What is the barrier between micro and macro evolution?

[Frank Robert]

well ... the majority of the clergy in Jesus day didn't believe He was the Messiah either and look what happened there.

When one removes or skews the foundation (Genesis) then it undermines the authority of Gods Word ..... ie .... Now the serpent was more subtle and crafty than any living creature of the field which the Lord God had made. And he [Satan] said to the woman, Can it really be that God has said, You shall not eat from every tree of the garden?

and....

Can it really be God created everything in 6 literal days?

Same tactic/deception being used, casting doubt on the Word of God.

If a deity created the world in 6 days ~2000years ago why would he deceive us with overwhelming evidence that makes the world appear to be ~4billion years old?

 

[Frank Robert]

Not a problem for creationists. The bible is quite clear about it.

It is not a problem for creationist due to their belief in a literal interpretation of genesis. Most Catholics and mainstream Protestants are not hindered with a belief in a literal interpretation of genesis that is in conflict with the evidence for a 4 billion year old world and the ToE.

 

[Frank Robert]

well yeah .... they are your parents .... your family unit.

Your example of what you seen when looking in the mirror was intelligent design which is based on belief. Mine was my parents DNA plus mutations which is based on evidence. Can you grasp the difference?

 

[eleos1954]

.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yeah, I think I might have this thread closed down soon. This is getting out of hand a bit.

 

[Frank Robert]

Genetic analysis suggests there may have been a long period of cross-breeding between early ancestors of the humans and chimpanzees, before they finally split into the Homo and Pan (chimp) genera around six million years ago.

Not facts ... is what l I'm saying .... and six million years ... is pre-supposed as well.

Science it is based on evidence, not on a 2000 year old creationist myth.

And the evidence for interbreeding is:

The human chromosome number two is actually two ape chromosomes joined end-to-end, and nine other chromosomes have inverted sequences of genes compared with their equivalents in chimps. Humans and chimps also have differences in their individual genes that are far bigger than the differences between any two unrelated humans.
​

There is also fossil evidence of our 6 million year evolution.

a lot of ... if's ... and's and but's within the theory(s).

The ifs and and buts are in your mind because scientific evidence not support your belief.

Life forms are very complex .... and science comes up with possibilities in an attempt to explain it ... that's a good thing .... but there are many many non observable and non testable ideas that come into play and it will always be that way in regard to the various life forms.

See Dating Fossils

a lot of "could be's" aren't facts.

Science is all about theories that are supported by evidence. If and when stronger evidence becomes available the theory is updated.

 

[eleos1954]

If a deity created the world in 6 days ~2000years ago why would he deceive us with overwhelming evidence that makes the world appear to be ~4billion years old?

God speaks things into existence and it happens. (that is what is stated in His Word) ... does not state He used any other means ... believe it or don't believe it.

and no .... God did not "make it look like" things evolved .... that is mans interpretation/theory (with satan behind him) to undermine the authority of God and God's Word and many buy into the lie.

Christians know very well (should know) very well how deceptive satan is.

2 Timothy 4 3-4

For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires. 4So they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

and so it is happening.

world appear to be ~4billion years old?

key word .... appear

Appearances can be deceiving.

Was anybody there 4 billion years ago? Is there really irrefutabile evidence of billions of years?

ahhhh the pride of mankind

Psalm 10:4
In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

God speaks things into existence and it happens. (that is what is stated in His Word) ... does not state He used any other means ... believe it or don't believe it.

and no .... God did not "make it look like" things evolved .... that is mans interpretation/theory (with satan behind him) to undermine the authority of God and God's Word and many buy into the lie.

Christians know very well (should know) very well how deceptive satan is.

2 Timothy 4 3-4

For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires. 4So they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

and so it is happening.



key word .... appear

Appearances can be deceiving.

Was anybody there 4 billion years ago? Is there really irrefutabile evidence of billions of years?

ahhhh the pride of mankind

Psalm 10:4
In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”

At this point, you're really just preaching, which is against the rules for the subforum.

 

[eleos1954]

Science it is based on evidence, not on a 2000 year old creationist myth.

And the evidence for interbreeding is:

The human chromosome number two is actually two ape chromosomes joined end-to-end, and nine other chromosomes have inverted sequences of genes compared with their equivalents in chimps. Humans and chimps also have differences in their individual genes that are far bigger than the differences between any two unrelated humans.
​

There is also fossil evidence of our 6 million year evolution.

The ifs and and buts are in your mind because scientific evidence not support your belief.

See Dating Fossils

Science is all about theories that are supported by evidence. If and when stronger evidence becomes available the theory is updated.

Yeah I would agree it depends on what base one comes from to justify their beliefs.

Soft tissue found in dinosaur bones .... pretty strong evidence .... yet it will be theorized how that could have happened.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yeah I would agree it depends on what base one comes from to justify their beliefs.

Soft tissue found in dinosaur bones .... pretty strong evidence .... yet it will be theorized how that could have happened.

