As a Christian, how many of you believe in evolution?

[Terry61]

do you have a specific case?

My apologies for my typo. It is spelled atavism.

 

[sfs]

For one much is assumed about the earliest stages in macroevolution, as in what would prevent the most ancient species from going extinct? Apparently Dinosaurs, massive, powerful reptilian like creatures, are all extinct, where does life continue on from the ice age theory?

I don't understand the questions. All species, without exception, descend from the most ancient species. Among dinosaurs, some evolved into other species (some of which still exist, as has been pointed out) and some went extinct without further evolution. What's your point here?

 

[Kylie]

any step that involve a complex trait. so we will never see a creature without an eye evolving an eye for instance.

Haven't you already been told how the evolution of the eye works? Why do you keep using the same flawed arguments?

 

[pitabread]

becbause even according to evolution we cant get an eye in real time. its too complex to evolve in a real time.

None of what you write is true.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I really should and would report your post above if I thought it would avail. As far as I am concerned, there is literally nothing left to discuss, you have unwittingly cut this brief conversation short by resorting to ad hominem fallacies. Bye.

Where is the ad hominem? Creationists are far too quick to make that false claim.

The fact is that you did use an improper debating technique. What you should do is to bring up one claim at a time that you are willing to support. That is how one has a discussion in the sciences.

 

[xianghua]

And why would we need to observe an eye evolving?

to prove that evolution of complex system is possible.

 

[xianghua]

I shared with you a link to a whole book on the matter, published by no less than the National Academies of Sciences. I think that goes beyond your request, and by no less than the top science organization of the U.S.

ok. so can you pick your favorite argument from there and tell why do you think that we cant explain it by design?

 

[xianghua]

None of what you write is true.

so you believe that we can see how a blind creature can evolve a complex eye in front of our eyes?

 

[Speedwell]

ok. so can you pick your favorite argument from there and tell why do you think that we cant explain it by design?

Because design doesn't explain anything. The presence of design is unfalsifiable so is of no use as an explanation. Design could be present even if evolution occurred and fully accounts for the functional complexity of the system.

 

[xianghua]

design is unfalsifiable

like evolution

 

[Speedwell]

like evolution

No, that is only in your imagination. You have to seriously misrepresent the theory of evolution (as you have been doing persistently) to make appear unfalsifiable. That, too, is why you were unwilling to respond to the rest of my post.

 

[tas8831]

And why would we need to observe an eye evolving?

to prove that evolution of complex system is possible.

Ah, so you also must need to see Jehovah creating a man from dust to prove that biblical creation of man is possible.

 

[tas8831]

Mammal hearts and lungs developed eons before humans.

so what was the function of a blood vessel without a liquid or vice versa?

How did you get that question from what was posted?

Do you ignore everything people write on purpose, or just because?

 

[Subduction Zone]

to prove that evolution of complex system is possible.

What makes you think that is required at all? Your demand is unreasonable if you stop to think about it. Scientists can observe this and test this in other ways than that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

like evolution

No, and I am sure that you know that you were wrong when you wrote this. There are many tests that could refute evolution, if it were wrong. It appears unfalsifiable to the uneducated because it keeps passing tests. That does not tell us that it is unfalsifiable, it tells us that it is almost certainly correct. Meanwhile creationists and ID followers are afraid to come up with reasonable tests for their beliefs. They have been burned far too many times in the past. Or have you forgotten the fiasco that they called "irreducible complexity"?

 

[Kylie]

to prove that evolution of complex system is possible.

Evolution of the eye - Wikipedia

 

[Kylie]

so what was the function of a blood vessel without a liquid or vice versa?

You know there are many creatures with blood that do not have a circulatory system? Their organs basically sit in a pool of blood.

Open Circulatory Systems: Definition & Examples - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

 

[pitabread]

so you believe that we can see how a blind creature can evolve a complex eye in front of our eyes?

Is that really what you think evolution is? A creature magically growing eyes in front of us?

Yeesh.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is that really what you think evolution is? A creature magically growing eyes in front of us?

Yeesh.

It is amazing how often the"proof" that creationists demand for the theory of evolution would actually refute it if it occurred.

 

[pitabread]

It is amazing how often the"proof" that creationists demand for the theory of evolution would actually refute it if it occurred.

It's a catch-22. If creationists actually understood the theory of evolution and could properly conceptualize it, they likely wouldn't be creationists in the first place. In which case these conversations would never happen.