Natural selection v Intelligent design

[paulm50]

Paul,

Some Christian brethren will disagree with you (like me, for instance); Genesis doesn't have to be "spot on" to be the Word of God. In fact, I think that to hold up the revelatory narrative structure of the Bible against that which science offers creates a False Dichotomy. The bible can be a "story" written by Bronze age men and still carry a Divine Imprimatur of sorts. It's just that Modernist notions of story construction have seeped into our theology, making some of us Christians insist that the bible must be seen as a book carrying a scientifically accurate message. This kind of theoretical 'seepage' has caused a lot of confusion and brought about a lot of disbelief, especially of late.

On my part, I'll continue to hold to the reliability of the Bible as God's Word AND proffer Theological Evolution as a working hypothesis.

Peace
2PhiloVoid

Genesis doesn't need t be spot on. Agreed.

It needs to be fairly close though. and it's a mile wide. A Mechanical Translation of the Book of Genesis. For what we actually written and not what's in your bible.

The bible must always be read and cherry picked from. We no longer kill homosexuals, as for the OT rules which Jesus said we should keep. They went long ago. And saying the Laws no longer apply. Needs scriptures where Jesus said that. And not ones that can be interpreted to mean that. Because 500 years age. We were burning witches and heretics.

 

[paulm50]

It comes down to whether you think God played a hand in creating life and to what extent. Did God create all the ingredients for the beginnings of life that could evolve into more complex life. Was it a series of events where God added His creative powers to kick life along. Or did He create all living things from the beginning basically as they are. Certainly in the beginning life cannot come from non life and existence can't come from nothing. So there must be some creative agent behind things. But even to think that such a small beginning could naturally self create the vast complexity we see today is hard to believe. The steps are just to complex and beyond the ability for a random process that is based on chance could do something like that. The chances are beyond anything we would consider possible.

The bible doesn't have to mention natural selection or any other scientific explanation. Its not a science book. Yet within the stories of creation we can see some of the keys to life explained simply and as a by product of Gods divine work. To God its not about getting into long explanations about how things happen. God is that explanation in His nature. Within God are all the complexity of DNA and quantum physics. Just as we see that the quantum world acts outside our understanding of our material world so does God. Science can explain things to a certain point. Beyond that we may not be able to comprehend.

As the bible says who knows the mind of God. God spoke existence into reality with His word. His light is beyond what we understand light is. That light may be existence. We dont really understand all these things and we think we do and therefore try to be the gods of our own world. But for all we know as with the quantum world our reality may just be something we see and beyond that is another realm that we will never know in this life.

Was the Big Bang, caused by God?
Was the process that allowed the start of life on Earth, caused by God?
Were the first fish to walk out of the sea, caused by God?
Was natural selection, caused by God?
And so on to where we get Genesis. Where it carries on going wrong.

If you consider the first part of my post to be possible, and I think you do. Then, Cain meeting other tribes is possible, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Flood, Plagues of Egypt, Destruction of Jericho, and so on are all natural events, which we know they are. Ordered by god as the bible says, or like Earthquakes, Volcanoes, Tsunamis just an act of nature due to the law of "[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] Happens."?

This part exposes you.

God is that explanation in His nature. Within God are all the complexity of DNA and quantum physics. Just as we see that the quantum world acts outside our understanding of our material world so does God. Science can explain things to a certain point. Beyond that we may not be able to comprehend.

How do you know within god are all the complexities?

Science is continually explaining more and more, religion is always denying and has even executed those trying to explain more.

Go back to what the original Hebrew mechanical translation says, it's astounding what people have added. Therefore discrediting the divine inspiration theory. Now you've stretched it "The Bible doesn't have to be right."

 

[paulm50]

Paul, I know you mean well in defending your thoughts, but I'm having a difficult time following the conceptual consistency of your conclusions; there seems to be some decision on your part to make recourse to personal bias to support your explanations.

You prefer to blame men? On what basis? I'm not seeing how you've supported your bias here.

So, you think that Leviticus 25:44-46 can be consigned to the blame of men? Is this a partial blame, or a plenaryblame? Just asking.

