Evolution's Brick Wall

[pitabread]

God's Word doesn't depend on man's hypotheticals.

It's not a hypothetical. You appear to be suggesting that Genesis's 'truth' depends on common descent being false. If that's what you believe, then that's what you believe.

If that's not what you believe then you need to clarify that.

You wished!

I've asked creationists repeatedly to demonstrate the biological barriers that would prevent common ancestry and nobody has done so.

Thus all we have on the table are:

1) The observable process of biological evolution; and,
2) The observable patterns of evidence from various sources (genetic, fossils, morphology, developmental biology, biogeography) that support shared ancestry of species.

So either species were created with the appearance of evolution or it in fact those species share common ancestry.

If creationists want to argue an alternative then you best be prepared to defend it with evidence. I'm not seeing that.

 

[Job 33:6]

Yeah, can't claim there is a brick wall if no biological barriers are identified. ^ @inquiring mind.

 

[inquiring mind]

It's not a hypothetical. You appear to be suggesting that Genesis's 'truth' depends on common descent being false. If that's what you believe, then that's what you believe.
If that's not what you believe then you need to clarify that.

How many hoops do you think I'm gonna jump through for you? Read the first two chapters of Genesis, it's not that long... that's what I believe.

I've asked creationists repeatedly to demonstrate the biological barriers that would prevent common ancestry and nobody has done so.

Maybe its because there is nothing there (except the brick wall of course).

 

[pitabread]

How many hoops do you think I'm gonna jump through for you? Read the first two chapters of Genesis, it's not that long... that's what I believe.

But your interpretation is not the same as others that have no issues reconciling findings in science with the text in Genesis.

So simply reading it is clearly not enough. You have a specific interpretation that precludes accepting common ancestry of species. This is why I keep asking you if your faith is dependent on common ancestry being false. Because it seems like that is the case for you.

Maybe its because there is nothing there (except the brick wall of course).

But there is no brick wall. That's the point.

 

[inquiring mind]

This is why I keep asking you if your faith is dependent on common ancestry being false. Because it seems like that is the case for you.

My faith lies in Jesus Christ and the truth He taught... the OT was very much a part of His message. I know of nothing in it He disputed. So yes reading it is enough. In fact, its very clear -- if you'll let yourself hear it. You're leading and hoping to use your 'connect the dots' game on my statements like you have done in macro evolution. Won't work, no more hoops for you.

But there is no brick wall. That's the point.

Sorry, but if there was no wall between different kinds, you'd went through like Sherman through Atlanta.

 

[Job 33:6]

Maybe time is the brick wall. It does prevent us from physically observing speciation over long periods of time, to the extent that genus to genus transitions could be observed as well.

That's the best I've got.

 

[inquiring mind]

Maybe time is the brick wall. It does prevent us from physically observing speciation over long periods of time, to the extent that genus to genus transitions could be observed as well.

That's the best I've got.

I’m not saying that I agree, but that’s not a bad take on it for defense. Of course, time is always the best card in the evolutionist’s arsenal.

 

[Job 33:6]

I’m not saying that I agree, but that’s not a bad take on it for defense. Of course, time is always the best card in the evolutionist’s arsenal.

We have evidence that the continents were once joined as well. Not once but at least 2 or even 3 times over. But without time, of course we couldn't ever see such a thing. We can't see things like ice ages either.

If only we had a time machine to bypass the brick wall of time.

Sometimes I might even see two smashed up cars on the side of the road. But without having the capability to reverse time, I am stuck making assumptions about what happened to those cars. Be it a car accident, or special creation of broken cars, or any other possibility.

(Inserts "i see what you did there" meme*)

 

[Belk]

My faith lies in Jesus Christ and the truth He taught... the OT was very much a part of His message. I know of nothing in it He disputed. So yes reading it is enough. In fact, its very clear -- if you'll let yourself hear it. You're leading and hoping to use your 'connect the dots' game on my statements like you have done in macro evolution. Won't work, no more hoops for you.


Sorry, but if there was no wall between different kinds, you'd went through like Sherman through Atlanta.

Are you infallible or is it possible for your understanding of scripture to be wrong?

 

[pitabread]

My faith lies in Jesus Christ and the truth He taught... the OT was very much a part of His message. I know of nothing in it He disputed. So yes reading it is enough. In fact, its very clear -- if you'll let yourself hear it. You're leading and hoping to use your 'connect the dots' game on my statements like you have done in macro evolution. Won't work, no more hoops for you.

I'm simply trying to get to an understanding of why you believe what you believe. Right now it appears your beliefs are at least partially contingent on aspects of science being false. Or at least the perception that they are false.

Otherwise, I'm not sure what issue evolution and common ancestry would otherwise pose for your beliefs.

Sorry, but if there was no wall between different kinds, you'd went through like Sherman through Atlanta.

Given that "kind" has no biological definition to begin with, it's a little hard to claim there is a barrier between them.

