered or potentially could discover can disprove the existence of God--including the theory of evolution.

In Genesis God said to Abraham, your descendentsvwould be as numerous as the stars, if you can count them. Initially scientists thought they could count the number of stars in the galaxy but later they realized there is too many. This is an example of accurate and elegant statement found in the bible.

A literary trope not intended by its author to have anything to do with a literally accurate count of the stars, which in any case is changing constantly as new stars form or old ones die.

 

[Speedwell]

For so many years, evolution has been presented as the alternative theory to creation, that it means no creator, and everything happen on its own.

That's still a lie, no matter how many times you repeat it.

 

[roman2819]

It's changes in DNA. ALL the changes in evolution are in DNA.

And yes, we can compare the different DNA of different species. In closely related species, the DNA is very similar. The more distantly related the species are, the more differences there are in the DNA.

Regarding similar DNA, could they mean that God created them that way, with similar DNA? Similarity does not point to evolution exclusively, does it?

Some people believe is that the presence of item A (eg a certain tissue) found in 10 species is proof of evolution, my question would be: Could it also mean that the Creator designed item A to be part of these 10 species? Just a simple illustration.

Perhaps you can offer some pointers here : What are the main features or beliefs of Evolution? For so many years, evolution has been presented as the alternative theory to creation, that it means no creator, and everything happen on its own. But some people in this discussion say this isn't true. IF so, why didn't evolutionists come out early to correct this belief which is held by majority of people in different parts of the world? I cannot it help but ask: Is this an evolutionist strawman? (the counter claim of creationist strawman, a term coined by some people here) .

So would you explain the main features of evolution? It cannot be unexplainable and complex. If i am told to go read it up myself, then I can only say perhaps no one knows enough to even explain the main features in a few words. I also hope to see clear opinions on whether evolution believe that one specie can evolve into another, and what are examples? Do evolution believe there are changes in kind?