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.
You and I both know that the evolution of a species is never ending.
Perhaps it's the correct answer.
It can start out by admitting it's myopic.In practical terms how can science possibly take into account something it cannot detect and measure?
So why hasn't the dolphin's tail evolved like the shark's?Of course. Evolution is simply the process by which gene pools vary over time. That never stops until life itself does.
So why hasn't the dolphin's tail evolved like the shark's?
Larger brain-to-body ratios owing to diet (compared to other apes), development of complex language and writing, development of cooking and agriculture, and the ability to specialize, and store and pass on knowledge.
Then you don't need one.Even if it a "correct answer", it doesn't serve as a useful explanation ...
Practicing Christians obey the Lord's commandments, and the Lord teaches them what they need to know to survive and be happy.Even if it a "correct answer", it doesn't serve as a useful explanation since it doesn't really answer anything.
"It is what it is" isn't particularly satisfying nor something to build a knowledge base on.
Just because the post was a long one doesn't mean it answered my question.I already answered this multiple times. See post #77 for example.
Then you don't need one.
Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.
Practicing Christians obey the Lord's commandments, and the Lord teaches them what they need to know to survive and be happy.
Just because the post was a long one doesn't mean it answered my question.
No- seriously - it's all about reproduction.Evolution has more to do than merely "successful reproduction." Evolution is about survival. If a creature ceases evolving simple because it "appears good enough for its particular niche," it will soon be extinct.
Practicing Christians obey the Lord's commandments, and the Lord teaches them what they need to know to survive and be happy.
Then you don't need one.
To claim that natural things are not designed because they are natural is a bit circular and begs the question.If you're talking about pattern recognition of objects (say, identifying cave paintings or rocks used as spear tips), then that's not quite applicable to biology in the fashion you appear to be suggesting. Identification of designed artifacts is based on understanding of processes related to the formation of different observed patterns and the contrast of human-manufactured objects versus naturally occurring formations.
With biology you don't really have that same comparison since biological forms themselves are natural (as they occur in nature) since we don't have an alternative known source of origin. And the patterns we do observe already fit an evolutionary explanation.
So you say, but you are not the person asking the question.Metaphysical reasons for origins appears beyond the scope of what is being asked here.
Aknowledging the Creator is always part of a complete explanation.On top of that, you don't actually have a metaphysical explanation for the question at hand. So who cares?
Are you talking about probability arguments? Because there is a gaping problem with probability arguments when it comes to biology and trying to identify design that way. Namely constructing a probability based on all possible variables (which are unknown) and identifying the probability space of all viable outcomes (also unknown). Generally such probability calculation attempts tend to be highly limited in scope and therefore not particularly meaningful.
Yes, wonderful job!My observations so far:
1. pitabread has carried the giant's share of the conversation. Honorable mention to USIncognito. great job!
That you re-purposed the shovel is an act of design.2. Design seems to be injected instead of deduced/inferred in the creationist responses. A feature is observed performing a function and it is assumed that the feature must have been designed to do that function. I can paddle a boat with a shovel, though the shovel is not designed for that purpose.
I am familiar with Darwins statement of falsifiability: If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.3. I wonder if we could all agree that any picture of a specific individual shark or dolphin that might be provided as an example for comparison was not created by a designer today. We all understand that any specific individual is the product of its parent(s) and is different from its parent(s)?
Philisophical, not semantic.4. Some expected semantic quarrels on the connotation of asking "why" questions.
That you re-purposed the shovel is an act of design.
I am familiar with Darwins statement of falsifiability: If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.
When I was 7 the just so stories of evolutionary trees and the like where unsatisfactory and remain umsatisfactory. I grew up to be a simple sailor, so why greater minds than mine consider such explanation as given by evolutionary biologists as satisfactory I have no idea, because they have no idea what so ever why anything happens.
That we commit ourselves to certain apriori philosophical ideas and so don't know what might have caused the design, does nothing to detract from the inference.Sure, but then my existence isn't debatable in a scientific sense. If you claim the shovel was designed to row the boat by a designer you can then proceed to point to me and I'll wave back and say, "Yep! I did that!" Not so much with the dolphin's tail designer.
Just finished reading an extensive exposition (Evolution Still a Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton) that reveals quite a large number of taxa defining traits that Darwin may have found if he had looked at modern biology.tsk, tsk. Let's finish that thought: "But I can find out no such case." And we still haven't found such a case 150 years on.
I would hope I can, I studied it for half a year and passed exams on the topic. Nevertheless in the fullest sense it is the Creator who makes it happen."Tide goes in, tide goes out. You can't explain that!" :-/
The gene pool just hubble bubbles away for a very long time and abracadabra useful novelties just pop into existence.Of course. Evolution is simply the process by which gene pools vary over time. That never stops until life itself does.
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?