Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

[Cearbhall]

The problem is the idea that Christians are somehow less intelligent and are encouraging their children to be less intelligent because they teach them about Jesus. (And I know you may not have said this, but others have).

Perhaps you should discuss it with them, then. I'm not sure why you keep bringing up points that have not been made by anyone in this thread.

I see a man who is telling his grandchildren it is okay not to believe something your teacher tells you. Which is only right.

It's not ok on the grounds that you don't want to believe it. That's just intellectual laziness. What he should teach them is to approach it critically.

 

[Oafman]

It does not matter what I think, what matters is what evolutionary science thinks and believes. We have to go where the evidence takes us. If you want to go there or not.

No. You need to explain your comment. You described the lemur as 'our common ancestor'. One species does not have a common ancestor, it just has ancestors. To talk about a common ancestor, you must be talking about two different species (the common ancestor being the point at which they diverged).

Lemurs could well be an ancestor that we share with some other species of mammal. Maybe it's the common ancestor for us and monkeys or something. I don't know. Please share any relevant info.

 

[amariselle]

Perhaps you should discuss it with them, then. I'm not sure why you keep bringing up points that have not been made by anyone in this thread.

It's not ok on the grounds that you don't want to believe it. What he should teach them is to approach it critically.

Such inferences have been made many times. I have been personally accused of being unintelligent on these forums, (because of my faith) and I have been told I cannot read or write properly, because I made a single spelling error in one of my posts. I'm sorry you don't think Christians here have been called unintelligent, but they have been.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Please share any relevant info.

As I said if you follow the Retrovirus information. Esp in terms of HIV you will end up on the island of Madagascar. Only one person has done any research there though so we can not really verify all of this. Big mouth is your retrovirus expert. He is the one that usually starts conversations about retrovirus and evolution. I think he has a PhD on this. So you may want to ask him to explain it.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081201200113.htm

 

[joshua 1 9]

Christians here have been called unintelligent

Francis Collins is a Christian and no one has ever called him unintelligent.

 

[amariselle]

Francis Collins is a Christian and no one has ever called him unintelligent.

Perhaps, that may or may not be true....but is Francis Collins here?

 

[Oafman]

Such inferences have been made many times. I have been personally accused of being unintelligent on these forums, (because of my faith) and I have been told I cannot read or write properly, because I made a single spelling error in one of my posts. I'm sorry you don't think Christians here have been called unintelligent, but they have been.

Then you need to respond to those posts, rather than raising it in response to others. Because otherwise it just looks like you're erecting straw men to argue against.

Francis Collins is a Christian and no one has ever called him unintelligent.

Indeed, and it would be foolish to do so given his accomplishments.

 

[amariselle]

Then you need to respond to those posts, rather than raising it in response to others. Because otherwise it just looks like you're erecting straw men to argue against.

Actually, I have responded to them directly. But when someone else brings it up again, I will respond to that too.

 

[Jimmy D]

The Lemur from Madagascar is considered to be our common ancestor if the retrovirus evidence is to be believed. When they talk about: Of mice and men, this is what they are referring to.

How does that work? Lemurs evolved independently of other primates in isolation on Madagascar. Your HIV link says "Ancestors of the modern lemur colonized Madagascar about 75 million years ago, and since then, lemurs and their lentivirus-carrying African cousins have been evolving separately."

How on earth can it be our common ancestor?

 

[KWCrazy]

Would you not even consider the possibility that a different interpretation and attitude the Bible might be correct?

I have never seen a different interpretation of the Scriptures, only a rejection of the Scriptures.

Genesis 1 could not be more explicit and plain than stating three different ways that the evening and morning, the numbered days and the week equaling six days of creation and one day of rest were intended to state the time and sequence of creation over a six solar day period. The only way evolution believers can interpret it differently is to say that it is false; that it is NOT the word of God but rather something men created.

I have repeatedly challenged TE believers over a 15 year period to explain line by line how evolution could be possible given the time and sequence of the creation account. NOBODY has ever been able to do so. The Scriptures clearly state that God created all living things in their mature state, and Christ verified that the Scriptures were the breathed words of God. Jesus quoted repeatedly from Genesis and other books of the Old Testament. He told us that if we didn't believe the words of Moses we wouldn't believe His words. Evolution believers do not, and do not. Instead they put their faith not in God but in a "scientific" theory that is disproved by science.

