the self replicating watch argument

[SavedByGrace3]

ok. but what is the evidence that creatures indeed changed to another creatures? by the way: as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some of your words here and there in general.

A couple general concepts I hold for discussion.
One is that if it seems someone needs a certain truth or collection of truths to maintian their faith, I should not rob them of that faith by stealing those truths from them. If you need to deny evolution in order to maintian your faith... then so be it. No harm done.
Another is that the scripure states that faith is the evidence of things not seen. In other words faith is the evidence of invisible things such as God, angels, demons, etc. Faitih is also the evidence of things that we could not witness due to our not being there. Such as God creating the universe, heaven, and the earth. None of us were there to see that. None of us were present to see the death burial and resurrection of Jesus. Yet we hold these things to be true. Faith within is the only real evidence we have that these things are tue.
Lastly, at least for this discussion, is what faith is not. Faith is not the denial of things that are. So if we see evidence in the world around us of an old earth, of creatures roaming the earth millions of years ago, and even evidence that living things can and do change over time... then it is not "faith" to deny these self evident facts. God does not ask us to deny reality. To the contray, He tells us that those invisible things we believe are confirmed by the things that are visible (Romans 1). I am not afraid of things that are. I am not afraid of science: as long as science sticks with the facts that is. I am not at all threatened by facts. The truth will come out in the end, and I am sure it will all make perfect sense. We will all sit back and say "Ah... so that is how it worked! God is the best!"

 

[Speedwell]

ok. but what is the evidence that creatures indeed changed to another creatures? by the way: as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some of your words here and there in general.

We have previously posted examples of observed speciation, which you ignored. I doubt it would do any good to post it again.

 

[xianghua]

Sure, but my conclusion for one object is not dependent nor based on the other object.

so your claim that if they are different then we cant conclude design isnt realy true.

 

[pitabread]

so your claim that if they are different then we cant conclude design isnt realy true.

Maybe this is the language barrier issue, but I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here...

 

[xianghua]

Scientists also call ID and creationism pseudoscience.

depend what scientists.

 

[pitabread]

depend what scientists.

Vast majority of scientists reject ID and creationism. In fact, many scientific organizations specifically have statements validating the continued teaching of evolution as an essential part of biology.

I mean, if we're going to start making ad populum arguments, then ID and creationism lose. It's not even a contest.

 

[xianghua]

-_- it's not explicitly stated to be an analogy when neurons are compared to toilets, either. Dude, my major is in biology, I know that any resemblance flagella have with motors is purely superficial. The parts of a flagella actually change shape to cause it to move, and they change shape as a result of molecules becoming bound and unbound to them repeatedly. This is not how a car engine works at all.

Also, you fail to consider that one of the definitions of a "motor" is "giving, imparting, or producing motion or action." And what do you know, despite being vastly different, a car motor and a flagellum do both of these things. It can also reference the moving parts. I think we both agree that flagella have moving parts, and that they produce motion in bacteria. Nothing about that definition says that they have to work like the motors of cars, though, and what do you know, they don't.

But, hey, I guess neurons are toilets to you.

so why a flagellum cant be consider as a motor then? give me your main objection.

 

[Speedwell]

so why a flagellum cant be consider as a motor then? give me your main objection.

You can consider it to be "motor" if you like, but because it is not man made we can't tell if it was designed or not.

 

[doubtingmerle]

so your claim that if they are different then we cant conclude design isnt realy true.

Ah, so you are going to make up things that have nothing to do with what people say? Fine, two can play that game. So your claim is that the moon is made of ketchup?

 

[doubtingmerle]

so why a flagellum cant be consider as a motor then? give me your main objection.

You are just being silly. You have already agreed that living things can do things that mechanical machines cannot do. Hence, the inability for a machine to evolve does not prove living things cannot evolve.

 

[dad]

No. DNA is used to determine ancestry (and common ancestry) all the time.

No, never ever for ancestors who lived in Noah's day, or Adam's day etc. I suspect the flood, for example may have been somewhere near the KT layer. Name some DNA you have from there?

 

[dad]

Why wouldn't current DNA tell us about ancestry?

