How to choose between creation and evolution.

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This might help. I had this condition long before I knew thousands of others suffered from it as well.

Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome | Lyme Disease | CDC

... and?

 

[bhsmte]

This might help. I had this condition long before I knew thousands of others suffered from it as well.

Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome | Lyme Disease | CDC

This link talks about your specific case?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

This link talks about your specific case?

Please.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

This is wrong. The earth is not a closed system. Hence the second law of thermodynamics does not apply.

Exactly; and even in a closed system, as long as it is not in thermal equilibrium, it is possible for entropy to decrease locally (e.g. for ordered systems to emerge) at the expense of overall entropy increasing faster. For example, for practical purposes, the solar system (or even just the Earth and the sun) can be seen as a (lossy) closed system, but while the sun continues to shine constantly, life on Earth thrives.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Everytime I visit this forum, I meet a new person with new stupid arguments. I like it though. Once, I met someone who believed that science didn't work the same in the past. Like momentum wasn't conserved and half life of tritium was different.

Haa... I call that guy, Mr Last-Thursdayism.

 

[bhsmte]

Please.

He asked about your specific story and you provided the link.

 

[rjs330]

A purpose, in the sense of function within the system, yes.

I prefer the word "function" because "purpose" tends to have some baggage around here, which is not applicable to organs.

Of course it is, because if you have to recognize. Purpose you have to recognize design. Yet the heart somehow through unkown evolutionary process from an unknown creature in some unknown primordial ooze grew to have the purpose to pump the exact life blood in the exact fashion we need to live and this blood contains the necessary nutrients and oxygen and infection fighting materials through our entire body and without it we die. Sounds an aweful lot like it has a purpose for being and doing what it does.

 

[rjs330]

Then why did he make sure that literally everything looks as though it evolved?



Bio-diversity, planets, stars, moons, mountains, rocks, lava, oceans, puddles, clouds, snowflakes,.............

It only looks like it evolved to evolutionists. You look at the data and interpret it to mean it evolved. Creationists look at the data and say it's an amazing design and see the reality of commonalities while everything remains unique and distinct from each other.

 

[rjs330]

Apples and oranges.

It's just pointing out an illogical premise. I reject the premise.

 

[Brightmoon]

Like I said and I have ALWAYS said that things do adapt. Bears might have existed and then adapted to fit the climate or area where they live. But bears were always bears from the start. They we're never ever an original ancestor that crawled out of the sea or whatever.

since we find bear-dogs and dog-bears like Amphicyon in the fossil record, that’s obviously not true

I breath just fine thank you. My head is firmly on my shoulders looking up where it belongs. "Look up for your redemption draweth nigh"

. Remember that the next time you choke swallowing because you’re trying to talk and chew at the same time . Our EVOLVED. voiceboxes make this a problem as they put our larynx too close to the esophageal opening.

 

[Brightmoon]

It only looks like it evolved to evolutionists. You look at the data and interpret it to mean it evolved. Creationists look at the data and say it's an amazing design and see the reality of commonalities while everything remains unique and distinct from each other.

When you come up with evidence of something being created and how , you might have a point . But until you do, you’re just blowing hot air

 

[Brightmoon]

WHAt IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR CREATION? What is your evidence that nested hierarchies arent truly nested? What is your evidence that genetic similarities don’t mean anything? I’ve seen creationist pseudoscience for about a decade and they still don’t have any evidence for their claims

 

[pitabread]

Creationists look at the data and say it's an amazing design

But that's literally all they do. It's just an endless stream of "awe and wonder", and marveling at this, that and the other thing. But it lacks all the things that makes scientific approaches useful. There is no real scientific modeling of creationism, no testabilty of ideas, no applications to biology-related fields...

Creationism just is what it is: a religious belief based on how people feel about the things they look at.

 

[Brightmoon]

Oh heck I get that sense of wonder and I’ve got a bio degree. Creationists just conflate their ignorance with wonder

 

[Speedwell]

Oh heck I get that sense of wonder and I’ve got a bio degree. Creationists just conflate their ignorance with wonder

But it's not about that; it's about the Bible.

 

[Brightmoon]

I think that creationists take a story, that’s obviously written like one, as if it were a history . The folktale elements are there. The emphasis on numbers ; duality for example, day and night., The 3 days of forming/ separating followed by 3 days of adding stuff . The numbers 6 and 7 . It’s numerology. The pun ( in Hebrew) on Adam being made from dirt. The number 40 in Noah’s Flood ( think ali baba and the 40 thieves) is a Semitic story telling device Etc etc etc.
And of course some of these stories were borrowed from other cultures

 

[rjs330]

When you come up with evidence of something being created and how , you might have a point . But until you do, you’re just blowing hot air

When evolutionists come up with an actual evidence of something evolving from the common ancestor and can show that's actually possible then they might have a point. Until then they are blowing hot air and making a lot of assumptions.

 

[Brightmoon]

Ok you’ve given evidence that you know how to type . Now how bout that evidence for creationism.

Evidence for evolution? Any allopolyploid or autopolyploid species.

And if you don’t know what those terms mean, you shouldn’t even be complaining about evolution let alone trying to discuss it.

The London Underground mosquito . Can’t survive aboveground during the winter and won’t mate with the aboveground species
Faroe Islands mouse can’t mate with the mainland mice it evolved from. It’s a different species.

And FYI speciation is not microevolution

 

[rjs330]

since we find bear-dogs and dog-bears like Amphicyon in the fossil record, that’s obviously not true

. Remember that the next time you choke swallowing because you’re trying to talk and chew at the same time . Our EVOLVED. voiceboxes make this a problem as they put our larynx too close to the esophageal opening.

Seriously? The bear dog was not a cross between a bear and a dog. It's actually more closely related to an opposum. It was it's own species.
Amphicyon, the bear-dog, is really another giant opossum

 

[Brightmoon]

The Amphicyonidae were caniform Carnivora .theyre also not marsupials like Opossums. The amphicyonidae were basal to the caniform Carnivora. Related to the ancestors of bears and dogs . I was trying to get that paper from the royal society from 2016
Where they realised that 2 Miacids were really amphicyonids . But Wikipedia has the same info about them being basal caniforms