Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I agree, so please show verifiable evidence of common ancestry evolution. Show verifiable evidence that all.life came from.one thing .
He doesn't sound "utterly ignorant" of the subject. He just doesn't agree with you. Although it could be worse. Mark Twain deemed those who didn't agree with him insane.
I'm going to present you with verifiable evidence showing common ancestry, but.I predict you will use "verifiable" as a weasel word to not only not address the evidence, but to simply hand wave it away
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution/Common Descent
I bet this has been posted on this board, a million times.
I agree. That 'hole' in my vision has been quite troublesome.
God created us with physical limits so we wouldn't get confused, or go crazy, and so we would know the consequences of sin, carelessness, and stupidity.
How does it make sense that having a blind spot would reduce the chance that we would go crazy, get confused, etc? I would think that it would have the opposite effect.
Better question:
Of those who deny evolution, what percentage of those do so because it is too painful to give up a personal faith belief?
With all of the "evidence" how many people accept the ToE based on understanding, and how many accept it based on faith in science alone (on a percentage basis)?
We know there is common ancestry because of all the correlated evidence of common ancestry. The Proof Is in the Proteins: Test Supports Universal Common Ancestor for All Life It is not an 'assumption'.
I would like to think that most people who accept evolution are aware of some of the evidence. Remember that observation of the natural world are what led Darwin to formulate his theory. While not many of us have been to the galapagos islands, there is still plenty of life around us. People are aware of how pigeons, cats, dogs, fish, etc. can be selectively bred. Where I live, there are different varieties of finches, even. There is plenty of evidence for everyone to see.
My point is that we cannot see, hear, or feel everything. If we did we would live in a madhouse and we would certainly go crazy. Our senses and abilities are limited by what is good for us, according to God's plan for us on earth.
Having a properly designed eye wouldn't mean that we would see everything. Just what we see now, except a bit better. It's not like we'd gain the ability to read people's minds. We'd suffer fewer problems caused by the compensations that have evolved for our suboptimal eyes. So, I think it would be a clear advantage to have better eyes.
actually its is. first: this is another bogus paper. as far as i aware they only talk about evolution vs convergent evolution. not about evolution vs a common designer. as for the rest of your claims i will response later.
With all of the "evidence" how many people accept the ToE based on understanding, and how many accept it based on faith in science alone (on a percentage basis)?
I think God intended for our eyes and other parts to wear out or fail in a timely manner. The decline in vision is predictable as is other functions which indicate that our 'spring' is winding down. What is most useful in this regard is to discover how to preserve our senses and abilities as long as possible within the time that we have on earth. So far we have failed quite miserably, so musing on a 'better design' is quite futile as we would just abuse that as well, with the same results.
How was man created?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?