Evolution is a story

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I hope this not addressed to me because I am not a 'your book' person and neither do I hold to this view of spirituality -- and you'll find a large assembly of those who love their sacred texts, are panenthiests and not afraid of reality

False, obviously.

Almost all parts of the knowledge gained from Science disagree with your book. Examples:

Chemistry was invented by man to show that unknown phenomena (like fire, water tuning to ice) were not spiritual in order to exclude god from his life.

Meteorology was invented by man to show that rain, wind, lightning, and storms were not spiritual in order to exclude god from his life.

Geology was invented by man to show that earthquakes were not spiritual in order to exclude god from his life.

Astronomy was invented by man to show that solar and planetary motion were not spiritual in order to exclude god from his life.

Seeing a trend here? I could go on for pages. Every Scientific discovery has some impact on the validity of your book. You are obsessed with evolution, but you might as well be obsessed with the the whole darn thing.

Evolution is no different from any other gained knowledge. It was not "invented" to discredit your superstition, it was discovered to be an accurate picture of the real world.

Deal with it.

 

[juvenissun]

So you think there is a qualitative difference between one species and another? A "step" rather than a continuity?

Good question. I don't know.

My number analogy emphasized the morphological change. To put my question and your question together, there is a good example to illustrate that: There are not much quality difference among ALL monkeys (biologist should correct the use of this generalized term). But there is a HUGE difference in quality between monkeys and human. We simply CAN NOT see this huge difference from skeletal remains.

So, are amphibians smarter than fishes? I doubt it. So if that is an example of evolution, it might not even be a step to anywhere.

 

[Shemjaza]

So?

Maybe he wrote The Preservation of Favoured Races as a Dear John letter?

Except we have writings from after that time about his faith.

In addition, using only part of the title in a different context to give a false impression about someones character is at least dishonest and should probably be considered bearing false witness against your neighbour. (I am aware that you just do it to annoy people who accept evolution, but it's poor behavior regardless.)

 

[juvenissun]

--- invented by man

True/False ?

The theory of evolution has many many un-mendable holes. God will not make His creation so ugly. Only human will. If you like to know, I would give you another irrefutable example.

 

[Speedwell]

Good question. I don't know.

My number analogy emphasized the morphological change. To put my question and your question together, there is a good example to illustrate that: There are not much quality difference among ALL monkeys (biologist should correct the use of this generalized term). But there is a HUGE difference in quality between monkeys and human. We simply CAN NOT see this huge difference from skeletal remains.

I'm not sure I follow you. What do you see as the significant qualitative morphological differences between humans and the other primates?

So, are amphibians smarter than fishes? I doubt it. So if that is an example of evolution, it might not even be a step to anywhere.

Are they supposed to be smarter? Why? Evolution is never a step to anywhere except greater survivability for the species in the environment in which it finds itself. "Smartness" may not always come into it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The theory of evolution has many many un-mendable holes. God will not make His creation so ugly. Only human will. If you like to know, I would give you another irrefutable example.

If that is the case why can't you mention even one of these supposed holes. And a friendly reminder, your inability to understand the theory of evolution does not mean that that is a hole.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

What macro evolution? You mean the 50+ mutations every birth that change nothing? Asians mate with Asians and remain Asians. Regardless of how many mutations they go through.

African mate with Africans and remain Africans, regardless of how many mutations they go through.

It is only when Asian mates with African in which we see variation within the species by producing the Afro-Asian.

The Asian does not evolve, theybremain Asian. The African does not evolve, they remain African. Only when genomes are combined do we ever see variation at the species level.

And I hate to break the news to you all, but no evolution was involved when those Asian and Africans mate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What macro evolution? You mean the 50+ mutations every birth that change nothing? Asians mate with Asians and remain Asians. Regardless of how many mutations they go through.

African mate with Africans and remain Africans, regardless of how many mutations they go through.

It is only when Asian mates with African in which we see variation within the species by producing the Afro-Asian.

The Asian does not evolve, theybremain Asian. The African does not evolve, they remain African. Only when genomes are combined do we ever see variation at the species level.

And I hate to break the news to you all, but no evolution was involved when those Asian and Africans mate.

I see that you are still struggling with the concept of species. I must run now but will help you when I get back.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm not sure I follow you. What do you see as the significant qualitative morphological differences between humans and the other primates?

Morphology is not described by quality, but by quantity.

 

[juvenissun]

Are they supposed to be smarter? Why? Evolution is never a step to anywhere except greater survivability for the species in the environment in which it finds itself. "Smartness" may not always come into it.

They ARE supposed to.
You are cheated by evolutionists. Evolution has a trend.

 

[Speedwell]

They ARE supposed to.
You are cheated by evolutionists. Evolution has a trend.

Not according to the theory itself--where did you get the idea?

Morphology is not described by quality, but by quantity.

But I thought you said there were qualitative morphological differences between humans and the other primates?

 

[Subduction Zone]

They ARE supposed to.
You are cheated by evolutionists. Evolution has a trend.

The trend is survival of the species. That in no way says that a species has to get more intelligent, nor bigger, nor faster. Look at snails, if they got much bigger they would be a worthwhile foo source and easy pickings for predators. Small and hard to see can be an advantage. Also they are not set up for speed and no amount of evolution will give one a sixty mph snail, yet they prosper at their current size and velocity.

You can't refute a theory with a strawman of it.

 

[juvenissun]

Not according to the theory itself--where did you get the idea?

The simple diagram:

The theory is wrong.

 

[Gene2memE]

We do not see the effect similar to the rational number system. It IS a feature like the natural number.

Give me an example that species 4 evolved into 4.1111 and then 4.1112 ... . Then 5 to 5.1111 ....

It did not, does not and will not happen.
I guess it does not even happen at the genetic level.

 

[Speedwell]

The simple diagram:

The theory is wrong.

So you are telling me you got an erroneous idea about evolution from a cartoon?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... There are not much quality difference among ALL monkeys (biologist should correct the use of this generalized term). But there is a HUGE difference in quality between monkeys and human.

Quality of what?

Quality is a measure or attribute, not something in its own right; don't make the same mistake as New-Agers make with 'energy'.

 

[bhsmte]

--- invented by man
--- in order to exclude God from his life.

Dr Henry M. Morris III
ICR.ORG

True/False ?

Based on the mountains of evidence; false.

 

[juvenissun]

So you are telling me you got an erroneous idea about evolution from a cartoon?

Evolution has a trend.
That is an idea which rooted the evolution out.

 

[juvenissun]

Quality of what?

Quality is a measure or attribute, not something in its own right; don't make the same mistake as New-Agers make with 'energy'.

Is there a "quality" difference between you and a monkey?
You may say no. Then I will shut up.

 

[Shemjaza]

Is there a "quality" difference between you and a monkey?
You may say no. Then I will shut up.

Bigger, so we have more of the "quality" of size and mass.
Smarter, so we have more of the "quality" of intelligence.

I guess you mean value? I do value humans more then monkeys, because we are more intelligent and have more of what I recognise as an identity. But "having value to humans" is not exactly a specific trend in evolution.