• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Quick question on evolution

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What miracles are you talking about that are necessary for evolution to occur?

- Life
- Decrease in entropy
- increase in information
- increase in intelligence
- Rock to life after adding a heat lamp
- reproduction
- survival of proposed initial life
 
Upvote 0

Seipai

Regular Member
Jan 20, 2014
954
11
✟1,266.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
- Life
- Decrease in entropy
- increase in information
- increase in intelligence
- Rock to life after adding a heat lamp
- reproduction
- survival of proposed initial life
This is just so sad.

If you do not even understand entropy how can you possibly try to debate against evolution?

Even the AiG crowd no that the "entropy argument" is garbage:doh:
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
- Life
- Decrease in entropy
- increase in information
- increase in intelligence
- Rock to life after adding a heat lamp
- reproduction
- survival of proposed initial life

Since when do decreases in entropy require miracles? Your refrigerator is doing it right now. Is your refrigerator magic?
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,532
Antwerp
✟165,905.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Thanks for the good explanation, but I admit I'm still having trouble. (Although I was quite accomplished in getting my college degrees, I was never very good at biology.) I'd like to keep things as simple as possible.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you said, but it seems to me that you're saying that an offspring is the same type of being as its parent, but with a tiny change at its core. If you go on for millions (?) of generations these tiny changes will have resulted in an offspring eventually being a totally different type of being as the ancient ancestor. Is that right?

If I understand you right, then I guess you're saying that there once was a bacterium many millions (?) of generations ago, and because of the tiny changes, that bacterium's offspring eventually resulted in a human?

Pretty much, yes.
Although, instead of "totally different type of being", consider calling/viewing it a "subspecies" of the ancestor.

Exactly like with languages.
French, Italian and Spanish are all subspecies of Latin.

So it's the same with humans (and any other living thing).

homo sapiens, chimps, gorilla's and bonobo's are all primates (subspecies of that common primate ancestor).

Primates and cats are all mammals (subspecies of that common mammal ancestor).
Mammals and reptiles are tetrapods (subspecies of that common tetrapod ancestor).

And so it goes on all the way back.
When we get to the single celled organisms, we see eukaryotes and prokaryotes. And we are descendents of the eukaryotes. Humans, cats, dogs, etc... we are all multi-celulluar eurkaryote organisms.

Dogs will produce dogs. All off spring of dogs will forever be dogs (ie: belong to the branch that has canines as its roots). These dogs will futher speciate into dog subspecies, but they will remain dogs. Just like they remain mammals and tetrapods and multi-cellullar eukaryotes.
 
Upvote 0

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
9,382
5,229
✟343,514.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
- Life
- Decrease in entropy
- increase in information
- increase in intelligence
- Rock to life after adding a heat lamp
- reproduction
- survival of proposed initial life

So...your ignorance is a miracle? I find that rather offensive.

If you have no clue about the definition of any of the words your using how do you expect anyone to take you seriously.
 
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟36,267.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Pretty much, yes.
Although, instead of "totally different type of being", consider calling/viewing it a "subspecies" of the ancestor.

Exactly like with languages.
French, Italian and Spanish are all subspecies of Latin.

So it's the same with humans (and any other living thing).

homo sapiens, chimps, gorilla's and bonobo's are all primates (subspecies of that common primate ancestor).

Primates and cats are all mammals (subspecies of that common mammal ancestor).
Mammals and reptiles are tetrapods (subspecies of that common tetrapod ancestor).

And so it goes on all the way back.
When we get to the single celled organisms, we see eukaryotes and prokaryotes. And we are descendents of the eukaryotes. Humans, cats, dogs, etc... we are all multi-celulluar eurkaryote organisms.

Dogs will produce dogs. All off spring of dogs will forever be dogs (ie: belong to the branch that has canines as its roots). These dogs will futher speciate into dog subspecies, but they will remain dogs. Just like they remain mammals and tetrapods and multi-cellullar eukaryotes.

You are describing the evidence for creation but attributing it to natural forces.

God did not create Eve from the ground again. He created Eve from a part of Adam. I suspect God did the same with other life and all for a good scientific reason.
 
Upvote 0

lasthero

Newbie
Jul 30, 2013
11,421
5,795
✟244,477.00
Faith
Seeker
I suspect God did the same with other life and all for a good scientific reason.
You suspect, but you have not one wit of evidence, Biblical or otherwise, to back up that suspicion. God's certainly not obliged to do anything for a 'good scientific reason'. being omnipotent and all - making them from pure scratch wouldn't have made any difference to him.
 
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟36,267.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
You suspect, but you have not one wit of evidence, Biblical or otherwise, to back up that suspicion. God's certainly not obliged to do anything for a 'good scientific reason'. being omnipotent and all - making them from pure scratch wouldn't have made any difference to him.

