If individual life forms were created, why assume a biological limit to evolutionary changes?

[Job 33:6]

And actually, I would say that it's young earthers who really dismiss scripture.

You have young earthers saying things like how animals were all babies and in eggs when placed on the ark in order to fit. They claim things about marsupials floating on giant moss piles all the way to Australia. The claim things about the flood metamorphosing rock and about water canopies that made the whole world tropical.

Scripture never says any of that. That's just them in putting their imaginations. Rather than trying to tell others what scripture says and trying to force Genesis into being a scientific text book, young earthers should just accept that it was never meant to be literal in a scientific sense.

 

[Job 33:6]

Nor do you.

And I noticed that the above final words of my prior post went ignored.

And that is telling of the young earth interpretation in regards to it's scientific accuracy.

But the truth is, most young earthers are not scientists and often don't actually know much about...what we the scientists are aware of. Which is half the battle.

And it's nothing for young earthers to be ashamed of. I don't know anything about brain surgery, but I'm not ashamed. It's just a reality that very few young earthers are scientifically literate.

 

[xianghua]

As an example, consider terrestrial mammal to aquatic mammal transitions. Creationist generally believe that terrestrial mammals and aquatic mammals were created separately. But even if that were true, why couldn't populations of created terrestrial mammals still undergo evolutionary changes over time; going from terrestrial to semi-aquatic to fully aquatic.

even a human can live in a desert for instance. but its still human. where is the limit? maybe in a complex new system. so human will not change into another creature if this creature need a complex system to evolve.

 

[pitabread]

where is the limit? maybe in a complex new system. so human will not change into another creature if this creature need a complex system to evolve.

Complexity in-and-of-itself is not a barrier for evolution, since we know how complex structures can evolve.

 

[xianghua]

Complexity in-and-of-itself is not a barrier for evolution, since we know how complex structures can evolve.

no we dont. but you are welcome to believe it.

 

[pitabread]

no we dont.

Actually, we do. There are many such examples in the scientific literature in how complexity can evolve.

Here's an example: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-surprising-origins-of-evolutionary-complexity/