Important interpretation? : does having been a monkey, help all future "evolutions" in a monkey way?

[SkovandOfMitzae]

Evolution breeds species after its own kind with minute genetic and morphological difference that may not even be noticeable within dozens of generations. A species becomes a subspecies which becomes its own species and eventually maybe even its own family. Often horizontal gene transfer happens and makes significant genetic changes. Sometimes two isolated subspecies, or species within the same genus are able to crossbreed and the offspring will carry different lineages of naturally selected traits.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

Then your point can take a hike.

That seems pretty intolerant and hostile. Are you by any chance a yecist?
My point makes perfect sense.

you said A does B and I said no it does not.

 

[Believer000]

Christianity breeds hostility since you're coming at me like a bull for a red flag.

I'll repeat what I said in post #113:
My post is no way influenced by the theory of evolution.

The theory of evolution is not a belief or moral system to follow. It's just a descriptor of biological science.

Get over yourself.

Your posts do come across as very hostile. Accusing me of lying for example, and accusing me of deliberately misreading things for whatever reason etc.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Your posts do come across as very hostile. Accusing me of lying for example, and accusing me of deliberately misreading things for whatever reason etc.

The misreading one was a genuine question because I failed to see how it is that you could have misread what I wrote.

And lying... eh, you are new here, so maybe some leeway should have been given. Your statements were still incorrect.

 

[Believer000]

My post is no way influenced by the theory of evolution.

The theory of evolution is not a belief or moral system to follow. It's just a descriptor of biological science.

Get over yourself.

Evolution is an idea not based on anything other than one man's thoughts.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Evolution is an idea not based on anything other than one man's thoughts.

Except that it's not. Like, you are just wrong, flat out wrong on this.
Read this. Or this. Or even this. And learn why you are wrong, because you massively, majorly wrong.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

Evolution is an idea not based on anything other than one man's thoughts.

It’s based on the expert interpretation of millions of scientists through hundreds of thousands of studies carried out through dozens of specialized fields.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution breeds species after its own kind with minute genetic and morphological difference that may not even be noticeable within dozens of generations. A species becomes a subspecies which becomes its own species and eventually maybe even its own family. Often horizontal gene transfer happens and makes significant genetic changes. Sometimes two isolated subspecies, or species within the same genus are able to crossbreed and the offspring will carry different lineages of naturally selected traits.

And therefore we were redeemed on the Cross by a mutant copy-error ... right?

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you by any chance a yecist?

No.

Embedded Age Creationist.

You?

 

[AV1611VET]

It’s based on the expert interpretation of millions of scientists through hundreds of thousands of studies carried out through dozens of specialized fields.

Meaning it's been changed more times than Carter has liver pills?

How many of those "hundreds of thousands of studies were wrong"?

 

[chevyontheriver]

Charles Darwin believed the white race to be more advanced than other races. If you believe in his theory you must also believe this?.

It WAS his theory. He doesn’t own it any more. So even if Charles Darwin was a racist (he was) his idea that natural selection makes changes in populations is not this wrong. Social Darwinism is so much hoohaw (and Darwin was a Social Darwinist (like Margaret Sanger and many other movers and shakers in Western history)). But Social Darwinism is not the whole of Darwinism, nor is Darwinism exactly the same as today’s evolutionary theory. For one, Darwin didn’t even have a mechanism for inheritance or how that could be manipulated by natural selection. It took Gregor Mendel to show the idea of genes and later Watson and Crick to show the idea of DNA actually making up those genes. Darwin hadn’t a clue about either. He had observations about finches in the Galapagos. He made a good inference from that data. But evolutionary theory is way more than Darwin’s inference about natural selection steering evolution. Which has nothing to do with racism.

Social Darwinism IS racist. Evolution could be used by racists just as the Bible can be used by racists.

Social Darwinism was and is culturally common. Lots of US public policy is based still on Social Darwinism. Certain philanthropists buy into it. And Planned Parenthood was founded on principles of eugenics, the attempt to select out inferior stock from the breeding pool to advance the species.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

No.

Embedded Age Creationist.

You?

I’m a Christian who accepts the general scientific consensus of the world being several billion years old. Most commonly known as a evolutionary creationist or evolutionary theist.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I believe that the burden of proof would require some evidence that the main creationist orgs are all notorious liars. Simply saying it does not make it so.

They keep producing claims about evolution that are clearly false, distort the science, and in some cases require them to actually understand what the science is saying. If you understand the facts of a certain something and then present contrary information about those facts you are deliberately presenting false information -- aka, lying. All of the big creo orgs have done this including CMI in the past. They are not worthy of ones trust or the benefit of the doubt.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

Meaning it's been changed more times than Carter has liver pills?

How many of those "hundreds of thousands of studies were wrong"?

Very few. I was referring to papers just done in the last few years. With 8,000,000 scientists and almost every field having some overlap with the theory of evolution we get tons of studies a minute.

but yes as we get more data in, we change it. Lots of changes occurred from 50 year ago to now. Most of it not major changes. All of it working towards what we have now. That’s why we can trust science and scientists. It’s overwhelmed with checks and balances. Hence peer reviewed public papers that get scrutinized. All of it further and further supporting and proving the theory of evolution. It’s why over half of all Christians accept it and why 99.9% of scientists accept it. The largest groups that reject evolution are white republican Christians in USA and the alt right conservatives of Africa.

within a few decades of Darwin’s research the bulk of scientists have accepted it and have constantly further and further fine tuned it.

 

[AV1611VET]

With 8,000,000 scientists and almost every field having some overlap with the theory of evolution we get tons of studies a minute.

And how many of those 8 million conclude GOD DID IT?

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

And how many of those 8 million conclude GOD DID IT?

about half believe in the god of Abraham. But less than 0.01% believe evolution was not part of it.

 

[AV1611VET]

about half believe in the god of Abraham. But less than 0.01% believe evolution was not part of it.

How many of those 4 million believe GOD DID IT?

I believe in the paperboy; but I don't believe he made that big bang noise I hear last night.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

How many of those 4 million believe GOD DID IT?

I believe in the paperboy; but I don't believe he made that big bang noise I hear last night.

I already answered that question a few times. All of those Christians, Jews and Muslims who are also scientists believe Yahweh did it, and they believe he did it in a way that can be explored and understood scientifically. So they reject young earth , old earth, and gap creationism and they reject intelligent design. They accept God did it, and that we can learn about it through science including the theory of evolution. They don’t think he did it through a literal reading of genesis 1-11 because that’s bad theology and pseudoscience.

 

[AV1611VET]

I already answered that question a few times. All of those Christians, Jews and Muslims who are also scientists believe Yahweh did it, and they believe he did it in a way that can be explored and understood scientifically. So they reject young earth , old earth, and gap creationism and they reject intelligent design. They accept God did it, and that we can learn about it through science including the theory of evolution. They don’t think he did it through a literal reading of genesis 1-11 because that’s bad theology and pseudoscience.

Who is Yahweh?

 

[disciple Clint]

They keep producing claims about evolution that are clearly false, distort the science, and in some cases require them to actually understand what the science is saying. If you understand the facts of a certain something and then present contrary information about those facts you are deliberately presenting false information -- aka, lying. All of the big creo orgs have done this including CMI in the past. They are not worthy of ones trust or the benefit of the doubt.

Once again say something is not evidence, is there any evidence to support the post or is there not, if there is evidence please provide it.