 

[mark kennedy]

Do you have research supporting this claim that functional constraint would prevent these 18 mutations?

Mine is not the burden of proof, the question is pointless. The thing that is important is to realize what functional constraint is and why it is rarely relaxed.

 

[mark kennedy]

I should also point out that human and chimpanzee common ancestry is closer to around 7 million years as opposed to 2 million

So it would be 18 mutations in something like 7 million years. So thats 2 or 3 mutations every 1 million years.

No, there were no hominid ancestors until 2 mya. Nothing in the proportions suggesting human ancestry.

 

[pitabread]

Maybe time is the brick wall. It does prevent us from physically observing speciation over long periods of time, to the extent that genus to genus transitions could be observed as well.

That's the best I've got.

I think the relatively short time frame we can directly observe evolution makes it much harder to conceptualize the same process over longer periods of time. We're used to thinking in terms of minutes, hours or days. Trying to imagine what a million years is like is basically impossible.

I also think people don't know how to conceptualize evolution as a recursive process (i.e. a process where the output of one generation becomes the input for the next). Thus it becomes difficult to understand how evolution results in accumulation of changes over time.

 

[Job 33:6]

Mine is not the burden of proof, the question is pointless. The thing that is important is to realize what functional constraint is and why it is rarely relaxed.

Well, you essentially made a claim that the mutation of a particular gene, 18 times, is impossible. So, that in and of itself is a claim that warrants some sort of justification.

I'll be waiting for the source of justification.

 

[Job 33:6]

No, there were no hominid ancestors until 2 mya. Nothing in the proportions suggesting human ancestry.

huh? according to who? Sahelanthropus has both hominid and chimpanzee traits and its around 7 million years old.

 

[DogmaHunter]

You keep saying that...

Because it's true. Faith has no place in scientific topics.

in a discussion sub-forum that half the title pertains to.

A sub-forum of the science forum.
Because creationists and other cdesign proponentsists keep insisting that creationism is "science". This forum is meant for them to persent that "science".
Yet all we seem to get is good ol' "faith".

Now that's stacking the deck if I ever saw it.

It's not. It's rather asking creationists to put their money where their mouth is.

Wrong! There is no proof of that. Remember the brick wall.

I just told you that the evidence is the exact same. More then that, in science, there is no distinction between both in terms of the evolutionary process - or the evidence for that matter.

It's only creationists who pretend that they are different things. And when asked to explain how they are different, no answers are forthcoming. It's one of those many dishonest creationist tactics of misrepresentation.

So you say... as you 'connect the dots' to make your reality.

If biology is "connecting the dots", then all of science is such.
And in a way it is. Reality provides us with data. Each piece of data can be seen as a "dot", sure. It's upto scientists to then analyse said data and paint the larger picture, by "connecting the dots", if you will, sure.

And then that larger picture is tested to hell and back by collecting more "dots" and seeing if they fit the picture.

Your insinuation that all this is just "guess work", is asanine.
All of science is done like this. This is how we knew about atoms, long before we were able to directly observe them.

Jesus didn't dispute that 'story'...

According the the same story...........................

even as an atheist, do you think He didn't know what reality is?

Why would I think that someone that supposedly lived 2000 years ago, would have a better understanding of reality and earth's history as opposed to 21st century science??

If that is really true

It is. YECs and other species of funamentalists are a minority within christianity. Even within islam.

, then they can defend their position by answering that question themselves... and you're right, I don't think many would welcome you describing what they do and don't believe.

Contrary to some other people here, I don't pretend to be a mind reader so I don't like telling people what they do and don't believe.

 

[DogmaHunter]

God's Word doesn't depend on man's hypotheticals.

That's not an answer to the question that was actually asked.

 

[DogmaHunter]

How many hoops do you think I'm gonna jump through for you? Read the first two chapters of Genesis, it's not that long... that's what I believe.

The Pope and the rest of the Vatican, along with the majority of Catholics, also read those first two chapters of Genesis and they to believe in the bible, yet they don't believe the things that you do.

So, what's that about?

Maybe its because there is nothing there (except the brick wall of course).

What wall?

 

[mark kennedy]

Well, you essentially made a claim that the mutation of a particular gene, 18 times, is impossible. So, that in and of itself is a claim that warrants some sort of justification.

I'll be waiting for the source of justification.

How about the fact that it doesn't happen in such highly conserved genes, one would be fatal. That's why only two substitutions are allowed over 300 million years. You have the justification, the deleterious effects on brain related genes, now your just arguing in circles.

 

[mark kennedy]

huh? according to who? Sahelanthropus has both hominid and chimpanzee traits and its around 7 million years old.

There is by no means that the single fossil, Toumai, is a human ancestry. Like paranthropus there is every indication of a gorilla chimpanzee ancestor. According to convention there are many human ancestor fossils and few chimpanzee and gorilla fossils. Its been my experience the opposite is in fact the case.