Oh, thought you'd never ask! Well, in addition to mutation, there's recombination, genetic drift, sexual selection, natural selection, and of course random world events.
Upvote
0
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.
Anytime you have something other than the supposition that only mutations produced all life from an alleged single life form of long long ago, let me know. . . . .
Then you would agree that what one imagines to be true would shape one's worldview.
Not as it applies to populations. Try again.
I doubt the sincerity of this statement, based on your response to this post where you were provided exactly that by a fellow Christian.
Not seeing what? the imaginary?
Where?
You said, "Apparently many here give you time concerning your constant 'critique' of the bible, which you've never read."
Asking afterwards if you got it right is a sign of confusion on your part.
You asked for that one.
Back-peddling noted.
That you believe that perpetual motion machines exist is also noted. Science much?
Oh, thought you'd never ask! Well, in addition to mutation, there's recombination, genetic drift, sexual selection, natural selection, and of course random world events.
The belief that one is the product of only the creative impetus of mutation would surely shape one's worldview.
Populations of life forms are still 'life'.As it applies to individual life forms which are grouped into populations.
No, it does not address your straw man argument.Not a single thing offered produced a new life form. And of course you're not going to offer anything either.
And to you, by all appearances.. It is not like you can show that this 'spiritual' exists, is it? You must not be able to see it either. You may claim to, but I don't believe you.Imaginary only to the blind.
Indeed they are."Apparently, I am antileprechauns, antipixies, anti-extraterrestrial aliens, antiBermuda Triangle, antigremlins, anti-elves, antignomes, and antifairies. The spirits are busy."
You are wrong. In post #72 you asked, "You're speaking of yourself, right?", to which I responded, "Nope".And still no answer. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I only follow your lead.You're true to form.
You said, "It has to do with the fact that there's no such thing as a perpetual motion machine." Feel free to rephrase it to allow for your god/spirits/angels/souls/Heaven/Hell/etc.Go back and read my statement. I stand by it in the context in which it was offered. Your attempt to change it failed.
Then we are agreed that what one imagines to be true would shape one's worldview.
No, they're a collection of life forms. Individual life forms are life.Populations of life forms are still 'life'.
The view that all life forms are produced only by mutation isn't a straw man argument, even though it's an erroneous one. You failed to offer any other impetus which created humanity from an alleged single life form of long long ago.No, it does not address your straw man argument.
And to you, by all appearances.. It is not like you can show that this 'spiritual' exists, is it? You must not be able to see it either. You may claim to, but I don't believe you.
Indeed.Indeed they are.
If you've read the bible you would have found your identification with the antichrist spirit. Miss that part? I'd be glad to point it out, seeing that you really haven't read the bible.You are wrong. In post #72 you asked, "You're speaking of yourself, right?", to which I responded, "Nope".
Do I have to remember all of this for both of us?
You're attempting to rephrase it to include God/spirits/angels/souls/heaven/hell. The original post was in response to none of those things.You said, "It has to do with the fact that there's no such thing as a perpetual motion machine." Feel free to rephrase it to allow for your god/spirits/angels/souls/Heaven/Hell/etc.
To justlookinla:
Claiming that there is no definitive basis for morality without God is probably true. But if you knew for certain that there was no God, would you go and murder your neighbor? I hope not.
Any moron can see that nature is survival of the fittest. That's the way it operates.
But in a way, with our rational thought, that part of us that separates us from the animals, we have evolved BEYOND the animal part of ourselves. The whole point of morality is to make the world better for ourselves and each other. We don't have to operate like animals anymore. We don't have to act like chimpanzees and commit genocide. When we have primal urges, we have to say to ourselves, "That's irrational. That is the primitive part of my brain urging me to violence or sexual misconduct. I am a human. I am beyond that."
Even if there were no God, I would not want to live in a world where people just randomly murder each other, or steal from each other all the time, etc. Nobody would want to live in that world! Which is why we do our best to do these things.
I mean did you never think that part of the reason religion exists is to give people a reason to act moral? I mean if people need the fear of hellfire to make them act moral...I think it's more respectable to act moral because you want the world to be a better place.
Just because there is no absolute basis for morals doesn't mean it's okay to go out and be an [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].
Or, in my case, lack of faith.Then we are agreed that one's faith shapes one's worldview?
A distinction without a difference.No, they're a collection of life forms. Individual life forms are life.
That would be your straw-man argument. I cannot offer support to what science does not say.The view that all life forms are produced only by mutation isn't a straw man argument, even though it's an erroneous one. You failed to offer any other impetus which created humanity from an alleged single life form of long long ago.
By all indicators, you are in the same boat, even if you have convinced yourself otherwise.That's because you haven't experienced it. Your making decisions, and establishing beliefs, from a position of spiritual ignorance.
I missed it because I do not identify with it. You are the one that thinks it sounds scary. You may as well worn me that I am also going to get a lump of coal in my stocking come Christmas. It is all so unbelievable.Indeed.
If you've read the bible you would have found your identification with the antichrist spirit. Miss that part? I'd be glad to point it out, seeing that you really haven't read the bible.
