Branching Trees - A question for evolutionists

lifepsyop · Sep 27, 2019

It is often claimed that if God created living things, he did so in a way to look like Evolution, as if trying to trick people into believing all things had evolved from a universal common ancestor.

This is because, based on their anatomical and molecular characteristics, life can usually be arranged in the pattern of a branching tree... thus the phrase "tree of life". Evolutionists claim that this pattern is strong evidence for their model... with the suggestion that God could have created in such a way where living things resist being organized in such a branching pattern.

....branching trees.... branching trees....

Here is a question for evolutionists:

It seems surprising that evolutionary processes would produce such an abundance of life (plants and trees) that physically emulate the very branching pattern of evolutionary common ancestry.
Do you think that is a strange coincidence?
Were plants and trees created in Evolution's image?

SkyWriting · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
It is often claimed that if God created living things, he did so in a way to look like Evolution, as if trying to trick people into believing all things had evolved from a universal common ancestor.

It's a poor claim to say just one.

I read a better (I think more scriptural) model saying the entire globe was one organism that developed into the branches of life we find in our imagination of the past. Or another way...animals were not plants in the past.

essentialsaltes · Sep 27, 2019

Using a 'tree' for genealogy is an old old metaphor.

I think you're confusing a simple figure of speech for something meaningful.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
Were plants and trees created in Evolution's image?

What is the image of Evolution? Evolution, not evolution, by the way.

Occams Barber · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
It is often claimed that if God created living things, he did so in a way to look like Evolution, as if trying to trick people into believing all things had evolved from a universal common ancestor.

This is because, based on their anatomical and molecular characteristics, life can usually be arranged in the pattern of a branching tree... thus the phrase "tree of life". Evolutionists claim that this pattern is strong evidence for their model... with the suggestion that God could have created in such a way where living things resist being organized in such a branching pattern.

....branching trees.... branching trees....

Here is a question for evolutionists:

It seems surprising that evolutionary processes would produce such an abundance of life (plants and trees) that physically emulate the very branching pattern of evolutionary common ancestry.
Do you think that is a strange coincidence?
Were plants and trees created in Evolution's image?

The branching tree or bush is nothing more than a metaphor for something technically known as a 'nested hierarchy'. Russian dolls are also a nested hierarchy.

Were Russian dolls created in Evolution's image?
OB

lifepsyop · Sep 27, 2019

essentialsaltes said:
Using a 'tree' for genealogy is an old old metaphor.

Yes, isn't it interesting that trees are geneaological images?

Same question, (since evolution is just a lot of geneaology). Is it just mere coincidence that we have all these images of the evolutionary process around us?

essentialsaltes said:
I think you're confusing a simple figure of speech for something meaningful.

I think you're confusing a figure of speech as something meaningless.

(In the beginning was a 'figure of speech', the Word.)

lifepsyop · Sep 27, 2019

Occams Barber said:
The branching tree or bush is nothing more than a metaphor...

That is the point. The metaphor is used because trees "look like evolution"... that's why evolutionists always use the metaphor of a branching tree when portraying their evolutionary creation story.

So do you not find it interesting that "Evolution" happened to create so many living things that offer such a direct visual metaphor of itself?

Warden_of_the_Storm · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
That is the point. The metaphor is used because trees "look like evolution"... that's why evolutionists always use the metaphor of a branching tree when portraying their evolutionary creation story.

So do you not find it interesting that "Evolution" happened to create so many living things that offer such a direct visual metaphor of itself?

Why are you capitalizing the word evolution like it's the name of some being or person?

Occams Barber · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
That is the point. The metaphor is used because trees "look like evolution"... that's why evolutionists always use the metaphor of a branching tree when portraying their evolutionary creation story.

So do you not find it interesting that "Evolution" happened to create so many living things that offer such a direct visual metaphor of itself?

Not really - it's just a useful metaphor.
OB

1am3laine · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
It is often claimed that if God created living things, he did so in a way to look like Evolution, as if trying to trick people into believing all things had evolved from a universal common ancestor.

This is because, based on their anatomical and molecular characteristics, life can usually be arranged in the pattern of a branching tree... thus the phrase "tree of life". Evolutionists claim that this pattern is strong evidence for their model... with the suggestion that God could have created in such a way where living things resist being organized in such a branching pattern.

....branching trees.... branching trees....

Here is a question for evolutionists:

It seems surprising that evolutionary processes would produce such an abundance of life (plants and trees) that physically emulate the very branching pattern of evolutionary common ancestry.
Do you think that is a strange coincidence?
Were plants and trees created in Evolution's image?

I found your information very interesting.
Genesis 2:17 is the "tree" of knowledge good/evil. So to learn we must educ(ATE).
you notice the word "ate" in educate because we're eating information. (Proverbs 13:2, Proverbs 18:20-21)

Example: Our twitter timeline is called a (Feed) = eating information
It is more than 4000 words with eat/ate within them.

I do believe the uni(verse = word = John 1:1-2) is agricultural = Mark 4:13-20

God called us trees that's why when Jesus healed the man at first he saw trees. (Mark 8:24)
(Matthew 7:16-20)

Industry = In dust tree

The tree seems to be very significant.

Shemjaza · Sep 27, 2019

lifepsyop said:
That is the point. The metaphor is used because trees "look like evolution"... that's why evolutionists always use the metaphor of a branching tree when portraying their evolutionary creation story.

So do you not find it interesting that "Evolution" happened to create so many living things that offer such a direct visual metaphor of itself?

Not really.

The structure is a consequence of something singular that divides and spreads out.

Trees start as a single shoot and divide into multiple branches we see the same structure with not very similar life forms or even with non living structures like rivers.

