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.
Evolution does happen, but according to design. That's why the lack of transitionals.
This was in reply to someone else who said that science doesn't prove anything. Facts would constitute proof, no?
A lie, hmm? How about Piltdown man, Nebraska man, and Java man? Archaeoraptor?
To say that the modern examples of evolution, like whale or horse evolution, stretch credulity would be kind.
There aren't any smoking guns, just a collection of just-so stories that don't come close to proving all life descended from a common ancestor.
The lack of a transitional fossils
is a continued source of embarrassment to the scientific community which is why they've "moved on" with PE and other explanations to try to cover up the fact that the emperor has no clothes.
The creation speaks for itself:
Psalm 19:1-3
The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork.
2 Day unto day utters speech,
And night unto night reveals knowledge.
3 There is no speech nor language
Where their voice is not heard.
Romans 1:18-23
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things
If that's true then it is strange then that Stephen Gould said this:
"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils"
So, in other words, most of our evolutionary understanding is based not on hard evidence but on the imagination of scientists.
Comparative genetics and anatomy demonstrate evidence of a common design, not common ancestry.
Without the fossil record to back it up, there is no reason to favor evolutionary theory as an explanation over a Designer, which has much better explanatory power.
Change within kinds, not between them.
That isn't what I meant. Not a dog giving birth to an aardvark, but seeing animals transitioning between different kinds today. Seeing the inbetween forms, you know..the transitions?
According to PE it can happen fairly rapidly, but it isn't happening at all.
That is a demonstrably false claim, as we observe changes and the effects of natural selection every single day. If your claim was correct, then we wouldn't have a SINGLE example of speciation.One part of the theory is right which is that everything is in stasis and doesn't change;
amazing how evolutionists overlook that as positive evidence for creation.
It's when I was extremely ignorant of the theory that I believed it.
Evolution from a common ancestor is the secular creation myth.
You believe it because it explains the world to you without God
Yet, even if it were true it doesn't explain how life got here in the first place.
You fill in the gaps of your knowledge with evolution
You say it must have been evolution, and that is your faith.
You're also wrong about creationism being believed by a minority of believers. Over 1/3 of the country believes in creationism:
More or less--and no coincidence that it's about the same size as the Trump base. The good news is that outside the US (outside of the Old South, for that matter) the percentage is miniscule.Good grief, that figure isn't accurate is it?
In which universe is 1/3 not a minority?
Out of those 4, only the first two were actually hoaxes.
If anything, these 2 frauds constituted an epic win for the science of evolution
You mean like the clear series of fossils where you can literally see the nostrils move from the front of the face in the oldest fossil to the top of the head in the most recent fossils concerning the whale lineage?
1. "just so stories" is the domain of religion. In science, the "stories" are concluded from the evidence. Not imposed upon it, like religions tend to do (in the few instances that religions actually care about evidence).
2. all life sharing common ancestry is a fact of genetics.
I'll point you to those whale lineage skulls again, where you can literally see the nostrils move from the front of the face to the top of the head through the ages.
And that's just one example, off course. There are hundreds of thousands of known fossil, each with their own transitional properties in their respective lineages.
The only embarrassment here, is you being yet another creationist who clearly doesn't understand what PE is all about.
Your bible is the claim. I asked for a demonstration of these claims. Not a copy paste of the claims themselves.
Inference, is not the same as imagination.
I'm sorry that you apparantly don't understand the difference.
No. Evolution predicts a very very specific pattern of distribution of shared traits / genetics, that pattern being a nested hierarchy.
The pattern predicted by evolution, is the opposite of the pattern one would expect from a design process.
And comparative anatomy/genetics exhibits a nested hierarchy.
Exactly as we would expect if evolution is true.
And the opposite of what we would expect if creationism is true.
And by no means would it support nonsense designer claims. Unless you wish to claim that this designer went extremely out of his way to make his design look, feel and smell like the result of a natural evolutionary process.
