What about the differences between chimps and humans?

[Humble_Disciple]

In the words of Martin Luther, "All the articles of our Christian faith, which God has revealed to us in His Word, are in presence of reason sheerly impossible, absurd, and false."

If humans were the product of special creation by God, that would, by definition, transcend the scope of science and require divine revelation to be known.

If you look at the evidence presented for natural selection acting on random mutation being responsible for the complexity and diversity of life through the lens of divine revelation, rather than naturalism and reductionism, that evidence will come up lacking.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you look at the evidence presented for natural selection acting on random mutation being responsible for the complexity and diversity of life through the lens of divine revelation, rather than naturalism and reductionism, that evidence will come up lacking.

That's why I love this picture:

 

[Frank Robert]

That's why I love this picture:

It only a problem for those who do not understand that it's an incentive to dig deeper.

 

[AV1611VET]

It only a problem for those who do not understand that it's an incentive to dig deeper.

Is that what the guy with the glasses is telling the guy pointing to the blackboard?

Pointer: I think you should be more explicit here in Step Two.
Glasses: It's only a problem for those who do not understand that it's an incentive to dig deeper.

 

[Hans Blaster]

In the words of Martin Luther, "All the articles of our Christian faith, which God has revealed to us in His Word, are in presence of reason sheerly impossible, absurd, and false."

If humans were the product of special creation by God, that would, by definition, transcend the scope of science and require divine revelation to be known.

If you look at the evidence presented for natural selection acting on random mutation being responsible for the complexity and diversity of life through the lens of divine revelation, rather than naturalism and reductionism, that evidence will come up lacking.

What I want to know now is:

Which one of you Creationist/ID posters is Ben Carson?

It's like every argument I heard from him are *exactly* the same "sophisticated" arguments I read on this site every week.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

If Dr. Ben Carson, an expert on the human brain if there ever was one, says that natural selection acting on random mutation is an inadequate explanation for the differences of intelligence and brain structure between chimps and humans, perhaps he should be heard.

Like myself, Dr. Carson does not insist that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. The age of the earth is peripheral to whether evolution or the Bible is true.

 

[SelfSim]

Scientists discover a new feature that distinguishes modern humans from Neanderthals

Skoltech scientists and their colleagues from Germany and the United States have analyzed the metabolomes of humans, chimpanzees, and macaques in muscle, kidney, and three different brain regions. The team discovered that the modern human genome undergoes mutation which makes the adenylosuccinate lyase enzyme less stable, leading to a decrease in purine synthesis. This mutation did not occur in Neanderthals, so the scientists believe that it affected metabolism in brain tissues and thereby strongly contributed to modern humans evolving into a separate species. The research was published in the journal eLife.

Chimpanzee/human brain divergence also happened way before the mutation:

The predecessors of modern humans split from their closest evolutionary relatives, Neanderthals and Denisovans, about 600,000 years ago, while the evolutionary divergence between our ancestors and those of modern chimpanzees dates as far back as 6.5 million years ago. Evolutionary biologists are after the particular genetic features that distinguish modern humans from their ancestors and may give a clue as to why humans are what they are.

 

[Astrid]

If Dr. Ben Carson, an expert on the human brain if there ever was one, says that natural selection acting on random mutation is an inadequate explanation for the differences of intelligence and brain structure between chimps and humans, perhaps he should be heard.

Like myself, Dr. Carson does not insist that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. The age of the earth is peripheral to whether evolution or the Bible is true.

Argument from authority, great.
Never mind all the authorities who say he is full of it.
But for authorities, we have Dr K Wisre a PhD and a full blown
yec. He knows more about earth agec / history than ten Dr Carsons.

So you better go yrc. He sure knows more than you.

Of course he admits the evidence doesn't go his way, but heck,
the bible does. He is honest enough to say so, flat out.

Coincidentally, the only people finding "flaws" in ToE are chridtisn
funds.

You an the ex doctor might want to just say bible is the sum of your
reason because you two and every other cresti9nist in the world
dont have one FACT to share among the lot of you.

(If I am wrong, tell me quick! )

Oh and btw...the age of the earth has a great deal of bearing
on whether Genesis is true by any sane rendering of what
" true" means.

 

[AV1611VET]

You an the ex doctor might want to just say bible is the sum of your reason ...

Okay.

1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own

Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted.

... because you two and every other creationist in the world don't have one FACT to share among the lot of you.

Fair enough.

FAITH* for the win then!

* Facts Acknowledged In The Heart

 

[Hans Blaster]

* Facts Acknowledged In The Heart

Careful, a blockage could kill you.

