creationism vs evolution-denial

[Jerry Smith]

Just a note that these are two very different things.

After all, many Christians who accept evolution believe that God created everything that is. By a purist's notion of "creationism", that should surely qualify.

"Creationism" as the term is used, refers to the systematic denial of evolution, coupled with the occasional attempt to show how a recent and simultaneous creation of all life (extant and extinct) can be seemingly harmonized with the some of the data from comparative anatomy, some of the data from genetic studies, a myopic view of the fossil record, and possibly even a point or two of geological data. "Creationism" is also readily compatible with a mind-numbingly literal reading of Genesis, which is part of the "point."

Of course the main two points are the systematic denial of evolution and the compatibility with Genesis, a pair of ideologies to which all data must be custom-fit or hand-waved away.

This is just for the "newbies" to this debate that have not realized that Christian ideas of origins and scientific ones can actually co-exist, without the need for science-denial.

 

[RufusAtticus]

I agree, Jerry.

In the context of evolution versus creation, two things are implied, that "evolution" is biological evolution and that "creation" is special creation. As such, evolutionists are those that accept biological evolution, specifically universal common descent. (This does make some IDers evolutionists.) Creationsts are those that believe in special creation, specifically that humans and other folk groupings are not related at all.

 

[alexgb00]

Jerry, you noted something interesting. Something about extinct animals.

Tell me if you disagree -- we can't honestly classify any animal as "extinct." Why?

Just because none of us recently saw this animal doesn't mean it doesn't exist. US, British and Canadian forces are looking for Osama bin Laden. But nobody has reported seeing him for at least 6 months. This doesn't mean he is dead. See what i'm trying to say?

Can you guys explain the definition for "extinct" and tell me if it applies to any animal?

Thank you, friends.

Alex

 

[Jerry Smith]

Originally posted by alexgb00
Jerry, you noted something interesting. Something about extinct animals.

Tell me if you disagree -- we can't honestly classify any animal as "extinct." Why?

We can safely classify many, many animals as extinct. We can never have 100% certainty of any particular animal (although, for many we can have 99.99% certainty - a population of those large enough to actually survive would be extremely hard to miss!). As a matter of fact, of the many animals that are classified as extinct, we have been wrong about a couple. It is beyond human comprehension that all of the thousands of animals that are never seen, but appear in the fossil record (or were seen by many people a hundred years ago) are actually alive but gone into hiding.

Can you guys explain the definition for "extinct" and tell me if it applies to any animal?

Extinct means that there was a point when none of the taxonomical group survived to spawn a next generation. We can identify many organisms as extinct, with a high degree of certainty for each.

Regards,

Jerry


 

 

[alexgb00]

Well, Jerry, i kind of doubt that because of how much of the earth's surface area is unexplored, let alone settled. There are huge forests in Siberia called Taigas, where nobody settles. Many places have swamps and jungles. And animals know how to hide well, too. It seems to me that classifying an animal as extinct is too hard. A scientist can't really know. Anyway, i might be mixed up.

God bless you, Jerry.

Alex

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by alexgb00
Tell me if you disagree -- we can't honestly classify any animal as "extinct." Why?

Just because none of us recently saw this animal doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I think common sense tells us that if any Tyrannosaurus Rex were still alive, we would know about them.

 

 

[Jerry Smith]

Originally posted by alexgb00
Well, Jerry, i kind of doubt that because of how much of the earth's surface area is unexplored, let alone settled. There are huge forests in Siberia called Taigas, where nobody settles. Many places have swamps and jungles. And animals know how to hide well, too. It seems to me that classifying an animal as extinct is too hard. A scientist can't really know. Anyway, i might be mixed up.

God bless you, Jerry.

Alex

 

Alex,

I don't have any accurate numbers, but the dinosaurs consisted of thousands of species, and they are but one group of extinct organisms. If all the extinct organisms had a population of 100 or more still living somewhere on earth, I think we would find it very crowded. There just isn't enough room in the unexplored regions of the earth for every extinct organism to live.

 

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by alexgb00
Well, Jerry, i kind of doubt that because of how much of the earth's surface area is unexplored, let alone settled. There are huge forests in Siberia called Taigas, where nobody settles. Many places have swamps and jungles. And animals know how to hide well, too. It seems to me that classifying an animal as extinct is too hard. A scientist can't really know. Anyway, i might be mixed up.

So wait. You think the dodos are hiding out in Siberia? Have you ever considered the fact that many of these extinct species can't live in the Taigas, jungles or swamps?

 

[Dorothyne]

Originally posted by LiveFreeOrDie
I think common sense tells us that if any Tyrannosaurus Rex were still alive, we would know about them.

 

 

I think if someone told you about it you would say they were crazy.

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by Dorothyne
 

I think if someone told you about it you would say they were crazy.

No, I would first ask to see one. When they undoubtedly fail to produce one, then I would say they were crazy.

 

[lucaspa]

Originally posted by alexgb00
Well, Jerry, i kind of doubt that because of how much of the earth's surface area is unexplored, let alone settled. There are huge forests in Siberia called Taigas, where nobody settles. Many places have swamps and jungles. And animals know how to hide well, too. It seems to me that classifying an animal as extinct is too hard. A scientist can't really know. Anyway, i might be mixed up.
Alex

Alex, sometimes you can search the entire search space.  In which case you know the species is extinct. 

For example, granted that parts of the earth are not settled, there still have been enough humans going thru the area that an animal the size of diplodocus could not have stayed hidden. Because we have looked everywhere an animal the size of diplodocus could be, we are certain they are extinct.

OTOH, if we are talking about the oceans, then there are large volumes of search space that we have not looked into.  This is how the coelencanth was found even though we hadn't seen it in the fossil record for 65 million years. We simply hadn't searched the available search space adequately. 

 

[lucaspa]

Originally posted by Dorothyne
 

I think if someone told you about it [T.rex]you would say they were crazy.

Not at all. I would just ask for some intersubjective evidence: pictures, tissue sample, dung sample, carcass, live animal, etc.

Otherwise I would withold judgement until the alleged search space was searched adequately.

Just last year several new deer and pig species were found in the Cambodian and Laotian jungles. And there is an expedition in central Africa to find a new species of chimp. Both of these were based initially on reports of sightings.  Instead of calling the people 'crazy', searches were mounted. The same would be true of T. Rex or Diplodocus or any of the pterosaurs. 

However, the hope that all extinct species are still alive somewhere so that all species can be contemporaries a la Genesis 1 is a vain hope.  The Noachian Flood plays such a prominent role in creationism because it is needed to make species extinct and to explain the ordering of species in the fossil record.  It fails at both and is falsified by other evidence, of course.

 

[Didaskomenos]

:o This thread has been hijacked.