This is where you define what a "kind" is.
Give an example. Because I have no clue what you mean by "kind".
PE is about "rapidly" changing environments and how it affects selection pressures.
I use quotes around "rapidly" because we are talking about speed in terms of geological time. We are still talking hundreds of thousands, even millions, of years for these processes to unfold
That is a demonstrably false claim, as we observe changes and the effects of natural selection every single day. If your claim was correct, then we wouldn't have a SINGLE example of speciation.
Amazing in what kind of willfull ignorance and mental gymnastics creationists must bath, in order to stick to their faith-based beliefs.
If you demonstrated anything in this conversation, it most certainly is that you have no understanding of evolution. At all.
It is clear that you have no understanding of any of the following:
- PE
- what a "transitional" really is
- the importance of the pattern of nested hierarchy observed in genetics, anatomy, etc.
- how evolution is a gradual process that produces branches of lineages
-...
Then why do most christians have no problem with it?
Why does the Pope believe it? Or Ken Miller and Francis Collins, both well known evo-biologists and also devout christians?
Neither is it supposed to.
Evolution explains the process that existing life is subject to. No. I have no problems with saying "i don't know" when I don't know.
Unlike some, I'm not allergic to those words.
Just believing God somehow guided evolution won't make it. You have to believe that creation happened during a single week in 4004 BC, that the South should have won the civil war but somehow got cheated out of it and that you have to vote Republican or go to hell. Sunisout is about right: it runs about 1/4 to 1/3 of the population, depending on who and how you ask.That's 33 percent of Americans, not just believers. It may be the majority view among believers since 24 percent of Americans believe in evolution guided by a supreme being.
Evolution does happen, but according to design. That's why the lack of transitionals.
What this juvenile comment supposed to be making some point?
Well, it's easy, really...
The trick is, to not allow your emotions or a priori faith-based beliefs to dictate how reality actually works. And to instead, simply go by what the evidence demonstrates.
And that gets us to the reality of evolution, where all living things are related and it's a harsh reality indeed. It's a cruel reality where the suffering of one creature is required for the feeding of another. Where a lion runs exactly fast enough in order to catch the antilope that is just a tiny bit slower then his/her peers.
Indeed, it does not reflect some kind of reality where after you die, you get to spend eternity in candy land playing bingo with your long deceased grand mother.
You might not like that, but the universe isn't here for you to like it.
We are distant cousins of all living things.
Including banana trees.
Regardless of your emotional objections.
Barbarian suggests:
Let's test your belief. Name two major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack a transitional form.
What do you have?
(silence)
You're not alone. No one else has been able to find one so far. Isn't that an important clue?
Nobody is hoping to find a picture of a donkey giving birth to a zebra or anything like that. Evolution takes time. But the fossil record shows us that, over millions of years, an eohippus can evolve into a horse, zebra and donkey.we have 8 million species, surely the millions of scientists have a bunch of cameras on a few possible transitions, right? You know, where one species turns into a completely different species, not just "look alike", with one short beaked and the other long. God made sure that each species will survive so they don't all eat the same seeds, from the same spot, .. but man has been wiping out species since after the fall.
So where is, out of 8 million living species, that ONE species that the cameras are on, .. that Evolutionary scientists just know is about to change into another species?
If they transitioned, they HAD TO transition while they were alive, unless you think that they transitioned after they turned into fossils? Is that what Evolutionists believe, and why they use "fossils" as "proof of evolution"??
Show us that Evolutionists are even watching for a possible transitioning species, .. but you can't. You know why?
Because Evolutionists know they are just pulling on peoples legs, that they don't believe in evolution themselves, and my request is proof of that: "No one is watching for a possible transitioning species", because it NEVER happened and will never happen, and they KNOW IT!
Oh yeah, the bacteria that become immune to penicillin (anti biotic), right? Only problem is that they remain bacteria. Moth remain moth, dogs, horses, pigeons, .. they all remain "after their own kind".
