• 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.

What does having 96% chimp dna mean to you?

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
From the bottom up. Not magic. Its planned.
That's how evolution proceeds as well--from the bottom up. Each incremental change is built on the previous ones.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
From the bottom up. Not magic. Its planned.

Did you not notice the voussoirs (the wedge stones that form the arch)?

Nope, it's an impossible structure to build step-wise without gravity pulling it to the ground first. Unless you believe in magic.

 
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
555
44
tel aviv
✟119,055.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
Nope. If you take out a single stone, the arch will collapse,

are you saying that this arch was made stepwise by a natural process? of course that some intelligent was involve in its build. so how you compare it with a natural process? do you think its also possible to change stepwise a car into an airplane?
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
are you saying that this arch was made stepwise by a natural process?

No, I'm saying that it's impossible to build step-wise and therefore was clearly created by magic. Possibly by a wizard.
 
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
555
44
tel aviv
✟119,055.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
No, I'm saying that it's impossible to build step-wise and therefore was clearly created by magic. Possibly by a wizard.
not magic but intelligence. so you actually prove the point of ic rather then falsify it.
 
Reactions: dmmesdale
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
No, I'm saying that it's impossible to build step-wise and therefore was clearly created by magic. Possibly by a wizard.

No mystery here. The 'part' needed for temporary support is removed after the keystone is in place. Even it must be placed in the proper sequence. Leaving it in place (as evidence) would be as silly as leaving the heart/lung machine attached to me after my heart was started following bypass surgery.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: dmmesdale
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
555
44
tel aviv
✟119,055.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
Here is demonstrated experiment how bacteria learned in steps to eat citrate. It evolved.

Bacteria learn new trick
actually the bacteria already has all the genes required to this ability:

"Ancient E. coli bacteria used to be able to eat citrate, observes biologist Zachary Blount, who works with Lenski at Michigan State. At some point about 1.3 million years ago, the microbes lost that ability, he told Science News."

so they just lost it and gain it again. or something very similar too.
 
Upvote 0

dmmesdale

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mar 6, 2017
755
189
Fargo
✟74,412.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Here is demonstrated experiment how bacteria learned in steps to eat citrate. It evolved.

Bacteria learn new trick
In a state of the art intelligently designed lab. Elephant in the room. None of it demonstrates any start of sexual reproduction. It is asexual. It is all bacteria. It is micro not in dispute even by 6 day Creationists.
 
Upvote 0

Dawnhammer

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
545
436
50
Denmark
✟38,474.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is micro not in dispute even by 6 day Creationists.

Microevolution....so you acknowledge that humans who colonized a planet with say 1.3 times earth’s gravity would micro evolve to develop say shorter stature, denser bones and that kind of things during future generations of offsprings ?
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
No mystery here. The 'part' needed for temporary support is removed after the keystone is in place.

Ah yes, scaffolding. Interesting concept. I'm curious as to why IDists never consider that as an option when attempting to claim that step-wise evolution is impossible...
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
In a state of the art intelligently designed lab.

This is where I find that creationists give themselves multiple outs when attempting to rebut evolution.

If something hasn't been demonstrated, they claim it is impossible. If it is demonstrable (which typically would be in a laboratory setting), then they claim it's "intelligent design" by way to researchers conducting an experiment.

I figure the latter is going to be the ultimate "out" when it comes to abiogenesis research especially.

This way creationists never have to acknowledge anything that would otherwise run contrary to their position.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Ah yes, scaffolding. Interesting concept. I'm curious as to why IDists never consider that as an option when attempting to claim that step-wise evolution is impossible...

The scaffolding has been observed, unlike the missing parts needed for step-by-step evolution. What is interesting to me is why science isn't able to see the diminishing odds of evolution as more complexity is discovered. At some point they have to throw up their hands and say....Nowwaddaminut!
 
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
The scaffolding has been observed, unlike the missing parts needed for step-by-step evolution.

But this is missing the point: the idea that parts may have previously existed facilitating the evolution of structures which now appear 'irreducibly complex' doesn't seem to enter the minds of creationists making this argument. Heck, of the three people arguing about the Roman arch, you were the only one to specifically mention scaffolding.

In the case of evolution, it also wouldn't necessarily be scaffolding existing to specifically facilitate a particular structure being created, but rather a result of functional shifts that have occurred through evolutionary history.

There's a more detailed discussion here which covers this topic: The Evolution of Biological Complexity

What is interesting to me is why science isn't able to see the diminishing odds of evolution as more complexity is discovered.

This is again where I point to genetic algorithms as a fascinating example of the emergence of complexity from (relatively) simply, recursive processes. Simply looking at the end product and then being dumbfounded as to how such a thing could possibly come to exist, ignores the process by which such things can emerge via evolutionary processes.

My favorite example is when some researchers were trying to evolve an oscillator and then inadvertently evolved a radio by accident: Radio emerges from the electronic soup

It's a great example of the unintended consequences of the blind search of an evolutionary process.

At some point they have to throw up their hands and say....Nowwaddaminut!

Throwing up ones hands doesn't lead to answers.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,348
9,107
65
✟433,507.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Why do you suppose that evolution excludes divine Telos? Evolutionary biologists don't make that claim.

No, it is only incompatible with fundamentalist Evangelical Protestant theism.
It's actually inconsistent with the bible.
 
Reactions: OldWiseGuy
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,348
9,107
65
✟433,507.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Actually creation belief is not Protestant minority. It actually comes from the 1st century believers and the apostles. The belief in evolution from a common ancestor is the "new" belief.

You keep saying the same mantra. But that doesn't make it true. The apostles believed in creation as taught in Genesis as did many of the church fathers as I have point d out before. It's time you put that old argument and disdain aside. It's NOT a new belief.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,977
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
As interpreted by fundamentalist Evangelical Protestant theists.

What is ironic is that both sides have 'condescended' in order to engage in this debate.

The higher position of religion is that, Man cannot live by bread alone, but by every word...... of God.

The higher position of science is that, Man can survive nicely without the superstitious ignorance of religion.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
[Staff edit]. The Apostles did not believe that the scriptures were the literal, inerrant, perspicuous and self-interpreting product of plenary verbal inspiration. Most Christians still don't, whether they believe in common ancestry or not, even those who accept the Genesis stories as historical.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reactions: pitabread
Upvote 0