Why Evolution is True (2)

[dad]

Now when will this happen in light of what you are saying that the evolution theory is true? Hyper-evolution of our salvation in progress? See how that works?

God was referring, I think to salvation, and how He makes us new inside. He changes our heart.

If you doubt God's words as they were written in Genesis in that He created all things good when He has made them in that day when there was morning & evening that day and not in the process of becoming good, then evolution has no part in creation.

Nonsense. A man did not have to be good to be able to evolve a different skin color, nor did an animal need to be good to be able to adapt to whatever was needed.

If death was in the world because of sin, then there can be no death before Adam & Eve had sinned, and so they were made good that day when God had created them.

So? That doesn't mean that man and beasts also were not equipped with an ability to adapt and evolve as needed. But I usually think of the time after the fall, when thinking of the need to adapt. Obviously there woulld be less need to adjust to a perfect garden, than to some ice age or desert, or changed atmosphere etc etc.

Indeed, the second chapter going into more detail of that sixth day shows God recreating every animal for Adam to name while seeking a helpmeet and finding none;

False. You made that up. Chapter 2 was clearly talking about what was already done and finished and created. Don't come here parroting dumb popular misconceptions and start thinking you can correct others. You clearly do not know what you are talking about.

that means there was no hyper progression of evolution from the lower animals to the next stage in evolution at all.

Say what? Any evolving started with the creatures God created, not one creature from another.

So when Moses had written Genesis as led by the Holy Spirit to do, believe what God had said thru Moses, or at the very least, lean on Jesus Christ and trust Him as your Good Shepherd to see the truth in His words as kept by those that loved Him & His words in the KJV.

Why babble and try to make it sound religious? Believing Moses and Jesus about creation has zero to do with accepting some foolish 'recreation'.


Busted ye be.



.

 

[createdtoworship]

I asked for evidence that these beliefs are true. If there are no observations, then there is nothing for science to consider.

no you never asked. you assumed they didnt exist and assumed the "divine foot in the door" didnt exist either. I see you've changed you tune twice now.

 

[Loudmouth]

no you never asked. you assumed they didnt exist and assumed the "divine foot in the door" didnt exist either. I see you've changed you tune twice now.

I am still asking. Where is the evidence?

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Evolution is true for many reasons, one of which is that despite the Creationist claim that it isn't observable, it actually can be observed in real time, as evidenced by the work of scientists such as Richard Lenski.

You can read a brief article about his work here: Evolution in real time | Harvard Gazette


Clarification: This thread is incredibly long, so I'm reasonably assuming that by this point other valid points to substantiate evolution have been made. I was trying to not be redundant. I never imagined that anyone would be so obtuse as to believe this was the only evidence for evolution. Smh.

 

[EternalDragon]

Evolution is true for many reasons, one of which is that despite the Creationist claim that it isn't observable, it actually can be observed in real time, as evidenced by the work of scientists such as Richard Lenski.

You can read a brief article about his work here: Evolution in real time | Harvard Gazette

That isn't evolution. That's E. Coli utilizing something else to eat with. Like using your feet instead of your hands to get food to your mouth. If that's all you have, it's an extremely poor example.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That isn't evolution. That's E. Coli utilizing something else to eat with. Like using your feet instead of your hands to get food to your mouth. If that's all you have, it's an extremely poor example.

Sorry, you are in no position to say what is and what is not evolution.

Deniers automatically disqualify themselves.

That E. coli did not have that ability before the experiment. The E. coli evolved. The allele's of the population changed, that is the biological definition of evolution.

 

[createdtoworship]

Evolution is true for many reasons, one of which is that despite the Creationist claim that it isn't observable, it actually can be observed in real time, as evidenced by the work of scientists such as Richard Lenski.

You can read a brief article about his work here: Evolution in real time | Harvard Gazette

no one here has a beef with micro evolution, its the monkey to man (macroevolution that we feel is unobserved.)

 

[createdtoworship]

I am still asking. Where is the evidence?

when you confess to changing your mind several times I will give you evidence. because I know you really care about the truth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

no one here has a beef with micro evolution, its the monkey to man (macroevolution that we feel is unobserved.)

But that was macro evolution. That was a case of speciation and as you know from the other thread that you have participated in by your own sited source speciation is macro evolution.

 

[Ellwood3]

Evolution is not a problem to Christianity.

Here Creator of VeggieTales and the What's in the Bible series Phil Vischer talks with Peter Boghossian about the "reasonableness" of faith.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9HG4u5QqMs


Evolution is how God created.

