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.
tell this to prof dawkins who use this analogy too. so i guess that according to you dawkins doesnt understand biology either
A post full of inane ignorance that needs to be recorded.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: A "uphill genetic process" ignorant statement when evolution has no direction.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: A bit of ignorance about the definition of species.
It is not the loss of ability to breed. For example, zebra and horses can breed: Zebroid
Generally a species is a population that does not breed with surrounding populations or produces infertile descendants when they do. The population is "reproductively isolated".
Study of Darwin’s finches reveals that new species can develop in as little as two generations is a new species of finches that have formed as a population of distinctive finches on an island full of other finches.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: An ignorant "Natural selection reduces alleles and gene forms" statement .
Natural selection does not eliminate alleles or "gene forms" from populations. As an example you have been naturally selected to depend on a diet containing vitamin C but you still have the broken genes for producing vitamin C. Neutral gene mutations such as a deactivated gene are not selected for or against.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: An ignorant "Genetic drift doesn’t build genes" statement
No one expects genetic drift to build genes from scratch, it is a drift within existing gene mutations.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: Parrots a Behe lie that the AIDS virus, malaria parasite, Lenski’s E. coli, etc. invalidate evolution.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: Real ignorance that that dog breeding is evolution.
When we breed dogs for specific purposes there are problems caused by that breeding. When dogs live in environments such as kennels, they will catch more diseases.
19 July 2018 WisdomSpy: An ignorant "Where did the wolf’s genes come from initially" question.
Ultimately all animals have genes that came from the last universal common ancestor.
Initially: Evolution of the wolf
20 July 2018 WisdomSpy: Jericho is archeological evidence against the Biblical account of Josiah.Interesting that you mentioned Jericho since it is one of my favorite examples of history and archaeology proving the Bible true.
The prevailing scholarly view is that Joshua is not a factual account of historical events.[20][21]:4 The apparent setting of Joshua is the 13th century BCE;[21] this was a time of widespread city-destruction, but with a few exceptions (Hazor, Lachish) the destroyed cities are not the ones the Bible associates with Joshua, and the ones it does associate with him show little or no sign of even being occupied at the time.[22]:71-72
All that and still not even the hint of a theory. You appear to have nothing to say but "evolution can't work so it must have been designed," grotesquely misrepresenting evolution as you go. For instance, you denounce evolution as a "random undirected purposeless natural process." How do you know it is purposeless?
20 July 2018 WisdomSpy: Jericho is archeological evidence against the Biblical account of Josiah.
Josiah reigned 640–609 BCE. There is no evidence of city walls in Jericho ruined during his reign. There is evidence that the city and its walls were destroyed by earthquakes or during an Egyptian campaign 900 years later, c.1500 BCE.
All that Jericho proves is that the writers of the Bible knew of the existence of Jericho which had been in their local area since about 9500 BC!
The ignorance that made your points irrelevant was quite clear. Adding to them just makes things clearer.I realize that it is easy to miss the points that I was trying to make.
You are right so I amendedYou appear to be saying that 1500 BC is "later" than 640-609 BC.
Kenyon's work was corroborated in 1995 by radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction level to the late 17th or 16th centuries.[6]
That's not a theory. It just says who, not how. The theory of evolution says how and leaves the who up to personal belief. You say who but all you say about how is that the theory of evolution is wrong, but offer no how of your own.Not a hint of a theory? Sorry you missed it. Let me be frank: if Venter can do it, so can an individual with greater intelligence and experience than he. As to which individual(s) this was, I believe that we must appeal to history and archeology, as I said before. And perhaps even more importantly, we can appeal to the history of someone who was crucified, demonstrably dead beyond all hope, guarded by Roman soldiers who were under the threat of death, should they fail their mission… and yet a mere 3 days later, the tomb was demonstrably empty and the resurrected man was witnessed to walk and talk and then to “ascend into the heavens”. Now, read John 1:1 and you might realize more fully what my “theory” is.