2PhiloVoid

I blame Man for man made events, I blame nature for Natural events. Leviticus 25:44-46 is absolutely the blame of Men. Unless god wanted some of his people to be bought and sold. And for that I need more than something written by men.

Do I need to show how I arrived at the conclusion a lot of the bible is biased towards, Men and those in charge? It's everywhere, right down to the "Meek will inherit the Earth" and Matthew 19:24. Designed for the rich to control the poor and rake in their money. The bible translation is wrong, it wasn't a camel.

 

[pshun2404]

two points to throw a monkey wrench into the mix

Nothing evolved by chance....chance has no power to do anything it is always and only a result (a mathematical abstract representing one of any number of possible outcomes)...design speaks of intentional information in form and function being implied from the actual evidence...Yes intentional information necessitates an intelligence because dead matter and energy do not create information...

Randomicity is a relative term...math proves random coincidence cannot prove (or even be demonstrated to prove) most of what we see and experience...all processes related to life's forms and functions follow lawful processes and principles already extant that apply everywhere we look...simply put laws DO NOT create...functional proteins are a perfect example (there are none found in nature outside a living system yet living systems rely on functional proteins for their formative and functional existence)

Science is the method by which we can discover these laws and principle and understand how they work...dead matter and energy cannot create or develop laws and principles...

Now once created, a God (intelligence) could certainly have allowed (and did in fact make it so) some things to occur randomly and the outcomes of chance being influenced by many forces and factors. Cells, DNA, and the process of information transmission (inheritance) from a number of possibilities can produce a number of probable results.

Two themes of science fiction have sadly infiltrated the beliefs of many who are naturalistically or materialistically inclined:

Abiogenesis (for which there has never been one iota of suggestion via the actual data and evidence we have), and

Darwin's concept of cross phyletic morphism (one creature actually becoming an entirely different type of creature)...VARIATION occurs through speciation not new creatures

 

[ray88c]

Was the Big Bang, caused by God?
Was the process that allowed the start of life on Earth, caused by God?
Were the first fish to walk out of the sea, caused by God?
Was natural selection, caused by God?
And so on to where we get Genesis. Where it carries on going wrong

Did you see the big bang? Did you see the soup that you're claiming existed? Did you see evolution happen? I'm going to take a wild guess and say no. Thus you're putting your faith in men to think for you. For all you KNOW, life could have started 100 years ago... The evolution theory requires faith, science says X=X. For example: Boats disappear when they go away from us, that is a fact. The interpretation is; 1) earth is round,2) to far away to see with the naked eye. We can test these theories, bring a telescope, point it at the boat... WOW it's still there! Of course this leads to more questions...

Ultimately I can't force anyone to believe the bible, and you don't have to, it doesn't hurt my feelings. But I highly suggest you look at your "science" before you judge us. Look at what is fact, then look at what is interpretation. If you rely on others to do your thinking(googling) then I pity you... If you'd like to explain this picture you're welcome to:

 

[pshun2404]

Natural selection does not make new creatures...

True natural selection merely states that if long necked and shorter necked giraffes lived in an environment similar to the Serengeti where most trees are tall....the one that can get to the food supply will survive and the ones that cannot will perish...false natural selection (science fiction) says that small necked giraffes grew longer necks from continually reaching for the food they could not obtain over 1,000s of generations...

If you are a scientifically oriented person that's great. God has made it possible for us to learn and know all about creation (within limits of course)...but let the data speak for itself. The data should shape and adjust the Hypothesis to create the theory....NEVER use the theory to interpret the data...

For example Paleo-anthropologist David Pilbeam in Pro-Evolution, Vol. 14, p.127, says “...in my own subject of Paleo-anthropology the “theory” heavily influenced by implicit ideas, almost always dominates data...ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influences the way fossils are interpreted ”

This is not good science (of which there is much)...NEVER interpret the data by the theory, ALWAYs shape the theory from the data (and do not fudge the data or the interpretation to make it appear to fit the preconceived conclusion)

Thanks

Paul

 

[pshun2404]

All experiments ever performed, by all scientists, only PROVE Intelligent Design!