I thought I did mention this. Perhaps you missed it?

Genesis 2:21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Once God set up rules for the universe, he would be bound to operate within those laws. Being omnipotent means you know the exact way to do everything perfect and right.
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
This is an honest inquiry as I try to find out as much as I can about what evolutionists believe. I've come to learn that the ToE says that birds produce birds, fish produce fish, humans produce humans, etc. I've also come to learn that the ToE says we all came from a common ancestor. Assuming my understanding is correct, how do you reconcile those two statements? Thanks.

As I like to say, you cannot escape your ancestry. We humans are all apes, primates, mammals, tetrapods, vertebrates, animals, and eukaryotes. Just like our ancestors were. We are just modified versions.
 
Upvote 0

anyathesword

Veteran
Dec 16, 2013
1,676
36
France
✟24,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Allow me a detailed answer on this one, as it is indeed a good question.
Before we start, let met address your statement in bold. Instead of trying to find out what "evolutionists" "believe", why don't you simply learn some evolutionary biology? Perhaps it is what you meant, but evolution theory is a theory of biology. You don't have to rely on what people believe to learn about it.

Having said that, let's start.

The central key of evolution is inheritable genetics/traits and mutation.
Let's leave sexual reproduction out of this for a second as it makes the tree of life more complex and it would only distract you from the mechanism I'm about to explain (although it applies just as well for breeding pairs, off course). So let's assume for simplicity that newborns have only 1 parent.

(warning: hypothetical numbers ahead, for the sake of example)
In that case, a newborn is an exact copy of his parents + some changes.
You are, indeed, 99.999% the same as your parent. That 0.001 % difference is unique to you. That represents your mutations. All newborns have mutations. This is called the mutation rate. In human species, I think that number is about 175 mutations per newborn. The vast majority of which is actually pretty much neutral in effect.

When you get a child, then the same thing happens. The child is 99.999% the same as you, with 0.001% difference due to its own mutations. It also inherited YOUR mutations. So it is 99.999% the same as you and 99.998% the same as your parent. And so it continues down.
Your kid will have a kid, he will have a kid, he will have a kid, etc.

All of them will be 99.999% the same as their direct parent.
After a long time, still being 99.999% the same as its direct parent, it will be perhaps only 97% the same as YOU.

What is the result? Well... that every single newborn is always of the same species as its direct parents. And it gradually, very gradually, changes through the generations. At some point, you would look back thousands of generations ago and find out that BIG changes have taken place. At the core, that descendent far into the future will still have YOUR DNA, which was inherited through the ages. But it will have become a new species.

So all off spring of Homo Sapiens will forever belong to the group of Homo Sapiens. Homo Sapiens will not turn into canines. Canines are on another branch of this family tree. Homo Sapiens will no doubt speciate further into subspecies. But they are forever "stuck" in the Homo genus. That's their ancestry. That's the DNA they've inherited through the ages. And it ain't going anywhere.

You've surely heared that Humans evolved from primates. This is correct. What is also correct is that humans are STILL primates. That will never change. We are also still mammals. And tetrapods. And vertebrates.
We share an ancestor with all primates. We share an older ancestor with all mammals. We share an older ancestor with all tetrapods. Etc.



Too difficult to comprehend? Let's try an easy analogy. I love this: languages.

As you probably (or hopefully) know: Italian, French and Spanish are called "Roman languages". They are called that because they all derived from Latin.

At one point, the ancestors of Italian, French and Spanish speaking people all spoke Latin. Let's called Latin the ancestral species.

Now, how did we get from Latin to those 3 other languages?
Consider this: at no point in history did a latin speaking mother give birth to a spanish speaking child. Instead, each child was always brought up in the SAME language as its parents. But generation after generation, the latin changed. Some words were altered, accents were altered, dialects formed, fonetics changed. All in gradual manner. Again, at no point did a generation speak a different language then the previous generation.

Yet, here we are: French, Italian and Spanish. All different languages with the same roots. All three are still Roman languages. Just like humans are still primates.


Feel free to ask additional questions if you feel like you need to.
I'll be more then happy to do my best to answer them (or point you to what might be able to answer them) if you are sincere in your request.

How many changes and how much time would be needed for each change in a land animal to a whale?

I mean all changes that would be needed to make this animal be able to swim, breath in the water, grow in tremendous size, change physical features, etc.

And what kind of factors would cause this animal to turn into a whale?


And why is this not happening in any observed animals today? Animals living near water who changed to water animals?
 
Upvote 0

anyathesword

Veteran
Dec 16, 2013
1,676
36
France
✟24,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Allow me a detailed answer on this one, as it is indeed a good question.
Before we start, let met address your statement in bold. Instead of trying to find out what "evolutionists" "believe", why don't you simply learn some evolutionary biology? Perhaps it is what you meant, but evolution theory is a theory of biology. You don't have to rely on what people believe to learn about it.

