Evolution (or like) that is trained to respond to false positives, is a stronger Evolution (or like)

returntosender said:

I don't believe he means them to be factual statements. I think he throws things out there that he's trying to figure out, hoping someone will come up with something to solve his mystery.

Click to expand...

He's definitely NOT stupid.

returntosender said:

I don't believe he means them to be factual statements. I think he throws things out there that he's trying to figure out, hoping someone will come up with something to solve his mystery.

Click to expand...

Yes, but when part of the mystery is what other people think or believe and you don't take their explanations about what they think and believe into account, then it can get frustrating.

returntosender said:

He's definitely NOT stupid.

Click to expand...

I agree, which is simultaneously why people keep attempting to communicate and why they get snippy when they are ignored or Gottservant goes back to an earlier point without acknowledging any discussion in between.

Maybe he needs to make statements and stop asking for opinions. Maybe he doesn't feel he needs to respond. He's been seeking for months. I am sure we will all be relieved when he finds peace over all his seeking

Can't say I truly understand the opening post of this thread.
Are you asking if evidence or data can be used to disprove the Theory of Evolution?
Evolution obviously has many boundaries and constraints and can therefore be theoretically disproven.

There are many religious scientists who have tried to disprove evolution by noting that evolution requires stepwise improvements rather than a complex component suddenly appearing fully functional.
They have pointed out the complexity of the eye, and the Bacterial flagella, the blood clotting cascade etc are amongst many items that have been used to try to disprove Evolution.

And scientists usually try and find stepwise links in things e.g. DNA markers that show common ancestry across species, or even migratory paths that various humans took as they spread from Africa across the world.

Then again no one should stop seeking.
Gotta,. Throw your thoughts out there but don't expect replies unless you will respond to them,. Even if you say you have no response is better then nothing

returntosender said:

I am sure we will all be relieved when he finds peace over all his seeking

Click to expand...

He's been on these boards for 16 years. He's not finding.

Really? I guess God wants us to learn something from him. I've lost a lot of brain cells from his posts. I hope they aren't the same one's that I learned from him.

returntosender said:

Really? I guess God wants us to learn something from him. I've lost a lot of brain cells from his posts. I hope they aren't the same one's that I learned from him.

Click to expand...

QV please:

AV1611VET said:

Gottservant, none of my business, but are you a follower of Emmanuel Swedenborg? and/or are you into Swedenborgianism?

Click to expand...

Gottservant said:

Swedenborg was a giant in my estimation. I haven't read his stuff, but I've read about his story and was thoroughly impressed. His work seemed too dense to really approach from a modern day mindset however, so I doubt I will be reading it in future.

Click to expand...

Gottservant said:

The point is: how do you know if the first Evolution Darwin discovered, was not a false positive?

Click to expand...

You mean those peppered moths they glued to a tree?

Gottservant said:

The point is: how do you know if the first Evolution Darwin discovered, was not a false positive?

Click to expand...

Good question. Darwin didn't have much but phenotypes and breeding data to go on. However, genetics, observed evolution, fossil transitionals, evolutionary development, population genetics and biochemistry have all since confirmed Darwin's predictions.

Gottservant said:

They have confirmed a shift, per species.

Not a bridge between species.

Click to expand...

That's wrong. Speciation is well-documented. Even many professional creationists now admit speciation is a fact:

As creationists, we must frequently remind detractors that we do not deny that species vary, change, and even appear over time.
...
Before the time of Charles Darwin, a false idea had crept into the church—the belief in the “fixity” or “immutability” of species. According to this view, each species was created in precisely the same form that we find it today. The Bible nowhere teaches that species are fixed and unchanging.
Speciation

This is not to deny that speciation occurs. Much evidence implies that isolating processes are establishing unique populations all the time. Indeed, in the case of ploidy, a new isolated species (depending on the definitions) can occur in one generation.
Patterns of Specification

The Barbarian said:

That's wrong. Speciation is well-documented. Even many professional creationists now admit speciation is a fact:

Click to expand...

Speciation may be a fact, but I draw the line at the emergence of any new genus.

A dog can be a wolf, a domestic dog, or a coyote.

But a dog can't be a giraffe -- unless it's on paper.

Gottservant said:

And if it's on paper, the fool can't tell the difference!

Click to expand...

Fools put a lot of stuff on paper that passes as truth but, in fact, is science, which can be right or wrong -- usually wrong.

Then they put it in a book and sell it at the college bookstore for $275.00.

When you get a textbook that devotes SIX PAGES to Marilyn Monroe and ONE PAGE to Neil Armstrong, that's sad.

Gottservant said:

A butterfly needs a cocoon.

I don't see any cocoons for men, or monkeys.

Does the butterfly having a cocoon, mean that one day other species will too? Not likely?

Click to expand...

If humans have hands, does that mean butterflies will have them?

Not likely. Evolution is opportunistic. And mutations don't appear in response to need.