Well, at least it makes a refreshing break from 1 Corinthians 1:27 as a "reason" to shut your mind to the clear evidence, just because you think it will contradict what you think you already know.
Upvote
0
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.
Or maybe you should read the second Psalm?
Everything is technically an accident, but that's not really the point. Humans are no more of an accident then a cup of water forming a puddle in a certain shape when its tipped over.Posted by Tiberius:
"That's all evolution is. It's not striving to be more highly evolved."
Thus one of the central tenets of evolution. Man is nothing special, simply an accident of nature.
You're getting the question -- but evolution doesn't have to take thousands or millions of years -- just a matter of generations.
Since there are plenty of creatures out there which go through generations quickly (insects come to mind), we can observe small-scale changes in pretty short order.
Now, if someone were to produce something that would prevent those small changes from adding up, we've yet to see it.
There's just one or two things wrong with that, but I am sure you are aware of that.Well...if evolution doesn't have to take thousands or millions of years I suppose then that everything could have been created after their own kind about 6-10 thousand years ago and evolved into what we have today and the only COMMON descent would be God.
AV1611VET, you are, as far as I know, the only christian who claims that god cleaned after the Flood. Other biblical literalists point at as many features as possible that prove the Flood, espeacially "flood-geologists". I mean your brethren of AnswersinGenesis or drdino.com claim that they see many remains of the Flood. Does this mean
- AiG en drdino.com are wrong (and may be even not really christian)?
-you are wrong (*)?
-god cleaned up, but in an unperfect way
-any other possibility I didn't think about.
I think you will find that AiG and Dr Dino are wrong every day.One day AiG is wrong.
There there.Here!! Here!!
Well...if evolution doesn't have to take thousands or millions of years I suppose then that everything could have been created after their own kind about 6-10 thousand years ago and evolved into what we have today and the only COMMON descent would be God.
I think you will find that AiG and Dr Dino are wrong every day.
Well you would wouldn't you.Well, even if you don't... I do.
You would be amazed by how conserved adaptation is. For example, in the evolution of a receptor,
Nature publishes paper on the edge of evolution, Part 2 | Uncommon Descent - The Weblog of Michael BeheUsing clever synthetic and analytical techniques, Bridgham et al (2009) show that the more recent hormone receptor protein that they synthesized, a GR-like protein, cant easily revert to the ancestral structure and activity of an MR-like protein because its structure has been adjusted by selection to its present evolutionary task, and multiple amino acid changes would be needed to switch it back. That is a very general, extremely important point that deserves much more emphasis. In all cases not just this one natural selection is expected to hone a protein to suit its current activity, not to suit some future, alternate function. And that is a very strong reason why we should not expect a protein performing one function in a cell to easily be able to evolve another, different function by Darwinian means. In fact, the great work of Bridgham et al (2009) shows that it may not be do-able for Darwinian processes even to produce a protein performing a function very similar to that of a homologous protein.Comparatively, people may have previously conceded that the intelligent mechanism for adaptation (rivaling Darwin's random variation) would be acting through enzyme moderation but not anti-biotic resistance. From research, it can be shown that even the latter is under the influence of that intelligent mechanism. If there was anything you would have granted random mutation it would have been anti-biotic resistance through the high mutation rate of microbes, but it fails. Though adaptation has risen as the fountain of intellectual fulfillment in materialism, it may turn out to be one of the most compelling cases for design. This one might just be the one to flip the earth on its axis- stay tuned.
Before reading their paper even I would have happily conceded for the sake of argument that random mutation plus selection could convert an MR-like protein to a GR-like protein and back again, as many times as necessary. Now, thanks to the work of Bridgham et al (2009), even such apparently minor switches in structure and function are shown to be quite problematic. It seems Darwinian processes cant manage to do even as much as I had thought.
Well...if evolution doesn't have to take thousands or millions of years I suppose then that everything could have been created after their own kind about 6-10 thousand years ago and evolved into what we have today and the only COMMON descent would be God.
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?