• 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 evolutionists really understand the complexity of things?

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Or it could be that abiogenesis and evolution are two different biological processes. They always were; we just had to explain that to Creationists. You see, Creationists are under the mistaken impression that the purpose of the theory of evolution is to deny the existence of God and so they thought if science couldn't come up with a naturalistic explanation for the beginning of life, evolution would lose by default. But alas, that is not the case. Evolution would remain a viable theory even if God created life initially.
"Even if?" I thought you were a creationist. My understanding is that you and other theistic evolutionists believe that God DID create he just created the initial life form or whatever and set in motion the evolutionary process whereby all life as it exists today evolved into being.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
No, we aren't. ID/creationists refuse to look at the evidence we are looking at.
We look very hard at it. We are just not buying it. If makes no sense to us and since you can't prove It there's no reason for us to buy it. Yep I did use the word prove. Just like I can't prove God or creation, you can't prove evolution. What you see as evidence for evolution we creationist see as evidence of creation. We also utterly reject some of the so called evidence,as nothing more than wishful thinking and assumptive belief based upon a preconceived notion. Kind of like creationism where we believe based upon a preconceived notion and that the evidence,points to the creation and God as the creator.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Sex didn't develop until a couple of billion years after the first replicators, so there wouldn't be a mom & pop. You could call the first replicator the first of its species if you like - but it's not a particularly useful descriptor at this stage, and mixing of genetic material through horizontal transfer still makes it moot for some simple organisms even today, 3.8 billion years later. It's a convenient method of categorizing larger life forms, but has its problems; nature doesn't always resolve to the neat categories we prefer.
You can't prove that. Its assumption.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
"Even if?" I thought you were a creationist. My understanding is that you and other theistic evolutionists believe that God DID create he just created the initial life form or whatever and set in motion the evolutionary process whereby all life as it exists today evolved into being.
Not necessarily. "theistic evolution" encompasses a wide variety of beliefs. My personal belief is that God designed the universe such that life would arise as well as develop by natural forces.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
The theory of evolution does have the details that creationism lacks, such as testable and observable mechanisms.
No you don't. In fact I am constantly being told that evolution doesn't have to be tested or observed because there is so much evidence for it. You cannot test or observe evolution as presented. There is no way to test or observe the initial creature evolving and turning into something else and in turn evolving into fish, spiders,and birds. No way to test,or observe that.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Yeah, you don't understand how evolution works.

Besides, if every part of the human body is important and necessary, why is it that I have the little dangly bit on the bottom of my ears, but other people don't?
It's called design. God designed us to all be different not clones. The same reason we all have different personalities even among identical twins.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Of course, if a creator designed life so it would appear to be identical with evolution, we'd have to suppose that's what they wanted us to conclude, yes? So how can you tell us to disregard the creator's wishes in this matter?
You conclude that. We don't. We see all that and say what a marvelous creation.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
No you don't. In fact I am constantly being told that evolution doesn't have to be tested or observed because there is so much evidence for it. You cannot test or observe evolution as presented. There is no way to test or observe the initial creature evolving and turning into something else and in turn evolving into fish, spiders,and birds. No way to test,or observe that.
The theory of evolution is a theory. All it has to do is
1. Explain all the evidence we have in a plausible and parsimonious way.
2. Be contradicted by none of it.
3. Predict new discoveries.
The theory of evolution does all these things. At present there is no credible alternative to it.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,082.00
Faith
Atheist
You can't prove that. Its assumption.
It's inference. We find plenty of evidence of organisms for a couple of billion years before we find any evidence of sexual reproduction. The simplest organisms today are asexual (i.e. most life on Earth).
 
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist
No my friend you should because that is EXACTLY what evolution claims happened.
A million years old single-cell organism... yeah, sure, that's exactly what evolution is all about.

Perhaps OWG just phrased in in a weird way... but parts of what he wrote really read as if he thinks that there is one single cell organism that metamorphs into all these other organisms.

But that is not what evolution is about. It is, in a very, very basic form, about descend. Parts of that can be observed.

Had he been talking about a poodle surviving for thousands of years and turning into a rotweiler and a german shephard and a chow-chow and a coyote... you would have dismissed his version of evolution as well. (Or so I hope.)
 
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist
You conclude that. We don't. We see all that and say what a marvelous creation.
You don't. Even creationists look at different breeds and races of animals and see how they have changed. They weren't instantaneously created. ("Oh, but that is 'microevolution'. These are still dogs, cats, fish... yadda yadda yadda!")
What creationists do, is, at some arbitrary point that is beyond their direct observation, say: "And this is where it all started."
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
No my friend you should because that is EXACTLY what evolution claims happened.
Except that the "force" is not "mysterious." It is a well-characterized and well-evidenced process.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
The theory of evolution is a theory. All it has to do is
1. Explain all the evidence we have in a plausible and parsimonious way.
2. Be contradicted by none of it.
3. Predict new discoveries.
The theory of evolution does all these things. At present there is no credible alternative to it.
Yes there is its,called creation.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Yes there is its,called creation.
Wrong.

To begin with it is not parsimonious, as it relies on a dubious interpretation of an ancient text. More critically, it is contradicted by or fails to explain much of the evidence and makes no useful predictions.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,014
9,025
65
✟428,643.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
You don't. Even creationists look at different breeds and races of animals and see how they have changed. They weren't instantaneously created. ("Oh, but that is 'microevolution'. These are still dogs, cats, fish... yadda yadda yadda!")
What creationists do, is, at some arbitrary point that is beyond their direct observation, say: "And this is where it all started."

You are correct. We do see how animals have adapted to their environments etc, but as you so elequently state they are still dogs cats fish moths etc. And at the point of creation all kinds were created. We do,precisely what evolutionists do.

Evolutionists claim at some arbitrary point beyond their direct observation something happened for some unknown reason to an unkown creature that it sarted a massive change that eventually became all that is. Its unbelievably impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldWiseGuy
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist
You are correct. We do see how animals have adapted to their environments etc, but as you so elequently state they are still dogs cats fish moths etc. And at the point of creation all kinds were created. We do,precisely what evolutionists do.
(my emphasis)
See, that is the real problem with the creationis model. "A kind" was created. But that definition is indeed arbitrary. A creationist doesn't have any means to sort any individual lifeform into any "kind".
And on the other hand, this is the great point of the theory of evolution. Evolution doesn't need to make this distinction. Evolution doesn't have to say: "And this now is the original." Evolution deals with lines of descent. And these can be traced.

Evolutionists claim at some arbitrary point beyond their direct observation something happened for some unknown reason to an unkown creature that it sarted a massive change that eventually became all that is. Its unbelievably impossible.
That again is incorrect and not what the Theory of Evolution states.
The Theory of Evolution establishs itself in both directions. It takes observable facts... the change within lines of descent... establishes a mechanism for these changes, applies this mechanism to observations beyond the direct scope, and tries to see if it still works.

And it does. Just take a look at the current variety of dogs, made by the artificial variant of Evolution. If you didn't have the means of historical documentation that we have now, you would have sorted "Chihuahuas" and "Great Danes" into two different "kinds". But their "massive change" very quick and very recent.

It is in some regards an even more "massive change" than the one that split the cat, dog, bear and weasel lines of descent.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It's called design. God designed us to all be different not clones. The same reason we all have different personalities even among identical twins.

Prove it's design.

Because evolution explains it no problem.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,976
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,212.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Prove it's design.

Because evolution explains it no problem.

If it looks, quacks, and walks like design it's probably design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0