Evolution Lesson

[FredVB]

You were implying and making allegations, that is not necessary to the discussion. Broadbrushing is in error.

Feelings may be entirely enough for you, I won't suggest otherwise, though it is unexpected. But if you claim knowing God is there (you did), and say feelings are your only basis, you were failing to show that feeling is knowing, what you reference does not show that, and we have no reason to conclude from that that you know God is there from your feeling. Further you do not have basis to put down other ways others can conclude God is there. Your allegation that I would say it is a fact from science is wrong. I say God is really there from logic speaking about necessary existence. Atheists respond that it would not be God anyway, but if you dismiss that necessary existence would be God, what God is it that you feel and then conclude is there, who is not necessary existence? I see I should question that.

Your experience that those referring to creation science or logic to show God is there do so for a political agenda is flawed. It absolutely does not apply in my case and I do not assume it is the case for others as you do. Again you cannot show otherwise. You just don't agree God is the necessary existence there must be, so I find it is inconclusive what God you believe you know is there from feelings. Unlike atheists I understand that there is more than the universe because there is eternally necessary being without limit, and that existence does not exclude personhood.

This thread in Christian Forums is Evolution Lesson and I absolutely can come and put legitimate questions to see if they can be answered and it never means there is a political agenda, and I can defend reason for concluding God is there when it is criticized here. And this is not the place to evangelize, and it surely would not be effective.

What it appears you are saying is that you don't understand why I believe, but if I don't believe for the same reasons you do then my God isn't real. That's fine, I don't have to explain or prove anything about my faith to you. But if creationists want not just to believe, but to make their beliefs part of public policy (in the form of public school science curriculum, for example) that is a political objective and they have a lot more to prove than they have succeeded in doing so far.

That was not said at all, that is changing what is meant for responding to something other that was not said. Believe as you will, everyone can do that, and separate individuals are not going to think entirely alike or believe entirely alike in everything. And feelings are enough. Believing is not questioned, but you claimed to know God is there, and then claimed that your feeling is knowing, which is not the same as believing from your feeling. What you referred to fails to show your claim that what you feel is what you know. So you failed to show you know God is there. And it might be questionable how you, claiming that, are on threads arguing with believers who come on those but not with atheists.

"But if creationists want not just to believe, but to make their beliefs part of public policy (in the form of public school science curriculum, for example) that is a political objective." That is a diversion because politics are not brought up with this and you do not even know any political position I have, or that any of it that I might have involves any public school science curriculum. Please leave red herrings out of the discussion in response with only responding to what is actually said without claiming other things were said, that were not.

 

[Speedwell]

That was not said at all, that is changing what is meant for responding to something other that was not said. Believe as you will, everyone can do that, and separate individuals are not going to think entirely alike or believe entirely alike in everything. And feelings are enough. Believing is not questioned, but you claimed to know God is there, and then claimed that your feeling is knowing, which is not the same as believing from your feeling. What you referred to fails to show your claim that what you feel is what you know. So you failed to show you know God is there. And it might be questionable how you, claiming that, are on threads arguing with believers who come on those but not with atheists.

"But if creationists want not just to believe, but to make their beliefs part of public policy (in the form of public school science curriculum, for example) that is a political objective." That is a diversion because politics are not brought up with this and you do not even know any political position I have, or that any of it that I might have involves any public school science curriculum. Please leave red herrings out of the discussion in response with only responding to what is actually said without claiming other things were said, that were not.

I don't know why you responded with such hostility to my honest attempt to express the basis of my faith. Perhaps I was wrong to conclude that it had something to do with the usual creationist political agenda and I apologize for that. I will just write our disagreement off as a basic difference of opinion about the affective domain and how it works. I further promise to have nothing to do with you in future as you obviously find my attempts to communicate with you offensive. Go in peace, but go.

 

[Simon D]

Are there people in this thread still explaining evolution or would I be best to consider making a new thread?

 

[Speedwell]

Are there people in this thread still explaining evolution or would I be best to consider making a new thread?

Maybe you're not even in the right forum. Creationists don't really want to know about evolution, they just want to be able to believe that it's a lie.

 

[Simon D]

Maybe you're not even in the right forum. Creationists don't really want to know about evolution, they just want to be able to believe that it's a lie.

I can't post in apologetics until I hit 100 posts so I might have to wait.

 

[driewerf]

Maybe you're not even in the right forum. Creationists don't really want to know about evolution.

But I do, I do. I do,sir. Can I ask a question? I have a question sir. I want to ask something, sir.

