Micro and macro evolution explained.

[atpollard]

Trying to educate people about reality is never a "sermon".

If that was his goal, the video was an abject failure and he is a terrible communicator. Two potential members of his alleged target audience could not get through 6 minutes of his “education” without growing tired of his attacks on faith and lack of real information and abandoning listening to what he had to say. Yet for some strange reason the ATHEISTS on the board watched all of it and loved it.

Yet that says nothing to you except WE don’t understand and HE was just attempting to educate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it has not.
Please present the PROOF that any given bear and any given human share a common ancestor. The inability to prove an event that had no witnesses and left no real evidence is what makes Evolution a theory rather than a law.

PS. Science is not bound by “legal standards” of proof.

Sure it has. Burying your head in the sand will not make that fact go away.

And you have demonstrated that you do not understand even the basics of science "Proof" in the terms that you want does not exist in the sciences. Nor does it exist in a court of law. There is only evidence. What one considers in both cases is the totality of the evidence and by that standard evolution has "proved" that it is a fact. It is quite rare for a legal case to be based upon one piece of evidence and even if it is that evidence needs to be justified. The DNA evidence that can be used to identify criminals is the same DNA evidence that tells us that we share a common ancestor with other apes.

And I know that science is not bound by the legal standards. That is not a problem. There is an endless source of scientific evidence for the theory of evolution and no scientific evidence for any other explanation. Evolution has more evidence for its theory than gravity has for its theory. You are fractally wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If that was his goal, the video was an abject failure and he is a terrible communicator. Two potential members of his alleged target audience could not get through 6 minutes of his “education” without growing tired of his attacks on faith and lack of real information and abandoning listening to what he had to say. Yet for some strange reason the ATHEISTS on the board watched all of it and loved it.

Yet that says nothing to you except WE don’t understand and HE was just attempting to educate.

Some people are simply oversensitive. And we know that denial is extremely strong among some creationists. Some people refuse to learn. They will refuse to argue or reason rationally. You see it here all of the time. Look at how few creationists are willing to even learn the basics of science. There is no fighting that amount of denial

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, but we heard the same words and disagree on their meaning, so there is no point.

You appear to be only trying to fulfill your own agenda.

 

[atpollard]

You were talking about finches.

No, I mentioned finches in passing because I read an article about an African finch blown off course that mated with a finch on Galapagos and the offspring of that union had characteristics of both species (no surprise) and chose to inbreed with siblings ... this creating celebrated proof of speciation within a single generation and absolute proof of evolution.

From where I sit, if they can interbreed and produce fertile offspring then they are all friggin finches and one species. Like breeds of dogs. It is insulting to discuss two finches interbreeding as equivalent to dogs and foxes diverging as distinct species. The latter is evolution and the former is “humbug”.

 

[atpollard]

You appear to be only trying to fulfill your own agenda.

Ditto.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I mentioned finches in passing because I read an article about an African finch blown off course that mated with a finch on Galapagos and the offspring of that union had characteristics of both species (no surprise) and chose to inbreed with siblings ... this creating celebrated proof of speciation within a single generation and absolute proof of evolution.

From where I sit, if they can interbreed and produce fertile offspring then they are all friggin finches and one species. Like breeds of dogs. It is insulting to discuss two finches interbreeding as equivalent to dogs and foxes diverging as distinct species. The latter is evolution and the former is “humbug”.

That does not sound likely at all. You need to find an article that supports that.

And sorry, you do not get to set the standards. Yes, one can deny evolution if one sets ridiculous standards. That is not how science works. If you want to refute evolution you need to do it based upon what is said by the theory itself, Not based upon a strawman version of it.

Like it or not evolution is a fact. If you ever accepted a DNA test for paternity then you need to accept the DNA tests that show that you are an ape.

EDIT: And your mention of finches was far more than "in passing". If anything you appeared to talk about them more than about corn:

"I enjoy TED talks and have a strong background in Chemistry and the Earth Sciences, so I am skeptical of some evolutionary claims (like life emerging from non-living chemicals in the time frame given) and I object to the change in the definition of species that if applied to people would make the French and Iranians two different species (like Darwin’s Finch), however I am not crushed by the thought of an earth that is older than 6000 years or the thought that all bears share a common ancestor."

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ditto.

I can support my claims with evidence. So far all you have is denial. And anger at another for demonstrating that you are wrong.

 

[atpollard]

Evolution has more evidence for its theory than gravity has for its theory

Gravity, physics at least admits, is not understood.
Evolution pretends there are no questions.

 

[atpollard]

That does not sound likely at all. You need to find an article that supports that.

A New Bird Species Has Evolved on Galapagos And Scientists Watched It Happen

You can look up the more technical journals referenced in the article on your own.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Gravity, physics at least admits, is not understood.
Evolution pretends there are no questions.