 

[paulm50]

two points to throw a monkey wrench into the mix

Nothing evolved by chance....chance has no power to do anything it is always and only a result (a mathematical abstract representing one of any number of possible outcomes)...design speaks of intentional information in form and function being implied from the actual evidence...Yes intentional information necessitates an intelligence because dead matter and energy do not create information...

True, things that are born and don't fit into their natural environment. Don't last long. When the climate changed, or Asteroids hit the Earth. Many who didn't fit, died.

[/QUOTE]Randomicity is a relative term...math proves random coincidence cannot prove (or even be demonstrated to prove) most of what we see and experience...all processes related to life's forms and functions follow lawful processes and principles already extant that apply everywhere we look...simply put laws DO NOT create...functional proteins are a perfect example (there are none found in nature outside a living system yet living systems rely on functional proteins for their formative and functional existence)[/QUOTE]Define living system at the time the first single cell animals appeared.

[/QUOTE]Science is the method by which we can discover these laws and principle and understand how they work...dead matter and energy cannot create or develop laws and principles...[/QUOTE]Where is the dead matter you speak of?

Now once created, a God (intelligence) could certainly have allowed (and did in fact make it so) some things to occur randomly and the outcomes of chance being influenced by many forces and factors. Cells, DNA, and the process of information transmission (inheritance) from a number of possibilities can produce a number of probable results.

Possible, nut what does it have to do with the bible and Genesis?

Two themes of science fiction have sadly infiltrated the beliefs of many who are naturalistically or materialistically inclined:

Instead ognt he one themed bible beleivers. The diffence is science can prove what happens.

Darwin's concept of cross phyletic morphism (one creature actually becoming an entirely different type of creature)...VARIATION occurs through speciation not new creatures

You're very wrong here. Darwinism is proven beyond any question. You speak as if it happened over night, which is wrong.

Take dinosaurs to birds as an example. And go do the research for yourself. It's very clear how birds evolved from dinosaurs.

Did you see the big bang? Did you see the soup that you're claiming existed? Did you see evolution happen? I'm going to take a wild guess and say no. Thus you're putting your faith in men to think for you. For all you KNOW, life could have started 100 years ago... The evolution theory requires faith, science says X=X. For example: Boats disappear when they go away from us, that is a fact. The interpretation is; 1) earth is round,2) to far away to see with the naked eye. We can test these theories, bring a telescope, point it at the boat... WOW it's still there! Of course this leads to more questions...

Did you see Genesis happen? Thus you're putting your faith in men to think for you. Who also didn't see it happen. Evolution requires the freedom to learn, to go out and see what's real. We can see dinosaur fossils, see Neanderthal Bones, we can even see that Humans weren't the first Hominids in Israel. We don't need books written by men who didn't see anything, but the walls of Babylon. Their prison.

[/QUOTE]Ultimately I can't force anyone to believe the bible, and you don't have to, it doesn't hurt my feelings. But I highly suggest you look at your "science" before you judge us. Look at what is fact, then look at what is interpretation. If you rely on others to do your thinking(googling) then I pity you... If you'd like to explain this picture you're to: View attachment 160201[/QUOTE]I highly suggest you use Google to answer why the Sun and Moon appear in the sky together.

I also highly suggest what the original Genesis writers made of them and all the twinkling lights in the night sky.

 

[paulm50]

All experiments ever performed, by all scientists, only PROVE Intelligent Design!

Can you show us some.

Because for an Intelligent Design, it all fails.

 

[ray88c]

Paulm50, I fear Romans 1 for you... I know my belief requires faith, but the fact that you don't see that your belief requires faith astounds me. Yep I see your so called evidence, I find it hard to believe that you accept such a crazy theory with such little evidence. The fact that we have dragon bones does not mean that they lived millions of years ago...

The picture is much more then that, why is the light crescent on the wrong side of the moon?

How about this one, how is there a full(or nearly full) moon next to the sun?

Either way you slice it, we are being lied to... Think of the implications of the evolution theory,

instead of sweet treats you can insert any despicable any you'd like...

