• 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.

Do creationists accept the evolution of plants?

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Take it one at a time. It could be a little bit deep:

Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, electrolyte concentration or sweating to reduce temperature.

In order to change a rock, external energy must be available. Chemically it is called the activation energy. Without that energy, a rock is maintained in a state of homeostasis.

If you agreed on this, then quote me the next one and I will explain.

Yeah, you don't get how homeostasis works, do you? You fail on the first point.

If I go outside on a day when it is 35 degrees Celsius (I live in Australia, remember, and for those not familiar with the Celsius system, this is very warm), then my body regulates its temperature at about 36 degrees to remain at the proper temperature for my body to metabolize efficiently.

If I then go outside on a day when it is 5 degrees Celsius (which is very cold), my body temperature will remain at about 36 degrees.

Does a rock do this?

NO. Thus, rocks fail the first point, don't they?
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
72
Chicago
✟131,126.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, you don't get how homeostasis works, do you? You fail on the first point.

If I go outside on a day when it is 35 degrees Celsius (I live in Australia, remember, and for those not familiar with the Celsius system, this is very warm), then my body regulates its temperature at about 36 degrees to remain at the proper temperature for my body to metabolize efficiently.

If I then go outside on a day when it is 5 degrees Celsius (which is very cold), my body temperature will remain at about 36 degrees.

Does a rock do this?

NO. Thus, rocks fail the first point, don't they?

No. But neither a snake.

If a rock is heated to a higher temperature, it WILL change. So is human.

It is not the nature of the function, it is the capacity of the function. The criterion is the same.
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
72
Chicago
✟131,126.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I never specified the thing. I asked if consuming living or previously living things is necessary for a human to survive. It's a yes or no question.

No.

We can consume something which is not previously living.
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
72
Chicago
✟131,126.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
In order to change a rock, external energy must be available.

Same thing for living things, their changes come at the expense of energy.

Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, electrolyte concentration or sweating to reduce temperature.

What this means is that living things have the ability to self regulate for instance temperature, whereas a rock cannot. Get it yet?

Rock can. If you put a rock under the sun for one day, it will not change.
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
72
Chicago
✟131,126.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Sure....easy to do.
Defining Life


Well yes they can. Do you know what a working definition is?

With that criticism especially from you, I sure NASA will repent and not ever ever bring it up again. Cross their hearts and hope to die if they do.

Dizredux, shaking his head in wonder.

I do not see that kind of definition by NASA in you link. Please quote it out.
That is a stupid definition.
 
Upvote 0

Dizredux

Newbie
Dec 20, 2013
2,465
69
✟18,021.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
I do not see that kind of definition by NASA in you link. Please quote it out.
If you don't bother to read any of it, you can't find what is in it. All you had to do is search for the word "evolution".


Following a suggestion by Carl Sagan, the committee proposed that life is a “self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution.”
Much of the article was discussing the NASA definition.

That is a stupid definition.
And that is a stupid statement.

Dizredux
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
72
Chicago
✟131,126.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
If you don't bother to read any of it, you can't find what is in it. All you had to do is search for the word "evolution".


Much of the article was discussing the NASA definition.

And that is a stupid statement.

Dizredux

OK. People propose it. But is it in any document?

If we found bacteria on Mars, Do we need to verify that it evolved into existence before we announce the presence of "life" on Mars?

No wonder that stupid proposal did not pass. And you are the follower of that proposal.
 
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Do evolutionists accept 50+ years of plant and animal husbandry experiments that falsify evolution? How can we accept evolution in plants when actual experiments show it's false?

http://www.weloennig.de/Loennig-Long-Version-of-Law-of-Recurrent-Variation.pdf

We merely observe variation and sideways branching of kinds, that advances in technology is starting to bring forth.

PLOS Biology: Bushes in the Tree of Life

Any idea which goes against the evidence, is not a very good idea. But evolutionists will ignore the results of their own experiment, those 50+ years of mutational research, so they can continue to propagate Fairie Dust. That cash cow the genetic experts gave up on when it failed to meet their expectations.
 
Upvote 0

Mr Strawberry

Newbie
Jan 20, 2012
4,180
81
Great Britain
✟27,542.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
No. But neither a snake.

Do you suppose a snake controls its internal body temperature by other means, or does it, like a rock, just sit in the same place whatever the external temperature?

If a rock is heated to a higher temperature, it WILL change. So is human.

