Creationists: Explain how life was created.

[pitabread]

God didnt do it isnt an explanation either.

I never said that, so not sure what your point is.

If you're not going to address the OP, then I'm not going to respond any further. No sense derailing this thread.

 

[mark kennedy]

This is how knowledge is gained. It starts by asking questions about how things work.

Aimless questions about the omnipotent power of God isnt a question, its a red herring.

 

[mmksparbud]

See here: Welcome to Evolution 101!



I'm talking about the origin of species. The process of evolution explains how life diversifies over time into the various life forms that were observe.

Creationists claim those life forms were not the product of evolution but of independent creation. Therefore, I want to know how those life forms were created.

again--to claim variations in species without explanation of how that life came into being to begin with is what you are asking -and we are asking you the same thnig. You have given no explanation for the beginning of life itself.

 

[mark kennedy]

I never said that, so not sure what your point is.

If you're not going to address the OP, then I'm not going to respond any further. No sense derailing this thread.

The thread was never on track, its just you asking a pedantic question in circles.

 

[pitabread]

Aimless questions about the omnipotent power of God isnt a question, its a red herring.

If creationists believe that life forms were independently created and believe that this should supersede biological evolution as an explanation for the origin of species, then it's exactly the questions they should be asking.

 

[pitabread]

again--to claim variations in species without explanation of how that life came into being to begin with is what you are asking -and we are asking you the same thnig. You have given no explanation for the beginning of life itself.

It's not the same thing. I'm talking about the origin of various species we observe in nature. Biological evolution is the explanation for that. We don't need to know the origin of the first life form to know how life evolves and diversifies.

Creationists argue that those life forms were created fully formed and not the product of evolution. Therefore, I want to know how they were created fully formed.

 

[mark kennedy]

If creationists believe that life forms were independently created and believe that this should supersede biological evolution as an explanation for the origin of species, then it's exactly the questions they should be asking.

No, God created life and thats were biology and evolution begin.

 

[pitabread]

No, God created life and thats were biology and evolution begin.

So you accept common descent then? That humans and other modern species are the product of biological evolution sharing ancestry to the first life on the planet?

 

[mark kennedy]

It's not the same thing. I'm talking about the origin of various species we observe in nature. Biological evolution is the explanation for that. We don't need to know the origin of the first life form to know how life evolves and diversifies.

Creationists argue that those life forms were created fully formed and not the product of evolution. Therefore, I want to know how they were created fully formed.

No one has argued that horses didnt evolve, just that they dont have a common ancestor with plants. Ever hear of mitochondria? Plants dont have those.

 

[mmksparbud]

It's not the same thing. I'm talking about the origin of various species we observe in nature. Biological evolution is the explanation for that. We don't need to know the origin of the first life form to know how life evolves and diversifies.

Creationists argue that those life forms were created fully formed and not the product of evolution. Therefore, I want to know how they were created fully formed.

What's the big deal about species variations? They breed, there are differences in DNA--and so on--
that is not what you are asking. You asked specifically how that life form came to be---and we are asking you that same exact question. Our first life form came from the breath of God---how did yours start?

 

[mark kennedy]

So you accept common descent then? That humans and other modern species are the product of biological evolution sharing ancestry to the first life on the planet?

You know I'm a creationist right?

 

[pitabread]

No one has argued that horses didnt evolve, just that they dont have a common ancestor with plants. Ever hear of mitochondria? Plants dont have those.

Okay. So if you believe that there was an original horse ancestor that was the result of independent creation, how was it created?

 

[mark kennedy]

Okay. So if you believe that there was an original horse ancestor that was the result of independent creation, how was it created?

By Hod, that answer isnt going to change.

 

[pitabread]

What's the big deal about species variations? They breed, there are differences in DNA--and so on--
that is not what you are asking.

Species variations is exactly how life forms evolve over time. It's how we have the diversity of life on Earth today.

You asked specifically how that life form came to be---and we are asking you that same exact question. Our first life form came from the breath of God---how did yours start?

I'm asking how fully formed species appeared. If you accept that species are the result of biological evolution stretching back to the first life on Earth, then we're on the same page here.

But if you believe otherwise, I'm asking for an explanation of that alternative.

 

[pitabread]

By Hod, that answer isnt going to change.

Hod? Who dat?

(I know what you mean, but you're just going in circles here. If you don't have an explanation, why keep responding?)

 

[Speedwell]

By Hod, that answer isnt going to change.

The same could be said of evolution.

 

[mmksparbud]

Species variations is exactly how life forms evolve over time. It's how we have the diversity of life on Earth today.



I'm asking how fully formed species appeared. If you accept that species are the result of biological evolution stretching back to the first life on Earth, then we're on the same page here.

But if you believe otherwise, I'm asking for an explanation of that alternative.

But you aren't! You are asking how that fully formed species came to life---how life itself originated---and it is the same question we are asking you and you do not answer!! I don't care about species variation--how did life itself form? That is what you are asking us!

 

[pitabread]

I don't care about species variation--how did life itself form? That is what you are asking us!

I'm asking where species came from. Again if you accept the common ancestry of life on Earth (i.e. species originated via evolution), then there is no disagreement here.

 

[mmksparbud]

I'm asking where species came from. Again if you accept the common ancestry of life on Earth (i.e. species originated via evolution), then there is no disagreement here.

OK---so you are refusing to answer the question---OK---Noted, nothing more to learn here---bye.

 

[pitabread]

OK---so you are refusing to answer the question---OK---Noted, nothing more to learn here---bye.

I've answered the question: the scientific explanation for the origin of species is biological evolution. If you don't understand what that means, I again suggest visiting this site: Welcome to Evolution 101!

If you believe that species originated fully formed (i.e. they were not the result of evolution), then how did that occur?