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.
But we are talking about one nerve, in the brain, right?
The nerve that says "this is possible", is the same nerve that says "this can be repeated"?
How would you recognize a new evolution, if you couldn't recognize an old one?
The whole concept of evolution back tracking is technically physically possible... but requires such a vastly unlikely sequence of events that it can be ignored as possible.I'm starting to get why I have such a hard time believing "Evolution".
Answer me seriously now, why do you believe this (that anything goes), but you are uncomfortable with it being repeated (as in, apes becoming men then apes again)?
I mean it really looks like you are developing a pathology of duplicity or convenience, I can't tell which?
Maybe tell me this, when did you start to realize that you could put mutation in context, using Evolution? What was your first thought of "I can mutate, survivably"? EDIT: What "context" did you start to give the possibility of mutation?
You're just shooting the breeze, as far as I can tell.
All I can hear is "I need the conditions to be absolute" "I need the entire species to try in unison" things which God is capable of, but for which you will not acknowledge Him?
"I need for Evolution to refer to specific set of species, with a specific level of perfection" sounds like "I need to jury-rig something for which there is no evidence, by excluding interference at random"... seriously, how confusing and unpredictable do you need it to be?
Let me ask you something: is Evolution ever going to reach a point, where it venerates the ground on which Darwin walked? The way Hollywood stars get the walk of fame? 'Cause I really don't want to be in a conversation that proves anything goes for someone who finds an exception to the Cross? Jesus' Cross was final, it was for every sin, every sin that was committed in the name of Evolution, every sin that was committed in the name of anything else. There is no way for your readiness to evolve, being above sin and the temptation to sin.
There is no way for something to evolve, to the point that it does not have to struggle with the possibility of sin, does not have to be righteous in a specific way and does not have to face judgment as pertains to the faith behind it. I have tried to understand what Evolution means in terms of righteousness, and all I have been told is that "it has nothing to do with being right", meaning the chastening in the end, will be the harshest possible, to a point. You want that? You honestly want that?
EDIT: I'm serious. Sins committed in the name of Evolution, are worse than sins that are simply "selfish".
God handled the remaking of animals intoHi there,
So yes, simple question:
The point being, you would have hindsight about the Evolutionary process, as applied to your population?
Just looking for your thoughts on this, thanks.
EDIT: In Christianity, we have a concept called "quickening", where if you know what to do and you agree in your spirit with how God would do it, you start to do it faster than you would know how (with God's help) [I'm not sure of the exact verse, but maybe one of my brethren could point it out?]
Strange, you would think that would leave some sort of evidence. Yet none is to be found.God handled the remaking of animals into
man and likely the timing was perfect.
Not too fast, not too slow.
You seem to be here. That's one of the two pieces needed.Strange, you would think that would leave some sort of evidence. Yet none is to be found.
No; that's just begging the question.You seem to be here. That's one of the two pieces needed.
What question is that?No; that's just begging the question.
The question of the lack of evidence that "God handled the remaking of animals into man and likely the timing was perfect."What question is that?
I see. You are right again, I guess.The question of the lack of evidence that "God handled the remaking of animals into man and likely the timing was perfect."
The fact that Subduction Zone is here is not evidence for that.
I see. You are right again, I guess.
Sorry, that is not evidence. By any definition. In the sciences to even have evidence one must first have a testable hypothesis. What is your hypothesis and what test could possibly show that your hypothesis is wrong?You seem to be here. That's one of the two pieces needed.
Look at earth. God created man.Sorry, that is not evidence. By any definition. In the sciences to even have evidence one must first have a testable hypothesis. What is your hypothesis and what test could possibly show that your hypothesis is wrong?
Look at the trees!Look at earth. God created man.
Look everywhere else - No life by natural means.
List all the natural laws that cause life to occur.
List all the hypothesis that life should occur naturally.
Each one on your list is evidence against.
What if there are none? All are evidence that I am wrong.
Look at the trees!
Oh my, that is one of the worst arguments you could have tried to use. Once again we understand how life evolved. We have massive evidence for it. You have no evidence for your beliefs.
And no, none of those are "evidence against". An argument from ignorance is not evidence. It is a logical fallacy.
It does not matter if I understand your beliefs or not. They appear to be rather irrational since you do not seem to have any evidence for them. A person can have all sorts of irrational beliefs that are not "scathed" by logic. They should be. Do you think that the beliefs of cargo cult members are valid because they cannot be scathed by logic? You are in effect claiming that your beliefs are no different than yours.You don't understand what my beliefs are, so they remain unscathed by your logic assaults.
Look at the trees!
Oh my, that is one of the worst arguments you could have tried to use. Once again we understand how life evolved. We have massive evidence for it.
I you wish to claim the subduction zone...then....If you want to claim for design, you need to show design. Begging the question isn't evidence of design.
I you wish to claim the subduction zone...then....
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?