The "Tree of life" doesn't really look like a tree... it doesn't really look like anything, it's a visualisation for something that exists across time and space.

Also, the elements don't really look like a two dimensional grid... but the periodic table is a good visual aid.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Sep 27, 2019

There is a similarity in the way the 'tree of life' and trees develop, to the extent that both tend to do so by branching over time...

However, there are structural similarities between other very different features of nature, such as galaxies and hurricanes, that owe their similarity to shared fundamental physical principles, which the 'tree of life' and living trees do not.

46AND2 · Sep 27, 2019

1am3laine said:
I found your information very interesting.
Genesis 2:17 is the "tree" of knowledge good/evil. So to learn we must educ(ATE).
you notice the word "ate" in educate because we're eating information. (Proverbs 13:2, Proverbs 18:20-21)

Example: Our twitter timeline is called a (Feed) = eating information
It is more than 4000 words with eat/ate within them.

I do believe the uni(verse = word = John 1:1-2) is agricultural = Mark 4:13-20

God called us trees that's why when Jesus healed the man at first he saw trees. (Mark 8:24)
(Matthew 7:16-20)

Industry = In dust tree

The tree seems to be very significant.

Not sure if serious.

How about:

idola tree=idolatry
Iconola tree=iconolatry
Sophis tree=sophistry
Devil tree=deviltry

Perhaps it's all Satan's doing?

Think your guilty of a little zealo tree.

Bungle_Bear · Sep 27, 2019

1am3laine said:
I found your information very interesting.
Genesis 2:17 is the "tree" of knowledge good/evil. So to learn we must educ(ATE).
you notice the word "ate" in educate because we're eating information. (Proverbs 13:2, Proverbs 18:20-21)

Example: Our twitter timeline is called a (Feed) = eating information
It is more than 4000 words with eat/ate within them.

I do believe the uni(verse = word = John 1:1-2) is agricultural = Mark 4:13-20

God called us trees that's why when Jesus healed the man at first he saw trees. (Mark 8:24)
(Matthew 7:16-20)

Industry = In dust tree

The tree seems to be very significant.

Somebody needs to consume more information. Some basic linguistics and etymology would be a good place to start.

Jimmy D · Sep 28, 2019

lifepsyop said:
This is because, based on their anatomical and molecular characteristics, life can usually be arranged in the pattern of a branching tree.

Maybe if Haeckel is your most up to date source.

(You are correct that simplistic representations of ancestral lines do exist, but they don’t really convey the complexity of common descent).

SLP · Sep 28, 2019

Jimmy D said:
Maybe if Haeckel is your most up to date source.

(You are correct that simplistic representations of ancestral lines do exist, but they don’t really convey the complexity of common descent).

View attachment 263971
View attachment 263972

View attachment 263973

View attachment 263974

View attachment 263975

Looks like this one, unable to produce valid, interesting, discussions, wants to try some odd end-run around the evidence to make it look like the 'tree of life' is so because Jesus wanted it that way.

Ophiolite · Sep 28, 2019

In detail the "tree of life" is a rather crude and inaccurate metaphor. An anastamosing river is much closer to the mark.

lifepsyop · Sep 28, 2019

Shemjaza said:
Not really.

The structure is a consequence of something singular that divides and spreads out.

Trees start as a single shoot and divide into multiple branches we see the same structure with not very similar life forms or even with non living structures like rivers.

The "Tree of life" doesn't really look like a tree... it doesn't really look like anything, it's a visualisation for something that exists across time and space.

Also, the elements don't really look like a two dimensional grid... but the periodic table is a good visual aid.

Yea the pattern is basically everyhere in nature and I think that's the point I'm driving at. The pattern is not at all particular to an evolutionary or genealogical process. It is, in fact, a prevalent feature of the physical world.

So, the kingdom of Life does not actually look like it evolved. Life appears to be simply conforming to a pattern we see instanced in everywhere else in the natural world.

Thus, there is no need or reason to invoke Evolution (Universal Common Ancestry) in order to explain why living things can be organized within such a branching structure pattern. Because it is simply one more instance of a pattern that we find repeated in many other realms of nature.

Ophiolite · Sep 28, 2019

lifepsyop said:
Yea the pattern is basically everyhere in nature and I think that's the point I'm driving at. The pattern is not at all particular to an evolutionary or genealogical process. It is, in fact, a prevalent feature of the physical world.

So, the kingdom of Life does not actually look like it evolved. Life appears to be simply conforming to a pattern we see instanced in everywhere else in the natural world.

Thus, there is no need or reason to invoke Evolution (Universal Common Ancestry) in order to explain why living things can be organized within such a branching structure pattern. Because it is simply one more instance of a pattern that we find repeated in many other realms of nature.

Given that the reality is that the inter-relationship of species does not match the form of a tree we can safely dismiss your speculation.

Shemjaza · Sep 28, 2019

lifepsyop said:
Yea the pattern is basically everyhere in nature and I think that's the point I'm driving at. The pattern is not at all particular to an evolutionary or genealogical process. It is, in fact, a prevalent feature of the physical world.

So, the kingdom of Life does not actually look like it evolved. Life appears to be simply conforming to a pattern we see instanced in everywhere else in the natural world.

Thus, there is no need or reason to invoke Evolution (Universal Common Ancestry) in order to explain why living things can be organized within such a branching structure pattern. Because it is simply one more instance of a pattern that we find repeated in many other realms of nature.

That isn't true.

While we do have the tree pattern used to visualise the relatedness of life, the only mechanism we have to explain the branching pattern is evolution.

Branching Trees - A question for evolutionists

Regular Member

The Librarian

Stranger in a Strange Land

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Active Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...

Whoot!

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Regular Member

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Regular Member

Similar threads