Not so. Scientists will freely admit that not all questions have been answered in evolution. But it is rather well understood. And gravity is well understood as well. Your cell phone is an example of that. Yes, there are still unanswered questions, but that is the nature of science.

Just because we cannot answer all of the questions does not mean that we cannot answer some of them. The answers that bother you are rather basic ones that were answered quite some time ago.

Why does it bother you that Genesis cannot be read literally? That does not violate 2 Timothy 3 16-17.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A New Bird Species Has Evolved on Galapagos And Scientists Watched It Happen

You can look up the more technical journals referenced in the article on your own.

Thanks. You refuted your claim.

 

[atpollard]

I can support my claims with evidence.

But have chosen not to actually do so.

So far all you have is denial.

All I deny is liking the video in the OP.
I claim to find the first 90 seconds insulting and the claim on Corn to be a false representation of speciation.

And anger at another for demonstrating that you are wrong.

I apologize if I came across as angry. That was not my intention. I am more resolved to the reality of the pointlessness of the conversation if you can watch the first 90 seconds of that video and think that no person of faith should have any cause to take offense at a sincere attempt to explain facts to us, because from what I saw, a sincere attempt to explain anything was the last thing that video was created to do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But have chosen not to actually do so.

LOL! Not so. Did you not notice a chart that I posted for you.

All I deny is liking the video in the OP.
I claim to find the first 90 seconds insulting and the claim on Corn to be a false representation of speciation.

You have denied more than that. You don't have to not like it nor could I find anything offensive in that short space. He only stated facts.

I apologize if I came across as angry. That was not my intention. I am more resolved to the reality of the pointlessness of the conversation if you can watch the first 90 seconds of that video and think that no person of faith should have any cause to take offense at a sincere attempt to explain facts to us, because from what I saw, a sincere attempt to explain anything was the last thing that video was created to do.

The problem is that there is a time for faith and there is a time not to use it. The sciences are never faith based. Faith is not a pathway to the truth in the sciences. There is no excuse to apply faith to the sciences. Here is an example. Though many Christians try to deny it the Bible only describes the Earth as flat in word and deed. To get it to do otherwise one must mistranslate it. If one relied only upon faith one could demand that the Earth is flat and there are Christians that do so. Yet whether the Earth is flat or not does not change the message of the Bible. Evolution should not change the message of the Bible either.

The fact that life is the product of evolution should not refute one's belief in Jesus.

 

[atpollard]

Why does it bother you that Genesis cannot be read literally?

Ummm ... who said that it does?

Genesis 1 is a polemic written to attack all of the creation myths and pantheons of the surrounding religions from India to Egypt to Sumeria to Babylon even as far as the proto-Germanic and proto-Greco-Romans. People attempting to discredit Genesis have focused on the items of similarity with other eastern creation myths and missed the minor differences that shatter the deepest and most ingrained theological presuppositions of all of those religions.

However, the simple fact that Genesis was not written to be a text book for astronomy or geology or biology, does not mean that science gets a pass when it makes claims that it has not actually proven, but merely assumed to be true and shouted down anyone that attempts to ask if the emperor really has any clothes on. So polar bears and black bears may have diversified from a common bear ancestor without humans and mushrooms sharing a common ancestor. Proving one does not prove the other.

 

[atpollard]

LOL! Not so. Did you not notice a chart that I posted for you.

Shall I post a chart from the Flat Earther’s to prove the world is not round?

 

[atpollard]

The problem is that there is a time for faith and there is a time not to use it. The sciences are never faith based.

I do not disagree with your statement, but that is not the tone or content of the video. Even the cartoons playing in the background were chosen to be inflammatory mocking of the christian religion rather than supporting any argument for some scientific truth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ummm ... who said that it does?

Genesis 1 is a polemic written to attack all of the creation myths and pantheons of the surrounding religions from India to Egypt to Sumeria to Babylon even as far as the proto-Germanic and proto-Greco-Romans. People attempting to discredit Genesis have focused on the items of similarity with other eastern creation myths and missed the minor differences that shatter the deepest and most ingrained theological presuppositions of all of those religions.

However, the simple fact that Genesis was not written to be a text book for astronomy or geology or biology, does not mean that science gets a pass when it makes claims that it has not actually proven, but merely assumed to be true and shouted down anyone that attempts to ask if the emperor really has any clothes on. So polar bears and black bears may have diversified from a common bear ancestor without humans and mushrooms sharing a common ancestor. Proving one does not prove the other.

They have proven their case when it comes to human evolution. What evidence do you think is lacking?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Shall I post a chart from the Flat Earther’s to prove the world is not round?

I see that you do not understand the nature of evidence.

It won't take long. This applies to all of the sciences not evolution. Care to discuss it?

 

[atpollard]

The sciences are never faith based.

What real evidence is there that plants and animals diverged from a common ancestor? Is that an Evolutionary article of faith?