Every attempt to force evolutionary change has failed. Nothing has ever evolved into anything else. Fruit flies remain fruit flies. Bacteria remain bacteria. Miller-Urey proved that the auto-generation of life from random amino acids is impossible in the lab and pure foolishness in the natural world.

Only God can explain the origination of anything. Anyone who caims this can be replicated by science is either deluded or lying.

 

[Jimmy D]

Every attempt to force evolutionary change has failed.

LOL

I wouldn't go that far....

Not bad for a few hundred years of selective breeding.

How different do you think they might get if we continued the selective breeding over a few hundred thousand years?

Still, let's not pretend that your objections are scientific, that would be insulting to everyone's intelligence.

 

[KWCrazy]

ATTENTION CHRISTIAN EVOLUTION BELIEVERS::
Please explain Romans 5:12. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned."
If death came into the world through sin and sin came into the world through one man, how could that man have evolved over millions of years without anything before him ever dying?

Remember John 5: 46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.
47 But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?

How does one who disbelieves what Moses wrote and Jesus taught as truth believe the words of a prophet they feel was wrong about most of what He taught?
This is not an attack. This is a challenge. This is a challenge you will fail.

 

[KWCrazy]

How different do you think they might get if we continued the selective breeding over a few hundred thousand years?

Please show which traits are acquired from nothingness by selective breeding.
Both are still canines, are they not? Size changes, attributes are adjusted, but no new organs are created and no new functions are created, Adaptation SELECTS from existing traits and is a conservative process. Using an equal or subtractive process to demonstrate an addition process is fundamentally dishonest. Where is the increasing complexity? Nobody denies adaptation, which is what has given us the variety of species since the Great Flood. Where is the new genetic information that is REQUIRED for evolution to be viable?

P.S. How does a dog evolve into a dog?

 

[amariselle]

LOL

I wouldn't go that far....

Not bad for a few hundred years of selective breeding.

How different do you think they might get if we continued the selective breeding over a few hundred thousand years?

Still, let's not pretend that your objections are scientific, that would be insulting to everyone's intelligence.

I actually love the variety that God made possible in His original creation, and I often refer to dogs when I discuss this. However, dogs are still dogs, we have not seen any proven example of one species evolving into another completely different species. Evolution and change can occur WITHIN one species, but not in an evolution from one species to another.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I actually love the variety that God made possible in His original creation, and I often refer to dogs when I discuss this. However, dogs are still dogs, we have not seen any proven example of one species evolving into another completely different species. Evolution and change can occur WITHIN one species, but not in an evolution from one species to another.

Of course dogs are still dogs. They are also still canines and mammals and animals. Only creationists seem to expect dogs to "evolve" into cats or animals into plants. That's not how evolution works, but it seems to be how creationists believe it to work.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You must not have read my post right before you posted this.

You didn't bother to read my post, since absolutely nothing you wrote had anything to do with it.

 

[amariselle]

Of course dogs are still dogs. They are also still canines and mammals and animals. Only creationists seem to expect dogs to "evolve" into cats or animals into plants. That's not how evolution works, but it seems to be how creationists believe it to work.

Actually, I for one don't believe that's how it works. That is why I also do not believe mankind descended from an ape-like common ancestor. Human beings are human beings, not monkeys.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Actually, I for one don't believe that's how it works. That is why I also do not believe mankind descended from an ape-like common ancestor. Human beings are human beings, not monkeys.

No one ever claimed that we are monkeys, except creationists who think that's how evolution is supposed to work. We share a common ancestor with monkeys. We are apes. We are primates. We are mammals. We are animals. We are chordates, and so on...

 

[Oafman]

Actually, I for one don't believe that's how it works. That is why I also do not believe mankind descended from an ape-like common ancestor. Human beings are human beings, not monkeys.

You're welcome to think what you like, but you have no explanation for the observable evidence of evolution by natural selection. There are vast tracts of evidence - whole fields of science - which evolution explains, but which your viewpoint does not.

Shaking your head at something is one thing, but proposing an alternative theory which explains all the evidence is something completely different, and many people will not take your views seriously until you attempt the latter.

 

[amariselle]

No one ever claimed that we are monkeys, except creationists who think that's how evolution is supposed to work. We share a common ancestor with monkeys. We are apes. We are primates. We are mammals. We are animals. We are chordates, and so on...

I disagree, we are not apes. We are mammals yes, and animals in a sense, our physical bodies at least, but we are not just another animal.