 

[Vap841]

That's why I love this picture:

Actually there are unknown things that occur all the time, we call this emergence. If you had exhaustive knowledge of physics, things would occur one level up at the level of chemistry that would completely baffle you, things that are unpredictable given exhaustive knowledge of physics. If you knew everything about the laws of physics & chemistry, things come along at the level of biology that are baffling and unpredictable given exhaustive knowledge of the laws of physics & chemistry; and so on. In a sense a miracle of confusion takes place at every higher level of mechanics. We highly overrate our knowledge of how reality works, we recognize the repeatable physical patterns at different levels more than we comprehend the driving force behind what makes reality do what it does at each level. Proteins just magically go to work and perform an enormous amount of tasks at the level of biology, but none of these “Laws of mechanics” could be predicted if you knew everything there was to know about physics & chemistry

 

[Gottservant]

A naïve theory of evolution.

"Naive" is different...?

I think you are missing the point: I am trying to work out what would most compliment your theory.

If you were asking me how you could improve on the gospels of Jesus, I would say "be more direct" or "give what you know already to bear more fruit" - I wouldn't rubbish you.

 

[driewerf]

Okay.

1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own

Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted.

... even when it is wrong. You will even continue to be wrong, when shown wrong. As you wrote yourself.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

"Naive" is different...?

I think you are missing the point: I am trying to work out what would most compliment your theory.

If you were asking me how you could improve on the gospels of Jesus, I would say "be more direct" or "give what you know already to bear more fruit" - I wouldn't rubbish you.

A demonstrable improvement from you would be "actually understand the ToE". Do you think you can do it?

 

[o_mlly]

I just want to know where you are coming from and not waste my time on word games.

? No game, I simply asked that you complete your sentence , “If evolution is true, then we predict that….” and provide evidence that the prediction has been validated.

The definition of species is a group of individuals that actually or potentially interbreed in nature but some biologists like Professor Dan Cardinale are cautious when using the word species because their are animals like dog and a wolf that are different species but they can interbreed which leads to kickback from creationists.

Macroevolution refers to evolution above the species level which necessitate a lot of new traits.

Unless "species" is unambiguously defined, one cannot use it as a referent upon which to define macroevoluiton.

Algae do not breed and are something between plants and animals as creatures. The lab experiment that demonstrated the creatures propensity to go multicellular in certain environments does not evidence a new species (still need a definition). The creature very well could have always had the potential to go multicellular when necessary. As “plants” the algae produce their own food and as “animals” they can eat other plants or even their own grazers.

 

[o_mlly]

Such a critique is entirely unbalanced. There has never been any Sci-Fi writer who has captivated the imagination of thousands of scientists and spurred 10s of thousands of scientific hypothesis for nearly two centuries.

I agree "imagination" is the correct word.

Here’s the reason science doggedly and thankfully pursues a coherent natural explanation for the observed diversity of life on earth. As scientists, we do not allow them to appeal to any other source of knowledge other than the order of nature. We keep them myopic on purpose.

Now, consider a thought experiment. I task engineers to explain the motion of planets but I tell them they may not use calculus. The ones who get the correct answer will be lauded and handsomely rewarded. Under these conditions, they will turn over every rock (pun intended) and propose countless incorrect hypotheses because they are both dogged but, unfortunately, ill equipped.

 

[Frank Robert]

"Naive" is different...?

naïve synonyms

I think you are missing the point: I am trying to work out what would most compliment your theory.

Your help is appreciated.

If you were asking me how you could improve on the gospels of Jesus, I would say "be more direct" or "give what you know already to bear more fruit" - I wouldn't rubbish you.

The scientific method is simple and direct, if creationists and IDist used it they would know that.

 

[AV1611VET]

The scientific method is simple and direct,

So are the rules of checkers; but you can't play chess with them.

 

[Frank Robert]

I agree "imagination" is the correct word.

Here’s the reason science doggedly and thankfully pursues a coherent natural explanation for the observed diversity of life on earth. As scientists, we do not allow them to appeal to any other source of knowledge other than the order of nature. We keep them myopic on purpose.

You are entitled to your opinion.

Now, consider a thought experiment. I task engineers to explain the motion of planets but I tell them they may not use calculus. The ones who get the correct answer will be lauded and handsomely rewarded. Under these conditions, they will turn over every rock (pun intended) and propose countless incorrect hypotheses because they are both dogged but, unfortunately, ill equipped.

That would be good advice for creationists and IDist who have yet to come up with a testable hypothesis.

There's a current discussion among scientists, theists and atheists at Peaceful Science on the topic. Does ID have Hypotheses? A few IDs are taking part in the discussion.

 

[Frank Robert]

So are the rules of checkers; but you can't play chess with them.

Chess is bad. I almost flunked out of college in my freshman year because of chess. Luckily, after I beat the school champion I quit playing and haven't played much since.