Because DNA works according to the laws of nature. How atoms and molecules and etc work all depend on the laws of nature. Right now, we have certain laws that make it work how it does. We do not know the laws in place in the early days of creation.

DNA from living things regularly shows to be organized in nested hierarchies.

Taking modern DNA from this present nature, and arranging it in any particular order has zero to do with the origin debate.

Nothing else in nature does this.

Who cares what current nature does?
All nature really is, is the way God set things up at any given time to work. His living creations are in a nested pattern. Why would anything else man makes be that way, since man is so small and dumb compared to the Almighty??

The best explanation for this is common ancestry. How do you explain it?

False. The very best explanation is creation with subsequent evolving/adapting.

Some of us tire of having the pagan religion of evolution try to take all the credit for creation.

 

[theQuincunx5]

Some of us tire of having the pagan religion of evolution try to take all the credit for creation.

I've got a question from the Biblical concept of Creation. Perhaps you can answer it.

Since we know that not all forms of life showed up at the same time on the earth (for instance we don't find rabbit fossils where we find trilobites and that sort of thing). So how does THAT square with the concept of God creating all life at one point in the beginning?

It looks more like there are millions of "creation" events throughout history.

How does that work?

 

[SavedByGrace3]

We all have giant DNA in our bodies. Noah was pure... his wife and sons likely had giant dna. The wives of the sons did have giant dna. I suspect it is the root cause of many of the malidies we see today... including cancer and other mutations.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I've got a question from the Biblical concept of Creation. Perhaps you can answer it.

Since we know that not all forms of life showed up at the same time on the earth (for instance we don't find rabbit fossils where we find trilobites and that sort of thing). So how does THAT square with the concept of God creating all life at one point in the beginning?

It looks more like there are millions of "creation" events throughout history.

How does that work?

As stated in Genesis 1, God empowered the water and soil, and commanded them to bring forth life.
The earth is a life machine...


11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.grass: Heb. tender grass
12And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


20And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.moving: or, creepinglife: Heb. soulfowl…: Heb. let fowl flyopen…: Heb. face of the firmament of heaven
21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


24And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

The earth is God's life factory! Empowered by His Word!

 

[dad]

I've got a question from the Biblical concept of Creation. Perhaps you can answer it.

Since we know that not all forms of life showed up at the same time on the earth (for instance we don't find rabbit fossils where we find trilobites and that sort of thing). So how does THAT square with the concept of God creating all life at one point in the beginning?

Easy. All kinds DID show up. They just never showed up as fossils. Not all types of creatures apparently could fossilize in that different natured past.

It looks more like there are millions of "creation" events throughout history.

Just one, with some changes along the way actually.

Now, got any tough questions?

 

[dad]

We all have giant DNA in our bodies. Noah was pure... his wife and sons likely had giant dna. The wives of the sons did have giant dna. I suspect it is the root cause of many of the malidies we see today... including cancer and other mutations.

Ha? Just because there were some sort of giants in a certain land in a certain time before the flood...does not mean all men were giants.

 

[dad]

As stated in Genesis 1, God empowered the water and soil, and commanded them to bring forth life.
The earth is a life machine...


11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.grass: Heb. tender grass

It is good to remember that the verses also point out in each and every instance that this was on a certain day, that had a morning and evening. So God gave life, and used the earth in the process on the days of creation. Not to be confused with evolution.

 

[DogmaHunter]

No, never ever for ancestors who lived in Noah's day, or Adam's day etc. I suspect the flood, for example may have been somewhere near the KT layer. Name some DNA you have from there?

I was refering to extant DNA.
That flood you mentioned.... never happened. As shown by genetic evidence alone (no universal bottlenecks)

 

[doubtingmerle]

Now, got any tough questions?

Sure. Why is Cambrian life different from Devonian life which is different from Silurian life? Were there hundreds of different natures, with each nature selecting only its own fossils?

If humans walked with dinosaurs, why did nature select dino footprints but not human footprints in the Jurassic?

Why are there no axeheads in the Cambrian?

Why do mammal like reptile fossil show the jaw and earbones transitioning to be more like mammals as one progresses up the fossil record?