It's not theorized though. It's known how.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah I would agree it depends on what base one comes from to justify their beliefs.

Soft tissue found in dinosaur bones .... pretty strong evidence .... yet it will be theorized how that could have happened.

There are rules to evidence in the sciences. Those making claims are required to put their money where their mouths are. One has to have a concept that can be tested, in other words one's idea has to have the possibility of being shown to be wrong if it is wrong. If you can't do that one only has an ad hoc argument and since one merely cherry picks observations that support such claims and ignores observations that contradict it. Those arguments are not accepted in the sciences. One has to be honest in the sciences. and be willing to admit when one is wrong.

This is why I so often try to get creationists to understand the nature of evidence. Without an idea that can be refuted if wrong one cannot claim to have evidence. What is your testable hypothesis? What reasonable test could possibly refute it? If you cannot answer these two questions you do not have scientific evidence for your beliefs.

 

[Frank Robert]

God speaks things into existence and it happens. (that is what is stated in His Word) ... does not state He used any other means ... believe it or don't believe it.

and no .... God did not "make it look like" things evolved .... that is mans interpretation/theory (with satan behind him) to undermine the authority of God and God's Word and many buy into the lie.

All the scientific evidence points to a ~13 billion year universe and a ~4billion year earth.

Christians know very well (should know) very well how deceptive satan is.

Most Christians do not believe they are being deceived with the evidence for a ~4 billion year old earth or with the ToE.

key word .... appear

Appearances can be deceiving.

Was anybody there 4 billion years ago? Is there really irrefutabile evidence of billions of years?

ahhhh the pride of mankind

Psalm 10:4
In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”

You get confused because you do not understand the science principle of evidence. There is no such thing as irrefutable scientific evidence. Evidence serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. The idea that no one seen it is a Creationist ploy that they believe buttresses their literal belief in the genesis.

How Old is Earth, and How Do We Know?

Radiometric dating, which relies on the predictable decay of radioactive isotopes of carbon, uranium, potassium, and other elements, provides accurate age estimates for events back to the formation of Earth more than 4.5 billion years ago. These and other dating techniques are mutually consistent and underscore the reality of “deep time” in Earth history.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

You get confused because you do not understand the science principle of evidence. There is no such thing as irrefutable scientific evidence. Evidence serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. The idea that no one seen it is a Creationist ploy that they believe buttresses their literal belief in the genesis.

There is no irrefutable evidence in the sciences, but one can say that there is undeniable evidence in the sciences. If an observation supports a testable hypothesis it is evidence for that hypothesis. If one denies it one is simply wrong. Now that evidence could possibly be refuted later, but until that happens it is evidence for that idea. What this does is to put the burden of proof upon the denier. If one wants to deny evidence they need to show how that evidence is in error. And that happens quite often in the sciences. Yet it is something that creationists never seem to be able to do.

For example at one point even Piltdown Man was evidence for evolution. It was scientists that accept the theory of evolution that refuted and exposed that fraud. So wrong ideas can be refuted. But real scientists very very rarely lie. They know that being caught in a lie is a career ending event. I can show that the opposite is true for creation "scientists". Being willing to lie for creationism appears to be an asset with them. I can give specific examples that support this claim.

 

[Frank Robert]

Yeah I would agree it depends on what base one comes from to justify their beliefs.

Soft tissue found in dinosaur bones .... pretty strong evidence .... yet it will be theorized how that could have happened.

Belief serves no purpose in science. You anticipate a problem where none exists. If evidence supports the theory and if the theory makes accurate predictions there is no problem. If it doesn't then the theory will be discarded.

 

[inquiring mind]

It still says that everything that isn't a whale belong to the Water Kind.

You surely give some latitude to the 'and every living creature that moveth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after their kind' part, don't you?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You surely give some latitude to the 'and every living creature that moveth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after their kind' part, don't you?

You're the one who wants to take the Bible literally. So let's take it literally.
"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good."
According to that passage, there are only three Kinds mentioned: Great whales, 'water kind' (as you yourself called them) and 'winged fowl'.

 

[inquiring mind]

Your example of what you seen when looking in the mirror was intelligent design which is based on belief. Mine was my parents DNA plus mutations which is based on evidence. Can you grasp the difference?

How can you expect to debate in a Creation & Evolution Forum and not recognize 'belief' as being part of the conversation? And, you're not the only one.

 

[inquiring mind]

You're the one who wants to take the Bible literally. So let's take it literally.
"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good."
According to that passage, there are only three Kinds mentioned: Great whales, 'water kind' (as you yourself called them) and 'winged fowl'.

God wasn't finshed... He continued in verses 24 & 25.

 

[Mr Laurier]

I provided an answer already... if you believe as I do then Genesis 1:26-28 is a barrier to macroevolution even existing.

Alas, I don't believe any such thing.
So its rather pointless so start with the hope that I do.
Your "Genesis 1:26-28" is not a barrier to anything.
Its a word and some numbers.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Why would God tell us He created something in His image and then have it change?

Because the writer wants it that way.