God loves variety, just look at the trees, their leafs, snow flakes, people, animals. all different. Even the ones that are very similar like the wildebeest, where a million migrate, yet the lost infant will find its mama. Or like the penguins, have you seen the "March of the Penguins", how they find each other after a long absence? That was all planned out, not no accidental mutation, there is no evidence of trial and error in nature. It all goes exactly as God planned it to go, except for man, who has been given free will in the "image of his Creator". So to prove evolution, they are turning boys into girls and girls into boys, please look up "Trans humanism", and also trying desperately to genetically mix animals with humans, .. to prove Evolution even if it takes them Intelligent Design to do it.
(claim that transitional forms don't exist)
Barbarian suggests:
Let's test your belief. Name two major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack a transitional form.
What do you have?
(another creationist fails to show even one)
No one else seems to be able to to find one, either.
Nobody is hoping to find a picture of a donkey giving birth to a zebra or anything like that. Evolution takes time.
But the fossil record shows us that, over millions of years, an eohippus can evolve into a horse, zebra and donkey.
How do you explain all of those transtionals that we have found between Eohippus and zebra?
They're all hoaxes. Archaeoraptor: Archaeoraptor - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
I'm not sure how you can say Java man wasn't a hoax.
Yes they were an epic win for the scientific community because they convinced a generation of people what was false because of the insistence of the scientific community that they were legitimate. Just as they are doing today.
Do you mean in illustrations?
The conclusions are based on things assumed apriori which is where the storytelling comes in.
As far as Christianity is concerned, it is not based on a just so story, but on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
By fact, you mean its not proven right?
Yeah you can literally see them move through the imagination of scientists.
It was out of the authors own mouth that transitional fossils barely exist. Yet you seem to disagree by arguing they are plentiful. In any case PE explains that curious problem by saying evolution happened too quickly for the evidence to show up. It isn't really difficult to understand.
Did you read what I quoted? You don't understand how that answers your objection?
I know there is a difference, but I don't give them the credit for inference since they have stepped far beyond inference and into imagination time and time again
I'm sure that's what you've read on the internet, but evolution does not necessarily predict nested hierarchies.
Natural selection doesn't predict it.
It can fit within the evolutionary framework but it isn't necessarily implied by it.
Also, how can you say it is the opposite of what we would expect if creationism was true?
How would you know what God would design or why?
Since it is not necessarily predicted by evolution, you can't claim that.
This explains it better than I could:
What Are “Kinds” in Genesis?
We see no evidence today in living species that any of this is taking place, and we should if it were.
I didn't mean didn't change at all, but changing very little.
It's amazing that you think ad homs are a good substitute for reasoned discourse.
I believe after seeing the pew research poll that the majority believe in creationism.
Appeal to authority is also a logical fallacy
What do you think happened?
No that would not be proof of evolution. That would be proof of a creator creating a crocodile and using a duck as a surrogate mother.keep the cameras on a few hundred Mallard ducks, their lifespan is only 10 years max! If one turns into a crocodile, or lays eggs that has a crocodile inside, you'll have undeniable proof of evolution! The first live video of speciation resulting in a crock-a-duck!
Right, .. here is one of Evolutionist "Transitional forms":
Hello @doubtingmerle I understand that your 'Evolution' idea takes time, but in the 4 billion years of amoeba evolving, there had to be a "moment in time" where a monkey/ape turned into, or gave birth to a human.
No that would not be proof of evolution. That would be proof of a creator creating a crocodile and using a duck as a surrogate mother.
Now if after many millions of years you saw duck babies gradually grow stronger jaws and more protective skin until they had some resemblance to crocodiles, that would be proof of evolution.
And it turns out that this sort of incremental transition through time is exactly what the fossil record shows.
And regarding your rant about apes and humans, it turns out we have hundreds of intermediates leading to humans. See Transitional Fossils Are Not Rare
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?