Is there any idea or hypothesis about how the fused chromosome N° 2 got fixated in the human population, how it spread through humanity and didn't die out after one generation?
How did it match at fertilization. And did it provide any evolutionary benefice?

 

[Speedwell]

But I do, I do. I do,sir. Can I ask a question? I have a question sir. I want to ask something, sir.

View attachment 297647

Is there any idea or hypothesis about how the fused chromosome N° 2 got fixated in the human population, how it spread through humanity and didn't die out after one generation?
How did it match at fertilization. And did it provide any evolutionary benefice?

And that's exactly what would happen if you tried to teach creationism in a high school AP biology class. It would be a disaster.

 

[Estrid]

I can't post in apologetics until I hit 100 posts so I might have to wait.

You want to go where you are safe from
any challenges? I notice that is where most
of the " debate" is.

 

[Estrid]

But I do, I do. I do,sir. Can I ask a question? I have a question sir. I want to ask something, sir.

View attachment 297647

Is there any idea or hypothesis about how the fused chromosome N° 2 got fixated in the human population, how it spread through humanity and didn't die out after one generation?
How did it match at fertilization. And did it provide any evolutionary benefice?

You want to know something about evolution?
Have you tried study?

 

[driewerf]

You want to know something about evolution?

Yes, please

Have you tried study?

Hmmmm, actually,yes I tried study. A master degree in analytical chemistry. Is that study enough? A life long reading a wide variety on subjects, from chemistry over astronomy, some molecular biology, the vat majority of the essays of Stephen Jay Gould, a little bit of philosophy and history. is that study enough?

 

[driewerf]

And that's exactly what would happen if you tried to teach creationism in a high school AP biology class. It would be a disaster.

Well, beyond the humorous way of asking about the fusion of human chromosome 2, there was a genuine question. i have no idea how it have spread through the human population. and the distribution and proliferation of genetic features is a serious field of science, namely population genetics.

Enjoy: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267845714_Lecture_Notes_in_Population_Genetics

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

You want to know something about evolution?
Have you tried study?

He forgot the smiley.
also google 44 chromosome man
Chromosome fusion is covered in AP bio I believe.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Yes, please


Hmmmm, actually,yes I tried study. A master degree in analytical chemistry. Is that study enough? A life long reading a wide variety on subjects, from chemistry over astronomy, some molecular biology, the vat majority of the essays of Stephen Jay Gould, a little bit of philosophy and history. is that study enough?

Sounds a bit like my HS background. AP chem and physics but only basic bio due to HS change. Learned about Robertsonian translocation via the internet and articles like this from Biologos:

 

[Frank Robert]

But I do, I do. I do,sir. Can I ask a question? I have a question sir. I want to ask something, sir.

View attachment 297647

Is there any idea or hypothesis about how the fused chromosome N° 2 got fixated in the human population, how it spread through humanity and didn't die out after one generation?
How did it match at fertilization. And did it provide any evolutionary benefice?

This may not answer all you questions but it should be of some help.
The Rise of Human Chromosome 2: Fixation Within a Deme

 

[Estrid]

Yes, please


Hmmmm, actually,yes I tried study. A master degree in analytical chemistry. Is that study enough? A life long reading a wide variety on subjects, from chemistry over astronomy, some molecular biology, the vat majority of the essays of Stephen Jay Gould, a little bit of philosophy and history. is that study enough?

Analytical / p Chem won't tell you very much
about biology and evolution. My intro to organic
Prof was a creationist.

 

[driewerf]

Many thanks to Ponderous Curmudgeon and Frank Robert.
These were certainly informative post.

 

[FredVB]

I don't know why you responded with such hostility to my honest attempt to express the basis of my faith. Perhaps I was wrong to conclude that it had something to do with the usual creationist political agenda and I apologize for that. I will just write our disagreement off as a basic difference of opinion about the affective domain and how it works. I further promise to have nothing to do with you in future as you obviously find my attempts to communicate with you offensive. Go in peace, but go.

There was no hostility shown. There were legitimate questions asked, which we may do here.

Are there people in this thread still explaining evolution or would I be best to consider making a new thread?

Maybe you're not even in the right forum. Creationists don't really want to know about evolution, they just want to be able to believe that it's a lie.

This is Evolution Lesson, for the purpose of Creationists to ask real, meaningful questions about the subject. I was doing that. And you are just dismissing the subject of this thread being here. That is an issue with the OP, there is not an issue with me or others asking proper questions to the subject as we do.