You said, "It has to do with the fact that there's no such thing as a perpetual motion machine." Then you tell me that your god/spirits/angels/souls/Heaven/Hell/etc. function like perpetual motion machines, able to work free of entropy - you created your own conundrum. Why should I accept the existence of [equivalents to] perpetual motion machines, on your say so?You're attempting to rephrase it to include God/spirits/angels/souls/heaven/hell. The original post was in response to none of those things.
Or, in my case, lack of faith.
A distinction without a difference.
That would be your straw-man argument. I cannot offer support to what science does not say.
By all indicators, you are in the same boat, even if you have convinced yourself otherwise.
I missed it because I do not identify with it. You are the one that thinks it sounds scary. You may as well worn me that I am also going to get a lump of coal in my stocking come Christmas. It is all so unbelievable.
You said,
"It has to do with the fact that there's no such thing as a perpetual motion machine." Then you tell me that your god/spirits/angels/souls/Heaven/Hell/etc. function like perpetual motion machines, able to work free of entropy - you created your own conundrum. Why should I accept the existence of [equivalents to] perpetual motion machines, on your say so?
I wasn't calling YOU personally a moron. I was saying that everyone agrees that nature does operate that way because it is manifestly obvious. Do you not agree that nature involves animals eating each other and competing over scare resources?
And I'm agreeing with you that without God there probably is no absolute basis for morality. That's why we need to make our own. That's why we HAVE made our own.
Your rejection of Christianity doesn't elminate faith from your life. You have faith that you're the product of only random/chance, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless naturalistic mechanisms acting on an alleged single life form from long long ago, don't you?
In the context of the 'survival of the fittest', the subject is the population.Of course there's a difference. A population isn't a life form.
No mention of "atheistic Darwinist creationism" on that link.From UC-Berkley....
"A mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organism's DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology. So a change in an organism's DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life."Now, if you have an impetus which changes a life form other than random/chance mutation, why not offer it? We both know the answer.....there no other creator in atheistic Darwinist creationism.
DNA and Mutations
Just not in any way that you can demonstrate, correct? We are in the same boat.Oh, I'm not the one who's being controlled by the antichrist spirit, denying Jesus Christ and the existence of God as creator. We're far from being in the same boat.
Your opinion does not make it true.Simply because you don't identify with it doesn't mean it isn't true.
Too late. Once you acknowledged that your god/spirits/angels/souls/Heaven/Hell/etc. work free of entropy, you branded into the same class as perpetual motions machines, of which you said, as a fact, do not exist.Again, you're attempting to change the context of my comment to include the spiritual realm. It's not going to work.
No, don't care. Would it affect the price of milk at the market? No.
In the context of the 'survival of the fittest', the subject is the population.
No mention of "atheistic Darwinist creationism" on that link.
Just not in any way that you can demonstrate, correct? We are in the same boat.
Your opinion does not make it true.
Too late. Once you acknowledged that your god/spirits/angels/souls/Heaven/Hell/etc. work free of entropy, you branded into the same class as perpetual motions machines, of which you said, as a fact, do not exist.
Tell me why I should not dismiss them as impossible.
The price of milk?It affects one's worldview.
Not really. Populations go extinct, not individuals.In the survival of the fittest, the subject is the actual life forms that survive or die.
Too much straw there.Mention of the only creative impetus of atheistic Darwinist creationism. Mutation.
Do you think I am happy that we are in the same boat?Sure. Simply find the passages and apply yourself to them. You're quickly identified.
If scripture were reality, and not religion.Your identification in scripture makes it true.
You described your god/spirits/angels/souls/heaven/hell as working free of entropy. How is that not impossible? Can you offer anything more than religious handwaving?God/spirits/angels/souls/heaven/hell are in the spiritual realm. My response, in context for anyone who wishes to look, was concerning the earthly realm. Your attempt to change my answer has failed.
Dismiss what as impossible?
Sure.
Actually, it's something within us, not DNA, which gives us our morality.
Mention of the only creative impetus of atheistic Darwinist creationism. Mutation. . . . .
A close reading of Gen 1 indicates that the original design criteria for both beast and man included vegetarianism. I myself spent several months eating a near-vegetarian diet and experienced a measureable improvement in my health. I'm thinking of returning to it again....Animals competing in evolutionary arms races to kill each other is a cruel process. Why would God endorse such a system, dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest?
That applies only to carnivores though...
Eating is one of the pleasures of life....But anyway, why would God make it so that humans die without food? Surely he knew that, in the future, people would die because they didn't have enough money to get food. A lot of people, I mean.
If the human body is so "perfect" as creationists claim, why can't it just generate its own energy? lol.
There are just so many simple things like this that are missed in the debate between creationism and atheism.
The price of milk?
Not really. Populations go extinct, not individuals.
Too much straw there.
Do you think I am happy that we are in the same boat?
If scripture were reality, and not religion.
You described your god/spirits/angels/souls/heaven/hell as working free of entropy. How is that not impossible? Can you offer anything more than religious handwaving?
Do you think if God didn't exist people wouldn't come up with rules like don't kill, don't steal? I really think they would. I mean Chinese people living 2000 years ago never heard of Jesus Christ, they had law and order.
Without natural selection, mutation is merely noise. It takes mutation and natural selection working together.
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?