Evolution is not science

[Tempus Fugit]

Lol

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

In my opinion.

Reality doesn't care what your opinion is.

 

[TrekkyAtheist]

Yes, but who in the Bible was fooled by evolution?

It's not until the end times that evolution becomes a viable threat to creationism; and in my opinion, it is going to become even more formidable during the Tribulation period, where the Antichrist is going to demonstrate abiogenesis.

But you stated that the thing that allows animals to change but not change "too much" was God. No other phenomenon has an answer like that. God does not will the wind into being from nothing every day. He has created the wind so that it works naturally. But if you argument is that God is intervening to prevent speciation, then that raises the question of why he did not simply design evolution out of the universe in the first place.

Occam's Razor.

Evolution takes too much time, and the universe has only been in existence for just over 6000 years.

In addition, why daisy-chain life, when life can be created instantly?

This is like saying it's more probable that the world was formed when you were born than have it develop for years beforehand. Life being created instantaneously is much more difficult than you make it seem in this strawman argument. To claim Occam's Razor for a 6000-year-old Earth is simply laughable. It would require a lying, trickster God who plants false evidence to mislead his creations. Light seemingly traveling for billions of years, fossils of long lost beasts dead long before the first humans walked the Earth, the aforementioned HERV-K DNA. All would have to be some constructed falsehood by God, and the omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent God is not a lier.

Your key words are: given no natural explanation.

Satan will make sure that those who don't want to believe in God will have a natural explanation for every jot and tittle in the Bible.

Jesus walked on water? simple ... it was a mirage

Jesus resurrected: simple ... it was someone else masquerading as Jesus

Jesus born of a virgin? simple ... virgin means "young woman"

Etc and so ad nauseum on.

When the wind blows, is it Satan that has us believe that temperature gradients and shifting weather causes wind? Of course not. God can use natural phenomenon if He so wishes, and sidestepping the issue with a scapegoat of "Satan" won't work. If God is interfering with adaptation and preventing animals from speciating, it is an observable miracle, and yet no one except you has claimed that in my experience.

I don't understand this question.

Plants have been observed to, for example, double their chromosomes and form a new species that is unable to reproduce with its original population. Fruit flies and bacteria have done similar things. This is observable formations of new species. So does God simply not care enough to prevent these instances from occurring? Or will you fall back on the vague catch-all of "kinds" rather than species?

If that was God's plan for populating the earth with plants and animals, yes.

His method, however, is a form of modified punctuated equilibrium (for lack of a better term), where miracle animals -- called "kinds" -- gave birth to different genera.

In my opinion.

How do you know God's methods? Is it not possible for God, for example, to have seeded the Earth with life in a plan that one day it would spawn humanity? I assume you don't take all stories in the bible, written by flawed men—guided by God if you believe, but still flawed—as absolute truth. The Bible is not a science textbook, and the writers of the Bible had no idea what we know today. Even given their writings, you simply cannot know the mind of God or His plan. So how can you know that God despises evolution so much that he will actively interfere with the world to prevent it?

 

[Oafman]

It's not until the end times that evolution becomes a viable threat to creationism; and in my opinion, it is going to become even more formidable during the Tribulation period, where the Antichrist is going to demonstrate abiogenesis.

So not only do you find yourself looking to make excuses for existing scientific evidence, you're now making advance excuses for scientific evidence not yet discovered?

Can you see how this might appear a little desperate?

 

[AV1611VET]

Reality doesn't care what your opinion is.

Reality can take a hike.

 

[AV1611VET]

But if you argument is that God is intervening to prevent speciation, then that raises the question of why he did not simply design evolution out of the universe in the first place.

God doesn't "intervene to prevent evolution."

As I stated before, God is a God of boundaries.

He doesn't, for example, intervene along a beach to stop the water from coming up on the land -- gravity does that.

I've put forth some ideas as to what this boundary in nature might be.

It could be sterility; it could be extinction; it could be a set number of generations, then suddenly stop.

It could be anything.