 

[paulm50]

Paulm50, I fear Romans 1 for you... I know my belief requires faith, but the fact that you don't see that your belief requires faith astounds me. Yep I see your so called evidence, I find it hard to believe that you accept such a crazy theory with such little evidence. The fact that we have dragon bones does not mean that they lived millions of years ago...

You can fear for me, I'm more afraid of Father Christmas not bringing presents. We don't have dragons bones, early man thought they were dragons.

The picture is much more then that, why is the light crescent on the wrong side of the moon? View attachment 160206

As I said, Google will reveal all.

Do you see why a little bit of understanding is required in order to not be fooled?

The pictures you posted, are normal. figure it out.

 

[ray88c]

I'm not saying it's not normal, I think it's very normal. I'm saying as a believer in ball earth, how do you explain it? My bible calls the moon the lesser light, thus implying it is its own light.

But that subject is far from the original topic... What can I possibly do to convince you that you believe a lie? I suspect nothing...

 

[paulm50]

I'm not saying it's not normal, I think it's very normal. I'm saying as a believer in ball earth, how do you explain it? My bible calls the moon the lesser light, thus implying it is its own light.

But that subject is far from the original topic... What can I possibly do to convince you that you believe a lie? I suspect nothing...

Ray do you know what those pictures are? If so nothing magical about them. The moon isn't a light it's a reflector. The original version of Genesis said;

and “Elohiym” said, the luminaries will exist in the sheet of the sky to make a separation between the day and the night and they exist for signs and for appointed times and for days and years, and they exist for luminaries in the sheet of the sky to make glow upon the land and he existed so, and “Elohiym” made two of the magnificent luminaries, the magnificent luminary to regulate the day and the small luminary to regulate the night and the stars, and “Elohiym” gave them in the sheet of the sky to make a glow upon the land, and to regulate in the day and in the night and to make a separation between the light and the darkness and “Elohiym” saw that it was functional, and evening existed and morning existed a fourth day,

Do you think these people were talking to any god or just writing down what they could see and with a limited knowledge of how the Earth worked and credited what they didn't understand to a god?

What can you do to convince me that's true? Explain how the original text has any truth in it. And stop posting pictures of the Moon with Venus or Mars and ask why they're on the wrong side to the reflection from the Sun.

You could try to explain why the Intelligent design is so good at killing us, and was before Eve ate the apple.

 

[ray88c]

You keep quoting that mechanical translation, I don't know enough Hebrew to confirm that what he translated it correct. All I know is English, and kjv says things a lot different. If you're going to quote the bible then use kjv, because anybody could claim to have direct translation and change a few words... No I do not think they had limited knowledge back then, I think they were smarter than we are now, less information, maybe... I like what you did there with Venus or Mars... Trying to discredit a picture...

Why Is intelligent design good at killing us? I don't think I understand the question, are you asking why is there death? Because of sin. I believe that there was no death til Adam sinned.

 

[bhsmte]

All experiments ever performed, by all scientists, only PROVE Intelligent Design!

Which experiments?

 

[pshun2404]

Which experiments?

Name one!

 

[bhsmte]

Name one!

Excuse me?

I asked you to list the experiments you claimed to prove intelligent design:

pshun2404 said: ↑
All experiments ever performed, by all scientists, only PROVE Intelligent Design!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Do you think these people were talking to any god or just writing down what they could see and with a limited knowledge of how the Earth worked and credited what they didn't understand to a god?

They wrote what they were inspired to write, without regard to scientific facts. Christians are inspired to understand what they were inspired to write down, without regard to scientific facts.

I never got beyond the recurve bow, in spite of the "overwhelming scientific evidence" that a compound bow, or even a crossbow, is a superior weapon.

 

[pshun2404]

Here is one I volunteer….Evolutionists touted the Peppered Moth of England (and the US) as being a prime example of the accuracy of the Theory of Natural Selection. Yet when it was pointed out that moths seldom rest on tree trunks and don't fly much during the day when birds are feeding, a bit of that story lost credibility. Then it was discovered here in the US, there were just as many dark Peppered Moths in pristine woodlands as there were in polluted areas just a few miles away.

