It is also not a claim I made. You are making the positive claim that evolution is guided. Up to you to prove it.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Abiogenesis and Evolution
- Thread starter Loudmouth
- Start date
It is also not a claim I made. You are making the positive claim that evolution is guided. Up to you to prove it.
justlookinla
Regular Member
I've said over and over in this thread that my view is a faith-based view.
If humanity wasn't produced by random, mindless, meaningless and purposeless mechanisms, how was it produced. Evolution basically teaches that (now it's your turn to attempt to muddy the is sue by demanding references where evolution teaches such a thing). Of course, we are talking about the claims of Darwinist evolution, one of the various views of evolution.
Upvote
0
Then the faith based view is that evolution is guided. If you can't demonstrate that evolution is guided, then there is no reason to believe that it is.
Upvote
0
justlookinla
Regular Member
Then the faith based view is that humanity is the result of only random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanisms. If you can't produce evidence, based on the scientific method, that humanity is the product of such a method, then there is no reason to believe that it is.
Upvote
0
029b10
It is a hinnie talking to the Spirit not a mule.
I think it would be up to you to prove evolution is anything more that just a hypothesis.
Since Abiogenesis has yet to produce a plausible working model to explain the process by which non-living matter becomes living matter, then evolution has no foundation to support its validity as a legitimate science.
Every science has for its basis a system of principles
as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe
is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles;
he can only discover them. THOMAS PAINE
And in such, would you care to state one of the Principles of Evolution? Would you say random genetic mutations is one of those princples claimed by evolutionist?
Since Abiogenesis has yet to produce a plausible working model to explain the process by which non-living matter becomes living matter, then evolution has no foundation to support its validity as a legitimate science.
Every science has for its basis a system of principles
as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe
is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles;
he can only discover them. THOMAS PAINE
And in such, would you care to state one of the Principles of Evolution? Would you say random genetic mutations is one of those princples claimed by evolutionist?
Upvote
0
i can give you some well known, and documented, testable, evidence, but you will outright reject it.
the placebo effect.
there is no evidence to the patient at all that a sugar pill will work.
but that patients faith that it WILL work, makes it work.
this effect is so powerful that double blind tests have to be devised to combat it in clinical trials.
Upvote
0
it goes beyond amazing.
the placebo effect in combination with epigenetics is simply unimaginable.
if the above is true, then you can affect the genetic make-up of your great grand kids, by simply having faith.
this sort of thing has unbelievable ramifications for the human race.
Upvote
0
The question in the topic assumes that evolution has already been supported by evidence past the hypothesis stage. What I am discussing is the relationship between abiogenesis and evolution. I am showing that one does not depend on the other. You can have the first life created by deity and still have life evolve naturally afterwards. Evolution does not require abiogenesis.
As already shown, all evolution needs is life, no matter how it got there.
Does the germ theory of disease have to explain where life first came from? If we found that the first life was created by a deity, would that mean that bacteria do not naturally cause infections? Or do germs cause disease no matter how germs came to be? If someone doesn't know who their parents are, do they stop existing?
At a certain point, proximal causes are independent of ultimate origins.
That is beyond the scope of this topic. If you want to learn about the experiments that led scientists to the conclusion that mutations are random with respect to fitness then there are two great studies to look at.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luria–Delbrück_experiment
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/mutations_07
In both cases, mutations for bacteriophage and antibiotic resistance occur in the absence of bacteriophage or antibiotics. What they found is that the needs of the organisms do not influence which specific mutations will occur. It is a bit like the lottery where you choose numbers without knowing which ones will win.
Upvote
0
justlookinla
Regular Member
And as already shown, there's no evidence, based on the scientific method, for humanity being the result of only random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanisms.
Upvote
0
No one has to prove a negative. You are the one making the positive claim. The burden of proof lies with you.
Upvote
0
justlookinla
Regular Member
It's not a negative, as I pointed out earlier. One makes the claim which inferrs humanity is the result of random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanisms. That's not a negative.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