To claim Occam's Razor for a 6000-year-old Earth is simply laughable. It would require a lying, trickster God who plants false evidence to mislead his creations. Light seemingly traveling for billions of years, fossils of long lost beasts dead long before the first humans walked the Earth, the aforementioned HERV-K DNA. All would have to be some constructed falsehood by God, and the omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent God is not a lier.

It's a mindset like this that makes it difficult to debate with you guys.

This God-would-be-a-liar mentality is nothing new though.

He's heard it before.

Matthew 27:63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.

Plants have been observed to, for example, double their chromosomes and form a new species that is unable to reproduce with its original population. Fruit flies and bacteria have done similar things. This is observable formations of new species. So does God simply not care enough to prevent these instances from occurring? Or will you fall back on the vague catch-all of "kinds" rather than species?

I don't care about new species. I'm talking about a new genus.

A new breed of dog is not macroevolution -- it's still a dog.

How do you know God's methods?

I don't.

That doesn't mean I have to accept Darwin's.

 

[AV1611VET]

So not only do you find yourself looking to make excuses for existing scientific evidence, you're now making advance excuses for scientific evidence not yet discovered?

Can you see how this might appear a little desperate?

I don't need "excuses."

I could just pull rank and say GOD DID IT and leave it at that.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I don't need "excuses."

I could just pull rank and say GOD DID IT and leave it at that.

So not "excuses," just the singular "excuse."

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Reality can take a hike.

Thanks for making an example of yourself, once again.

 

[Heissonear]

evidence for evolution is not just found in fossils my friend

Not so, firey, that would make them living fossils which you seem to not comprehend yet.

You post "evidence"in a dogmatic way, aye? There goes the scientific method and here now resides Scientism.

.

 

[Heissonear]

The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity=Richard dawkins

Firey, you have it at 180° backwards. Listening to men will do that to you.

"Explaining the existence of organized complexity" as evidence for Evolution? You've been reading too much science (fiction) books.

.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thanks for making an example of yourself, once again.

You're welcome.

Glad to oblige.

 

[fireof god98]

Firey, you have it at 180° backwards. Listening to men will do that to you.

"Explaining the existence of organized complexity" as evidence for Evolution? You've been reading too much science (fiction) books.

.

many Christians listen to there pastor without a question. how is that any different?

 

[fireof god98]

Not so, firey, that would make them living fossils which you seem to not comprehend yet.

You post "evidence"in a dogmatic way, aye? There goes the scientific method and here now resides Scientism.

.

there is more evidence for evolution than for god my friend. why did Christ only come when superstition reigned. we also know one of the main reason religion came about is because it brings comfort in the face of death but it does not mean its true. why is it in the Torah Moses orders parents to have their children stoned to death and at the same time is breaking his own commandment.

 

[Heissonear]

there is more evidence for evolution than for god my friend. why did Christ only come when superstition reigned. we also know one of the main reason religion came about is because it brings comfort in the face of death but it does not mean its true. why is it in the Torah Moses orders parents to have their children stoned to death and at the same time is breaking his own commandment.

All sounds reasonable. That is why you promote and think such.

Many others think the same and will agee with. Fair enough.

But one major problem: God did not die. In fact, He has watched everything you have said and done. Why is it you do not know this?

.

 

[TLK Valentine]

many Christians listen to there pastor without a question. how is that any different?

Well for starters, the scientist encourage questions -- the pastors don't.

 

[TLK Valentine]

But one major problem: God did not die. In fact, He has watched everything you have said and done. Why is it you do not know this?

.

Actually, He did die -- then He got better. Why is it you do not know this?

 

[AV1611VET]

Well for starters, the scientist encourage questions -- the pastors don't.

Ya ... that's why there are so many Christian academies, aren't there?

And if pastors don't encourage questions, then you guys don't exist, do you?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ya ... that's why there are so many Christian academies, aren't there?

How many of them encourage Biblical debate?

(not counting the ones I've worked at, of course )

And if pastors don't encourage questions, then you guys don't exist, do you?

Someone has to ask the difficult questions -- we exist because the pastors refused,

 

[AV1611VET]

How many of them encourage Biblical debate?

They don't need to, do they?

If CF is any indication -- debate finds them.

Did Jesus go around encouraging debate, or did the Pharisees engage Him?