Why do you believe in the evolution theory?

[AV1611VET]

It surprises me when I see two religionists agree on aspects of their religion.

You mean like: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD ... ?

 

[TLK Valentine]

You mean like: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD ... ?

Funny how everything beyond those first four words is up for debate among you guys.

 

[AV1611VET]

Funny how everything beyond those first four words is up for debate among you guys.

Would it matter?

Would Davian still be surprised?

Don't scientists have knock-down-drag-outs called "peer review"?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I was only querying as to qualify what you meant by "open-minded".

I answered your question in my reply: '....I've begun studying Evolution and have a more open minded approach to what that is all about' If you remember, I unpacked a considerable amount to this forum about my personal journey up to that point. Hence the reason why I said if you want to talk about it in detail, rather than bog this thread down, contact me through the private mail function.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Would it matter?

Would Davian still be surprised?

Don't scientists have knock-down-drag-outs called "peer review"?

Can't science take a hike?

 

[Davian]

You mean like: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD ... ?

Yet there are Christian panetheists, and Christian atheists.

"Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the God of Christianity is rejected or absent but the moral teachings of Jesus are followed."

Christian atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The apostle Paul quotes a pantheist poem about Zeus in Acts 17:28, turning it into a panentheist statement about their "unknown God" when he quotes, "'In him we live and move and have our being' as some of your poets have said."

Panentheism is also a feature of some later Christian thought, particularly in mystical Orthodox Christianity, Catholic philosophy, and process theology. In order to avoid confusion with pantheism some panentheists now use the doublet "unitheism.""

Panentheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Davian]

Would it matter?

Would Davian still be surprised?

Don't scientists have knock-down-drag-outs called "peer review"?

Sure, as a methodology for reaching consensus.

How have religionists reached consensus, historically?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Yet there are Christian panetheists, and Christian atheists.

"Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the God of Christianity is rejected or absent but the moral teachings of Jesus are followed."

Christian atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The apostle Paul quotes a pantheist poem about Zeus in Acts 17:28, turning it into a panentheist statement about their "unknown God" when he quotes, "'In him we live and move and have our being' as some of your poets have said."

Panentheism is also a feature of some later Christian thought, particularly in mystical Orthodox Christianity, Catholic philosophy, and process theology. In order to avoid confusion with pantheism some panentheists now use the doublet "unitheism.""

Panentheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you one of those, Christian Atheist Panentheists?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

=

How have religionists reached consensus, historically?

=

by being led by the flesh.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then odds can take a hike.

You have just destroyed the premise of your anti-abiogenesis thread and many others, since apparently probability no longer matters to you in any regard

 

[Davian]

Are you one of those, Christian Atheist Panentheists?

lol, no.

 

[Davian]

...

How have religionists reached consensus, historically?

by being led by the flesh.

My impression was, historically, we went with those that had the most powerful armies.

 

[sfs]

ept such things without reservations.
i'll be honest.
this is out of my league, but i do have questions.
have you done your analysis between humans and, say, bananas?

That analysis can't be done between humans and bananas, since too little of their genomes align.

i believe you will find the same correlation

To the extent the analysis could be done, you're wrong.

i also believe that you will find this relationship between any 2 arbitrarily chosen species.

You'll find a similar relationship between any two closely related species -- because the differences between them are the result of mutation.

IOW, what you are measuring is complexity in regards to time.

What time? What complexity? What are you talking about?

how does your model explain species that do not undergo "evolution".

All known species undergo evolution. Some of them don't change much to outward appearance. Why would that need any explanation? They're well adapted to their environment.

how does your model explain HOX genes?

What about Hox genes requires explanation?

adaptation and transposons would explain your results, neither of which requires the "man from ape" scenario.

As far as I can tell, adaptation and transposons have precisely nothing to do with this situation. If you have some reason to think otherwise, present your reasoning.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes, all of them are hoaxes.... cool story bro.

Paul, the Baptist. check out:

God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity

The Black Plague killed millions of heterosexuals, many of them who were virgins when they married and stayed true to their spouse. Obviously, God felt it necessary to punish these people as well. Go figure.

It seems that God punishes every group at one point or another, so you might as well join the group you feel best in.

 

[Loudmouth]

The universe is not a static world. This is the downfall of the TOE.

A theory where life changes through time is falsified by a theory that says the universe is not static?

Are you for real?

The speed of light is slowing down.

Creationists are lying more.

If you repeated those same exact experiments with the same exact instruments YOU WOULD GET THE SAME RESULTS THAT THEY DID IN THE PAST. Why can't creationists understand this simple, simple concept?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

That analysis can't be done between humans and bananas, since too little of their genomes align.
. . . . .

Don't be so quick to discount the possibility of analyzing similarity between humans and bananas!

Gene Cuisine: Human DNA similarities to chimps and bananas, what does it mean?

 

[sfs]

Don't be so quick to discount the possibility of analyzing similarity between humans and bananas!

Gene Cuisine: Human DNA similarities to chimps and bananas, what does it mean?

I didn't discount the possibility of doing a genetic comparison of humans and bananas; I said the particular analysis in question was impossible.

 

[whois]

sfs,
how do you explain the following:

After ∼644 generations of mutation accumulation, MA lines had accumulated an average of 118 mutations, and we found that average fitness across all lines decayed linearly over time. Detailed analyses of the dynamics of fitness change in individual lines revealed that a large fraction of the total decay in fitness (42.3%) was attributable to the fixation of rare, highly deleterious mutations (comprising only 0.5% of fixed mutations).

Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment

 

[PsychoSarah]

sfs,
how do you explain the following:

Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment

I know this is aimed at a specific person, but I still feel the need to answer. Life is trial and error, most of the time, it fails. Think of all the sperm which never go to become half of the genetic code of a person. It doesn't matter, because enough remain who are capable of surviving and reproducing to offset the huge degree of failure.

 

[whois]

I know this is aimed at a specific person, but I still feel the need to answer. Life is trial and error, most of the time, it fails. Think of all the sperm which never go to become half of the genetic code of a person. It doesn't matter, because enough remain who are capable of surviving and reproducing to offset the huge degree of failure.

yes, it was aimed at a specific person.
more importantly it calls into question his assumptions about accumulating changes and his test that "proves" it.