It doesn't make a good God itself.

 

[createdtoworship]

Evolution is not a problem to Christianity.

Here Creator of VeggieTales and the What's in the Bible series Phil Vischer talks with Peter Boghossian about the "reasonableness" of faith.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9HG4u5QqMs


Evolution is how God created.

It doesn't make a good God itself.

there are many things that jesus didnt say. he never said "thou shalt not use meth" but in other books of the bible it condems drug use
you have to take literally ( the whole bible)
I agree about faith paryially however

 

[Ada Lovelace]

That isn't evolution. That's E. Coli utilizing something else to eat with. Like using your feet instead of your hands to get food to your mouth. If that's all you have, it's an extremely poor example.

Gracious. Posting on here seems to require tedious fastidious at times. This thread is immensely long. I don't have the spare time to read every single post on it, but I imagine that others have presented reasonable information to substantiate evolution prior to this point. It might not be to your satisfaction, but I imagine it's there. I was trying to not be redundant. No, of course this isn't the only example of evolution, and it never occurred to me anyone would imply that it was, but it's one that I was thought might not have already been contributed to the thread, and therefore I shared it.

You and others of your mindset claim it isn't evolution. Scientists state otherwise. Believe as you wish to believe.

 

[dad]

...

 

[dad]

Evolution is not a problem to Christianity.

That depends how you define it. It all you mean is that the created kinds underwent changes after creation, fine. Anything else and that is disbelief in what Christ and the prophets and apostles said.

Here Creator of VeggieTales and the What's in the Bible series Phil Vischer talks with Peter Boghossian about the "reasonableness" of faith.

Evolution is how God created.

I scanned the video, and didn't hear evolution being dealt with, mostly just blab. So how is it evolution to create man and woman and all creatures in a few days?

It doesn't make a good God itself.

Evolution is a feature of creation. Like sunshine, or hands and feet. Man's hand did not form himself from the dust, not did man's breath give life to man. Likewise, man's ability to adapt and evolve was not part of man being created, but after the fact.

Just like this beast did not make the camera that made the pic.

.

 

[createdtoworship]

I imagine that others have presented reasonable information to substantiate evolution prior to this point. It might not be to your satisfaction, but I imagine it's there.

imagine on, no evidence has been presented so far. Only micro evolution. Which is not in question.

 

[createdtoworship]

Evolution is not a problem to Christianity.

Here Creator of VeggieTales and the What's in the Bible series Phil Vischer talks with Peter Boghossian about the "reasonableness" of faith.

The Phil Vischer Podcast, Episode 97: Peter Boghossian and the Reasonableness of "Faith" - YouTube


Evolution is how God created.

It doesn't make a good God itself.

if you take the "S" out of the link on your you tube post, it will fix the screen for all of us, thanks.

 

[PsychoSarah]

imagine on, no evidence has been presented so far. Only micro evolution. Which is not in question.

Provide any mechanism which prevents macroevolution, which has no difference in how it works to microevolution besides it is on a longer time scale. Macroevolution is microevolution over the course of millions of years, so tell me and others how a few small changes which occur in a matter of decades can't continue to change populations in little ways over the course of many generations to eventually make that future population significantly different from the original.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

imagine on, no evidence has been presented so far. Only micro evolution. Which is not in question.

I'm sure that's how you've construed the thread, Grady. That doesn't change my previous post in the slightest. How you perceive things seems to be diametrically different than how others do.

You made a blanket claim no one else here has an issue with microevolution, but I know that's not entirely true, so indeed that link was relevant for those who elect to make the distinction between macro and microevolution. If it's not useful or of interest to you, then don't read it and find another way to contribute to the thread.

 

[dad]

...How you perceive things seems to be diametrically different than how others do.

You thought creation depended on whose opinion had more votes?

You made a blanket claim no one else here has an issue with microevolution, but I know that's not entirely true, so indeed that link was relevant for those who elect to make the distinction between macro and microevolution. If it's not useful or of interest to you, then don't read it and find another way to contribute to the thread.

Keep him in line, mom.

To creationists who want to limit what could have evolved and how much..I say 'what does it matter'? If it all started at the creation anyhow, who cares what evolved how since?
.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

You thought creation depended on whose opinion had more votes?

Nope, nor has evolution ever been dependent on those who accept it as a biological truth, or a heliocentric universe. That wasn't my point in my response to Grady.

Keep him in line, mom.

Ha. I guess this is the closest I'll get to being a teen mom.