The "unified" theory of evolution

The Barbarian · Sunday at 8:14 AM

AV1611VET said:
From AI Overview:

Darwin did not attribute the emergence of life to God in the traditional sense of a divine creator. His theory of evolution, particularly natural selection, describes a process of change over time driven by environmental pressures, not by a supernatural entity. While Darwin acknowledged the possibility of a "Creator" who established the initial laws of nature, his focus was on the natural mechanisms that drive the development of life

Here's why you should be very careful of AI:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; andthat, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1859

The Barbarian · Sunday at 8:16 AM

Gene2memE said:
Strobel's analysis of evolutionary biology is about as balanced as a ladder with a leg missing and reads about as true as a Roman coin marked 'VII BC'.

I have debated YE creationists who have labeled his book "an embarrassment."

AV1611VET · Sunday at 12:10 PM

The Barbarian said:
But he formed his theory as a devout Anglican Christian.

From AI Overview:

Darwin was not a devout Christian, especially towards the end of his life. While he initially had religious beliefs, his scientific explorations and personal struggles led him to question and eventually reject traditional Christian faith. He described himself as an agnostic.

The Barbarian · Sunday at 2:21 PM

AV1611VET said:
From AI Overview:

Darwin was not a devout Christian, especially towards the end of his life. While he initially had religious beliefs, his scientific explorations and personal struggles led him to question and eventually reject traditional Christian faith. He described himself as an agnostic.

Here's why you should be very careful of AI:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; andthat, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1859

Your AI is wrong about Darwin's self-description, as well.

"In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.— I think that generally (& more and more so as I grow older) but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."
Darwin, letter to John Fordyce.

The young Darwin found the ‘argument of design in nature, as given by Paley, …conclusive’.15 Even when Darwin became convinced of the transformation of species in 1837 (like his grandfather Erasmus long before) and adopted his particular theory of evolution in 1838, he retained the Paleyan belief in universal adaptation.16 In 1842, he suggested, in the first full sketch of his theory, that the secondary law of natural selection, which was ‘impressed on matter by the Creator’, was capable of ‘creating individual organisms, each characterised by the most exquisite workmanship and widely-extended adaptations’.1

http://www.philos.de/Momme/vSydow,%20M.%20%282005%29%20Darwin%20A%20Christian%20Undermining%20Christianity.pdf

partinobodycular · Monday at 10:20 AM

The Barbarian said:
Here's why you should be very careful of AI:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; andthat, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1859

Indeed, one does need to be careful, because the 1859 edition of 'On the Origin of Species' doesn't contain the words 'the Creator'.

BCP1928 · Monday at 11:03 AM

Why is Darwin's religion important to this discussion?

Warden_of_the_Storm · Monday at 12:35 PM

BCP1928 said:
Why is Darwin's religion important to this discussion?

Because some people feel that it is.

AV1611VET · Monday at 1:42 PM

BCP1928 said:
Why is Darwin's religion important to this discussion?

Had Darwin been true to the religion some say he had, why did he marry his first cousin?

Warden_of_the_Storm · Monday at 1:50 PM

AV1611VET said:
Had Darwin been true to the religion some say he had, why did he marry his first cousin?

There's no passage in the Bible, no chapter or verse that directly and explicitly forbids the marriage of cousins.

AV1611VET · Monday at 3:23 PM

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
There's no passage in the Bible, no chapter or verse that directly and explicitly forbids the marriage of cousins.

What Darwin did is prohibited in 24 states.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Monday at 3:26 PM

AV1611VET said:
What Darwin did is prohibited in 24 states.

But not in the Bible, nor in America at the time at all, nor in Western Europe nor the world.

Swinging for low hanging fruit and missing, AV.

AV1611VET · Monday at 3:32 PM

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
But not in the Bible, nor in America at the time at all, nor in Western Europe nor the world.

Swinging for low hanging fruit and missing, AV.

Many states ban first-cousin marriage (and also incest) for good eugenic reasons. Malign recessive genes that hardly ever express themselves in children born from unrelated spouses are more likely to manifest in marriages between close relatives. In pursuit of this interest, Illinois and Minnesota only allow consanguinity between infertile cousins.

SOURCE

I guess science can take a hike, can't it?

Warden_of_the_Storm · Monday at 3:35 PM

AV1611VET said:
Many states ban first-cousin marriage (and also incest) for good eugenic reasons. Malign recessive genes that hardly ever express themselves in children born from unrelated spouses are more likely to manifest in marriages between close relatives. In pursuit of this interest, Illinois and Minnesota only allow consanguinity between infertile cousins.

SOURCE

I guess science can take a hike, can't it?

Or you can read what I wrote where I said:
"But not in the Bible, nor in America at the time at all, nor in Western Europe nor the world."

Only a few states banned first cousin marriage. And even if Darwin did marry his first cousin, it doesn't change the fact that evolution is sound and well evidenced science.

AV1611VET · Monday at 3:44 PM

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
... evolution is sound and well evidenced science.

Microevolution is.

Macroevolution is taught as such ... but the Bible says otherwise.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Monday at 3:54 PM

AV1611VET said:
Microevolution is.

Macroevolution is taught as such ... but the Bible says otherwise.

And since the Bible is not a scientific text book, that doesn't really matter. Nor at all does the fact that Darwin married his first cousin do anything against the theory of evolution, nor anything else you can claim about the man, no matter how spurious and misguided your claims to be.

The theory of evolution stands as a fact of science. Simple as.

Hans Blaster · Monday at 4:56 PM

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
But not in the Bible, nor in America at the time at all, nor in Western Europe nor the world.

Swinging for low hanging fruit and missing, AV.

Fun fact, America isn't the bible either.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Monday at 5:11 PM

Hans Blaster said:
Fun fact, America isn't the bible either.

Do you mean 'in the Bible'?

dlamberth · Monday at 6:03 PM

AV1611VET said:
What Darwin did is prohibited in 24 states.

Darwin was from England. He married his first cousin way back in 1839. Things were different back than in England. Moving forward to today, even today in England it is still legal to marry ones first cousin.

BCP1928 · Monday at 6:12 PM

AV1611VET said:
Had Darwin been true to the religion some say he had, why did he marry his first cousin?

AV1611VET said:

Maybe she was hot.

AV1611VET · Monday at 6:41 PM

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
Do you mean 'in the Bible'?

Are you sure?

The "unified" theory of evolution

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

One nation indivisible

Well-Known Member

Senior Contributor

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Similar threads