Winter Wheat Video Lecture

[renniks]

And no atheist has ever suggested otherwise

Lol, you have not been in on some of the conversations I've had with atheists.

 

[renniks]

I get the idea, you remember the strawman argument that a mutation can't change a whole body plan which nobody claims,

Well then getting from a dino to a bird is impossible, no matter the number of mutations.

 

[renniks]

In your reply what your not at all being clear about is what people think of with the term "creation".

According to the Pew Research Center study, 81% of U.S. adults say that humans evolved over time.
For Darwin Day, 6 facts about the evolution debate

And how many understood the question? Of course, we evolved in some ways. I would say devolved, overall, but close enough. We all came from the same parents, so races evolved over time. Not much different than selective breeding of plants or animals.

 

[Speedwell]

There is plenty of competition. In fact 40 percent of americans believe in creation. If you took a poll of muslims and Jews, I think you going to find a version of creation beloved by most, also. Just because something is a leading scientific theory doesn't make it correct.

No, there is no competing scientific theory. Lamarckianism is gone and biblical creationism as a scientific hypothesis has been off the table for 200 years. IDism has not risen to the level of a scientific theory. It may someday, but it is inconsistent with biblical creationism and does not deny an old Earth or the general effectiveness of the evolutionary processes in routine cases. Yes there Muslims and Jews who are biblical creationists, but many more who are not and they all, and all Christians as well, believe that God is author of our being.

 

[renniks]

No, there is no competing scientific theory.

I didn't say there was.

 

[Speedwell]

I didn't say there was.

So what's the problem?

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Well then getting from a dino to a bird is impossible, no matter the number of mutations.

No that is the strawman argument, that mutations can't get from dino to bird when both are tetrapods, their basic body plan and there is no requirement for major body changes.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

I didn't say there was.

You brought up Sanford's Genetic Entropy, are you now admitting it is unscientific?

 

[dlamberth]

And how many understood the question? Of course, we evolved in some ways. I would say devolved, overall, but close enough. We all came from the same parents, so races evolved over time. Not much different than selective breeding of plants or animals.

The point being that most do not use the word "creation" in the way that you did when claiming that 46% believe in creation.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Lol, you have not been in on some of the conversations I've had with atheists.

I have to wonder if you were listening, or just filling in from a script.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Well then getting from a dino to a bird is impossible, no matter the number of mutations.

Cprrecting.
Getting from a SAUROPOD dinosaur, to a bird, is impossible.
A THEROPOD dinosaur however, is another matter.
Theropods are already very bird-like.
Same bipedal stance.
Same lung system.
Same digestive system.
Same hollow bones.
Same brain structure.
Both have feathers.
Evolving a toothless beak and a short tail, is the only real change needed to make a velociraptor into an ostrich.

 

[renniks]

You brought up Sanford's Genetic Entropy, are you now admitting it is unscientific?

No, I'm saying it's not the current accepted theory.

 

[VirOptimus]

No, I'm saying it's not the current accepted theory.

Thats not how scientific theories work.

 

[renniks]

Thats not how scientific theories work.

What isn't?

 

[VirOptimus]

What isn't?

They dont compete like that with alternatives.

 

[renniks]

L

They dont compete like that with alternatives.

Like what?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well then getting from a dino to a bird is impossible, no matter the number of mutations.

Birds are dinosaurs.

 

[renniks]

Birds are dinosaurs.

Prove it. Have you personally examined a dinosaurs organs and DNA? Can I borrow your time machine?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Prove it. Have you personally examined a dinosaurs organs and DNA? Can I borrow your time machine?

We do not need to. We can examine their skeletons. And feathers. And other features that last. Just because one does not know how to test an idea does not mean that it has not been properly supported. In other words do not jump to conclusions.

 

[Astrid]

I think that's probably a rule violation.. .
If you all didn't try to use it to explain reality, well you know... but you do. Constantly.

" explain reality" is so disingenuously vague
that complaints of blatant falsehood is easily
sicestepped.