Having said that, let's start.

The central key of evolution is inheritable genetics/traits and mutation.
Let's leave sexual reproduction out of this for a second as it makes the tree of life more complex and it would only distract you from the mechanism I'm about to explain (although it applies just as well for breeding pairs, off course). So let's assume for simplicity that newborns have only 1 parent.

(warning: hypothetical numbers ahead, for the sake of example)
In that case, a newborn is an exact copy of his parents + some changes.
You are, indeed, 99.999% the same as your parent. That 0.001 % difference is unique to you. That represents your mutations. All newborns have mutations. This is called the mutation rate. In human species, I think that number is about 175 mutations per newborn. The vast majority of which is actually pretty much neutral in effect.

When you get a child, then the same thing happens. The child is 99.999% the same as you, with 0.001% difference due to its own mutations. It also inherited YOUR mutations. So it is 99.999% the same as you and 99.998% the same as your parent. And so it continues down.
Your kid will have a kid, he will have a kid, he will have a kid, etc.

All of them will be 99.999% the same as their direct parent.
After a long time, still being 99.999% the same as its direct parent, it will be perhaps only 97% the same as YOU.

What is the result? Well... that every single newborn is always of the same species as its direct parents. And it gradually, very gradually, changes through the generations. At some point, you would look back thousands of generations ago and find out that BIG changes have taken place. At the core, that descendent far into the future will still have YOUR DNA, which was inherited through the ages. But it will have become a new species.

So all off spring of Homo Sapiens will forever belong to the group of Homo Sapiens. Homo Sapiens will not turn into canines. Canines are on another branch of this family tree. Homo Sapiens will no doubt speciate further into subspecies. But they are forever "stuck" in the Homo genus. That's their ancestry. That's the DNA they've inherited through the ages. And it ain't going anywhere.

You've surely heared that Humans evolved from primates. This is correct. What is also correct is that humans are STILL primates. That will never change. We are also still mammals. And tetrapods. And vertebrates.
We share an ancestor with all primates. We share an older ancestor with all mammals. We share an older ancestor with all tetrapods. Etc.



Too difficult to comprehend? Let's try an easy analogy. I love this: languages.

As you probably (or hopefully) know: Italian, French and Spanish are called "Roman languages". They are called that because they all derived from Latin.

At one point, the ancestors of Italian, French and Spanish speaking people all spoke Latin. Let's called Latin the ancestral species.

Now, how did we get from Latin to those 3 other languages?
Consider this: at no point in history did a latin speaking mother give birth to a spanish speaking child. Instead, each child was always brought up in the SAME language as its parents. But generation after generation, the latin changed. Some words were altered, accents were altered, dialects formed, fonetics changed. All in gradual manner. Again, at no point did a generation speak a different language then the previous generation.

Yet, here we are: French, Italian and Spanish. All different languages with the same roots. All three are still Roman languages. Just like humans are still primates.


Feel free to ask additional questions if you feel like you need to.
I'll be more then happy to do my best to answer them (or point you to what might be able to answer them) if you are sincere in your request.

Well true, even the french don't understand each other when they are in different parts of the country.
 
Upvote 0

lasthero

Newbie
Jul 30, 2013
11,421
5,795
✟244,477.00
Faith
Seeker
Yes, but their breathing mechanisms are way different than in land animals. Am I correct?

Actually, no. Not really. I'll have to look it up the picture I had comparing them, but the blowhole's design is't really all that different from the nose you find on other mammals.
 
Upvote 0

lasthero

Newbie
Jul 30, 2013
11,421
5,795
✟244,477.00
Faith
Seeker
He meant different nostrils on top of the head. Not just moved but structurally different as well.

Anya is a girl, pretty sure. And they're not that different from other nostrils, when you compare them with others.

At least you admit they are nostrils, though. The last time we talked about this, you wouldn't even do that much.
 
Upvote 0

anyathesword

Veteran
Dec 16, 2013
1,676
36
France
✟24,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Actually, no. Not really. I'll have to look it up the picture I had comparing them, but the blowhole's design is't really all that different from the nose you find on other mammals.

Yes, possibly, they are 'nostrils', but they are structurally different than mammals. How many changes would be needed to move it and change it's anatomy and function?
 
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟36,267.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Actually, no. Not really. I'll have to look it up the picture I had comparing them, but the blowhole's design is't really all that different from the nose you find on other mammals.

It is quite different.

There are air sacks. It is not attached to the trachea. There is a flap of skin at the top that can be opened and closed. They are positioned differently.
 
Upvote 0