What would I care about what Dawkins has to say about it? He's an atheist and has no basis for an opinion about the purpose of our existence.As far as evolution not having purpose, I don't suppose it would do you or me any good for me to quote from Dawkins or other such persons. I'm sure that some people might posit that evolution has the purpose of allowing the survival of the fittest. But such a posit is nothing more than an anthropomorphic post-hoc attempt to put lipstick on a pig, so to speak. No offense intended.
So it is future humans with time machines that are doing the designLet me be frank: if Venter can do it, so can an individual with greater intelligence and experience than he.
how it make any difference? if a designer cant make an ic system in small steps how a natural process can?17 July 2018 xianghua: A lie that natural selection is a process where steps are chosen
Natural selection is environments (perhaps changing through natural processes) and populations being selected to fit the environments by natural processes.
Car modification are designed by human beings for the purposes of human beings. That is one of the things that makes an example of the human design of cars so inane.
16 July 2018 xianghua: A dumb question about an elephant sand sculpture.
16 July 2018 xianghua: Ignorance about cars and/or evolution - we do not add parts to cars at random, evolution s not only mutations.
so what about this?:I have confidence that Dawkins understands biology well enough to know the limitations of making analogies with non-living things. With you, not so much...
Assuming there is an "IC system" as you define it.how it make any difference? if a designer cant make an ic system in small steps how a natural process can?
-_- the shape of it alone? No. The fact that it has welding marks and an established history as a man made object is how we know it is artificial. The primary evidence that it is created is the marks of welding, blueprints, etc. In case you didn't know, we can even tell if something is man made if it is made to look natural because of stuff like that.so the statue of liberty by itself isnt a good evidence of design?
I have confidence that Dawkins understands biology well enough to know the limitations of making analogies with non-living things. With you, not so much...
Citation please?I find it curious when disciples of Darwin forget that he had misgivings regarding the newly-suggested term "natural selection", since it was ascribing to "nature" the intelligence which human-directed breeding of animals is based upon. He apparently recognized that the term represents an analogy.
"Origin of Species by Natural Selection"? Sure it did! It's right there, in the Name!The other thing that Darwin's disciples forget is that he revealed nothing factual about origins in his beloved book which touts that term.
Then you suspect hilariously off the mark, because these things have only served to cement the Theory of Evolution as probably the most well supported Theory in all of Science.Also, Darwin knew nothing about genes and epigenetics. He knew nothing of the extreme complexity of cells and genetic processes. I suspect that if he had lived long enough to learn these things, he would have recanted his theory regarding origins.
"Origin of Species", that's what his original proposition was - he made no bones of the fact that it didn't answer the Origin of Life questions, his theory only pertained to the change in organisms and divergence of species once life was already underway.This does not mean that things do not change over time. What it means is that the processes that contribute to genetic change over time have not been demonstrated to cause origins--origins of life, origins of genes, origins of eukaryotes, origins of major "kinds" of plants, animals and fungi, etc.
I find it curious when disciples of Darwin forget that he had misgivings regarding the newly-suggested term "natural selection",
since it was ascribing to "nature" the intelligence which human-directed breeding of animals is based upon.
He apparently recognized that the term represents an analogy.
The other thing that Darwin's disciples forget is that he revealed nothing factual about origins in his beloved book which touts that term.
Also, Darwin knew nothing about genes and epigenetics. He knew nothing of the extreme complexity of cells and genetic processes. I suspect that if he had lived long enough to learn these things, he would have recanted his theory regarding origins.
So it is future humans with time machines that are doing the design?
Or more seriously, advanced aliens that lie to us by only producing results that evolution would produce?
Or since you mention Bible verses, you have a God that lies to us by only producing results that evolution would produce? There are excuses for the lies but they are still lies (test of faith, an overall lie of concealing His existence, maybe others). I emphasize the you because there are Christians who accept the world as it is along with God by interpreting the Bible as a flawed document written by human beings inspired by but not necessarily informed by God.
"Origin of Species by Natural Selection"? Sure it did! It's right there, in the Name!
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?