So…if the intelligent designer of an experiment were to say secure one of the two varieties of the same moth leaving the other variety free and then released a flock of hungry birds near them the hungry birds would eat the available food source (DUH!) kind of like I can either eat the prepared turkey dinner at grandmas OR I can go hunting for my own turkey and IF I get one prepare that myself and eat it. Now the same thing is true if both types are secured by intelligent design the lighter ones being easier to see…certainly a turkey seen is easier to hunt and kill than a turkey well camouflaged

So though the intelligent designer was correct in his demonstration of the lighter variety reducing in number by the fog/pollution and then coming back in later years, what we actually have in the experiment is proof that an intelligent designer can make an artificial natural selection appear to support what might have been a process of natural selection, but it does not prove that is what happened.

But to me, a more important point here is that this has nothing to do with how many Evolutionary Biologists use the idea of natural selection….they use it to imply not speciation (which is merely the production of variety) but as a way one creature becomes an entirely different creature (such as the phyetic morphism Darwin’s theory suggests…see Dr. Steven Stanley, in Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, 1979), which of course has never been demonstrated or proven even by intelligent designers who create experiments. In fact, Dr. Stanley tells us “The known fossil record fails to document a single example of Phyletic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition...” Yet we never hear this opinion taught. Why?

And I will not list all (since they are ALL) experiments that demonstrate the necessity of an intelligent designer because it would include them ALL...there are virtually NO experiments not designed intelligently.

 

[paulm50]

You keep quoting that mechanical translation, I don't know enough Hebrew to confirm that what he translated it correct. All I know is English, and kjv says things a lot different. If you're going to quote the bible then use kjv, because anybody could claim to have direct translation and change a few words... No I do not think they had limited knowledge back then, I think they were smarter than we are now, less information, maybe... I like what you did there with Venus or Mars... Trying to discredit a picture...

Why Is intelligent design good at killing us? I don't think I understand the question, are you asking why is there death? Because of sin. I believe that there was no death til Adam sinned.

The Internet is a wonderful tool, research to see if it's right. Until you can present evidence it's wrong. It remains.

Then you go and make a silly statement. Of course they had less knowledge than us. They thought natural events were acts of gods. What ever the religion.

I tried to discredit your knowledge and achieved it. Your picture could be photoshopped. So unless you can show the original page it came from, not a biblical one, and other similar images. My explanation stands.

Are you serious? The world isn't intelligent design, unless it was designed to kill us. The Earth's plates, molten lave under the surface, weather systems, Mass Extinctions. The Earth wasn't designed well enough to stop asteroids hitting it. And all this long before Adam arrived.

You think Adam arrived 6,000 years ago. So even showing you proof you can see the actual bones of prehistoric hominids in Israel before Humans won't sway you. FIRST OUT OF AFRICA. Unlike the bible, which is one book that's difficult to verify. There's 1,000s of books that prove the truth about hominids. Even you and I, if you're of European descent, are carrying Neanderthal DNA.

They wrote what they were inspired to write, without regard to scientific facts. Christians are inspired to understand what they were inspired to write down, without regard to scientific facts.

That's the truth. Without scientific facts, no one to guide them. They wrote what inspired them. Like any author of fiction.

I never got beyond the recurve bow, in spite of the "overwhelming scientific evidence" that a compound bow, or even a crossbow, is a superior weapon.[/QUOTE]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow_shape#Recurve_bows

Here is one I volunteer….Evolutionists touted the Peppered Moth of England (and the US) as being a prime example of the accuracy of the Theory of Natural Selection. Yet when it was pointed out that moths seldom rest on tree trunks and don't fly much during the day when birds are feeding, a bit of that story lost credibility. Then it was discovered here in the US, there were just as many dark Peppered Moths in pristine woodlands as there were in polluted areas just a few miles away.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

Which is why science is superior to the bible. Science does get it wrong, admits it, then goes back and gets it right. Ifn fact the beauty is as you point out, you know science gets it wrong, when it checks it's findings.

And you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?