Not that "before Evolution: you must become a fish", but Jesus never said "before man, be ape"

[Gottservant]

Yes.

It's limited to genetic changes that don't interfere with a species survival. Small steps that can build up and not kill individuals inheriting them.

The whole point I keep trying to make, is that multiple ways of addressing the same survival, are preserved together, with those that are "used" (to cause the species to survive).

If I survive by climbing a tree, all the various heights of climbing a tree are preserved together, by the one adaptation to climb a tree.

This is typically called a "knock on effect".

 

[Gottservant]

The whole point I keep trying to make, is that multiple ways of addressing the same survival, are preserved together, with those that are "used" (to cause the species to survive).

If I survive by climbing a tree, all the various heights of climbing a tree are preserved together, by the one adaptation to climb a tree.

This is typically called a "knock on effect".

Just to be clear: no amount of knock on effects, can ever create a different species.

 

[Shemjaza]

Just to be clear: no amount of knock on effects, can ever create a different species.

Why not?

(That's assuming you are talking about knock on effects from genetic changes.)

 

[Mr Laurier]

Just to be clear: no amount of knock on effects, can ever create a different species.

Thats nice.
Take a population of grazing animals, living in a lush grassland.
Split that population into two sub populations.
Leave population (A) in the lush grasslands.
Move population (B) to a drier area, with less grass, and more scrub.

Watch for a few hundred generations.

 

[Gottservant]

Why not?

(That's assuming you are talking about knock on effects from genetic changes.)

Because the success of an adaptation, is weighed in the context of the species.

You can't weigh something in the context of "many" species, because you only have one "image" of a species to work with (your own).

You could weigh many species with many images, but the exponential difficulty prohibits it (at least in terms of successful flourishing).

 

[Gottservant]

Thats nice.
Take a population of grazing animals, living in a lush grassland.
Split that population into two sub populations.
Leave population (A) in the lush grasslands.
Move population (B) to a drier area, with less grass, and more scrub.

Watch for a few hundred generations.

God does not change the gratitude a species has, for being that species - He forgives presuming upon that gratitude, that that species could change (from being that species).

 

[Gottservant]

I think the point for Jesus, is that calling Men "fish" is a way of saying "men don't fear God, without being caught".

Whereas Darwin calling Men "descendents of apes" is a way of saying "men can't be trained to trust God, if they won't come out of their territory"

Have you come out of your territory - Evolutionists - ? Or are you just going with the flow?

 

[Gottservant]

Thats nice.
Take a population of grazing animals, living in a lush grassland.
Split that population into two sub populations.
Leave population (A) in the lush grasslands.
Move population (B) to a drier area, with less grass, and more scrub.

Watch for a few hundred generations.

I am confident even after a hundred generations, you would still be looking at grazing animals.

 

[Bradskii]

Does anyone understand any of this thread?

 

[Mr Laurier]

God does not change the gratitude a species has, for being that species - He forgives presuming upon that gratitude, that that species could change (from being that species).

And?
Unicorn does not change the gratitude a species has, for being that species.
There is nothing about forgiving in my post.

 

[Mr Laurier]

I am confident even after a hundred generations, you would still be looking at grazing animals.

And? Would genetic drift not cause speciation?

 

[Shemjaza]

Because the success of an adaptation, is weighed in the context of the species.

Yes. And if enough adaptions build up in the population then it is considered a different species.

You can't weigh something in the context of "many" species, because you only have one "image" of a species to work with (your own).

You could weigh many species with many images, but the exponential difficulty prohibits it (at least in terms of successful flourishing).

There isn't a problem in studying a species that isn't your own.

A lion is a different species to a tiger... and I don't have to be any kind of cat to see this.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think the point for Jesus, is that calling Men "fish" is a way of saying "men don't fear God, without being caught".

Whereas Darwin calling Men "descendents of apes" is a way of saying "men can't be trained to trust God, if they won't come out of their territory"

Have you come out of your territory - Evolutionists - ? Or are you just going with the flow?

I think that you talking an absolute load of codswallop and nonsense, and that you REALLY need to actually learn about the theory of evolution and science in general.

Evolution is not a religious belief, like you keep hoping it to be. Evolution is merely a name to describe the change of a species due to environmental pressures.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Does anyone understand any of this thread?

No. None of us do. It's not just you.