A rock being heated is not homeostasis. (Neither is it human!?!) You haven't grasped the concept of homeostasis yet. But then, I'm not betting on you grasping it any time soon.

It is not the nature of the function, it is the capacity of the function. The criterion is the same.

Poor juve. Try again.
 
Upvote 0

florida2

Well-Known Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,092
434
✟33,191.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Do evolutionists accept 50+ years of plant and animal husbandry experiments that falsify evolution? How can we accept evolution in plants when actual experiments show it's false?

http://www.weloennig.de/Loennig-Long-Version-of-Law-of-Recurrent-Variation.pdf

We merely observe variation and sideways branching of kinds, that advances in technology is starting to bring forth.

PLOS Biology: Bushes in the Tree of Life

Any idea which goes against the evidence, is not a very good idea. But evolutionists will ignore the results of their own experiment, those 50+ years of mutational research, so they can continue to propagate Fairie Dust. That cash cow the genetic experts gave up on when it failed to meet their expectations.

Please don't try and derail another thread.
 
Upvote 0

florida2

Well-Known Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,092
434
✟33,191.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Posts Per Day: 0.93

Why do I smell fake concern here?

Bahaha. You actually looked up my posts per day as if it actually means anything?

Just because I don't post all the time doesn't mean I don't read a lot of threads - I'm on CF every day near enough.

It just stuns me how you think that the number of posts I have per day actually has any relevance to the validity of my opinions.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Bahaha. You actually looked up my posts per day as if it actually means anything?

Just because I don't post all the time doesn't mean I read a lot of threads - I'm on CF every day near enough.

It just stuns me how you think that the number of posts I have per day actually has any relevance to the validity of my opinions.

Gives you a slight clue as to how AV thinks, doesn't it?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,605
52,510
Guam
✟5,127,868.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Bahaha. You actually looked up my posts per day as if it actually means anything?
Sure did.
Just because I don't post all the time doesn't mean I read a lot of threads - I'm on CF every day near enough.
Okay, so you lurk until you exercise your prerogative to play Miss Netiquette.

So what?

It's none of my business, isn't it?

I'm talking about what I'm smelling ... not what I'm hearing.

Personally, I think you were right on the money with your comment.

I think almost all of us are guilty of it.

I just smell fake concern, that's all.
It just stuns me how you think that the number of posts I have per day actually has any relevance to the validity of my opinions.
Again, your opinion is pretty accurate, IMO.

Just like I think mine is.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,605
52,510
Guam
✟5,127,868.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Gives you a slight clue as to how AV thinks, doesn't it?
I hope so.

If you want the full picture, read my profile, user title and signature.
 
Upvote 0

florida2

Well-Known Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,092
434
✟33,191.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Sure did.

Okay, so you lurk until you exercise your prerogative to play Miss Netiquette.

So what?

It's none of my business, isn't it?

I'm talking about what I'm smelling ... not what I'm hearing.

Personally, I think you were right on the money with your comment.

I think almost all of us are guilty of it.

I just smell fake concern, that's all.

Again, your opinion is pretty accurate, IMO.

Just like I think mine is.

So you agree with me but still want to criticise me? :confused:

Justa is one of those posters who likes to derail threads to his own agenda., usually Electric Universe but now he's been posting about experiments to do with evolution. I very rarely (if ever) write a post simply asking someone to not derail a thread - I just happened to this once because it is an active thread and it just happened to annoy me.

I really don't understand how my concern is 'fake'?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,605
52,510
Guam
✟5,127,868.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So you agree with me but still want to criticise me? :confused:
Yup.

Only I prefer to call it "constructive criticism."
Justa is one of those posters who likes to derail threads to his own agenda.
I've been [falsely] accused of that so many times, I'm almost starting to believe it, myself.

When I see someone appealing to Netiquette to make a point -- however valid that point is -- I usually consider it a desperation tactic.

In your case however, something told me to look up your post count, so I did.

I used to have a couple of guys with very low posts per day play Miss Netiquette with me, and it doesn't work.
I very rarely (if ever) write a post ...
So I noticed.
... simply asking someone to not derail a thread - I just happened to this once because it is an active thread and it just happened to annoy me.
You'll forgive me if I think it's fake ... I hope?

Everything we think, do, or say "annoys" you guys.

I can't even post in the Numbers forums without "annoying" someone.
I really don't understand how my concern is 'fake'?
Well, as I told someone else here (can't remember who) ... if your fake concern is indeed real, then I submit you have a real problem with us here.
 
Upvote 0