Why I do not accept evolution part two.

[Aussie Pete]

Congratulations! You now accept evolution. [These things *ARE* evolution.]

Utter and complete rubbish. It is not evolution. When the pepper moth becomes an ant, that is evolution.

 

[SkyWriting]

And therefore he plans every murder, every rape, every robbery and every abortion.

I'll check on that:

Romans 8:28
And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.

Proverbs 3:5-6
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.

Proverbs 16:9
The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps.

Proverbs 19:21
Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand.

Philippians 4:6-7
Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Proverbs 3:5
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.

Philippians 1:6
And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.

Isaiah 55:9
For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Ecclesiastes 3:1
For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:

 

[Subduction Zone]

Utter and complete rubbish. It is not evolution. When the pepper moth becomes an ant, that is evolution.

No, that would refute evolution.

Since you do not even have a first year biology major understanding how do you expect to hope to refute evolution? Your example would break cladistics. That cannot happen in evolution.

Once again I offer to discuss the basics of science with you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'll check on that:

Romans 8:28
And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.

Proverbs 3:5-6
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.

Proverbs 16:9
The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps.

Proverbs 19:21
Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand.

Philippians 4:6-7
Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Proverbs 3:5
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.

Philippians 1:6
And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.

Isaiah 55:9
For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Ecclesiastes 3:1
For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:

And how does any of that refute @NxNW ? This is why I objected to that post of his. It only antagonizes some Christians and then they demonstrate a lack of understanding of their own faith.

 

[Aussie Pete]

No, that would refute evolution.

Since you do not even have a first year biology major understanding how do you expect to hope to refute evolution? Your example would break cladistics. That cannot happen in evolution.

Once again I offer to discuss the basics of science with you.

No thanks. I know of no way to convince an evolutionist who is also an atheist. People far better qualified than myself have tried and failed. I've yet to meet or hear of an atheist who believes anything other than evolution. How can they?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since all we have heard from the OP are strawman arguments at best here are some concepts that may help. Phylogenetics and cladistics are two key concepts in evolution. Cladistics is a classification system that is based upon phylogenetics.

Cladistics - Wikipedia

Phylogenetics - Wikipedia

And phylogenetics is the study the evolutionary history of life and how life is related. We have all seen the "Tree of Life" and other such images. They are drawn to make clearer how life evolved . Those paths that you see are all one way streets. We can go over why in more detail if needed. If you have heard the poor 'odds arguments ' of some creationists those flawed arguments tell you why an ant cannot evolve into a moth. But they in no way refute the fact that ants and moths share a common ancestor. Evolution becomes impossible if one puts a specific goal for life. Then we would need a specific set of mutations to occur in the right order.

We can all understand that there is a record of who won various lotteries. And there is nothing spectacular about that list. That various people would win such a game should be rather obvious to all of us. A creationist demanding that we show how an ant can evolve into a moth is akin to denying a list of winners until they repeat their wins in reverse order. It is not going to happen in the real world and it makes no sense either. When a person uses nonsensical arguments he only demonstrates a total lack of understanding.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No thanks. I know of no way to convince an evolutionist who is also an atheist. People far better qualified than myself have tried and failed. I've yet to meet or hear of an atheist who believes anything other than evolution. How can they?

The problem is not with the atheist. It is with the theist that neither understands neither science or his own religious beliefs.

The strong in faith are not afraid to learn. Why are you afraid to learn even the basics of science?

And oddly enough, I have not met an atheist that does not accept the fact of gravity. Why complain that atheists accept obvious facts?

 

[Tanj]

The jury is still out on how influential epigenetics is to evolutionary development.

Only to the uniformed.

Quick quiz question: The genes responsible for proteins like EZH2 and DMNT, do they mutate?

Yeah, thought so.

 

[Tanj]

Utter and complete rubbish. It is not evolution. When the pepper moth becomes an ant, that is evolution.

Nope, that's creationism. Evolution says that cannot happen.

 

[Tanj]

No thanks. I know of no way to convince an evolutionist who is also an atheist.

You're selling yourself short there, least "Aussie" Pete I have ever met, you also have no way to convince an evolutionist that is also a Christian.

Did anyone get God memo assigning you infallible interpretation of the bible? It appears not.

 

[pitabread]

I know of no way to convince an evolutionist who is also an atheist.

Convince them of what exactly?

 

[Tanj]

Convince them of what exactly?

That "aussie" Pete was visited by God and assigned sole arbiter of biblical interpretation, obviously.

 

[Speedwell]

That "aussie" Pete was visited by God and assigned sole arbiter of biblical interpretation, obviously.

I suspect that Aussie Pete may not quite be convinced of it either, otherwise he would not be working so hard at getting affirmation.

 

[NxNW]

When the pepper moth becomes an ant, that is evolution.

Evolution makes no such prediction.

 

[NxNW]

I'll check on that:

Instead of checking on it, you just posted random Bible verses.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Utter and complete rubbish. It is not evolution. When the pepper moth becomes an ant, that is evolution.

I said *ACCEPT* evolution, not *UNDERSTAND*. That your title says you don't accept evolution, but then you write about accepting things that very clearly are evolution as defined in modern biology is quite strong evidence that you don't understand it.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I know of no way to convince an evolutionist who is also an atheist.

I think you are under the wrong impression that we are evolutionists. I believe the term they use is "evolutionary biologist" or some similar variation. I'm not sure that anyone here is one of those. There are people here with training in biology and many of the rest of us have read extensively in the popular writings on evolutionary biology.

I'm not an "evolutionist" but I do accept evolutionary biology to the best of my understanding. I used to simultaneously accept the divinity and resurrection of Jesus, but I don't any more, therefore I am an atheist who still accepts the findings of evolutionary biology.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think you are under the wrong impression that we are evolutionists. I believe the term they use is "evolutionary biologist" or some similar variation. I'm not sure that anyone here is one of those. There are people here with training in biology and many of the rest of us have read extensively in the popular writings on evolutionary biology.

I'm not an "evolutionist" but I do accept evolutionary biology to the best of my understanding. I used to simultaneously accept the divinity and resurrection of Jesus, but I don't any more, therefore I am an atheist who still accepts the findings of evolutionary biology.

Calling someone an "evolutionist" is roughly the same as calling someone a "gravitationalist". Except that there is more evidence for the theory of evolution. For some reason this fact annoys many creationists. That is most likely because they do not understand either the concept of evidence nor of gravity. Very few people think in terms of Einstein's theory of gravity (General Relativity for the uninformed). Few people think even in terms of Newtonian Gravity. at best people tend to think in terms of Galilean gravity which only describes the motion as d = (1/2)gt^2 + vt + h.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Calling someone an "evolutionist" is roughly the same as calling someone a "gravitationalist". Except that there is more evidence for the theory of evolution. For some reason this fact annoys many creationists. That is most likely because they do not understand either the concept of evidence nor of gravity. Very few people think in terms of Einstein's theory of gravity (General Relativity for the uninformed). Few people think even in terms of Newtonian Gravity. at best people tend to think in terms of Galilean gravity which only describes the motion as d = (1/2)gt^2 + vt + h.

There's also the jibe "globist" used in some other threads in a parallel sub-forum. I also accept the gravitational theory and the spherical shape of the Earth that it creates, but I'm not a globist or a gravatationalist either, and my spell checker rejects both terms a well , just regular old physicist who'd rather not deal with GR.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I've done enough research to satisfy my own mind about evolution.

The problem seems to be that you're too easily satisfied. The ideas about evolution you present are clearly incorrect - no wonder you find them implausible. The problems you've described with specific examples suggest that you haven't done enough 'research' to understand evolutionary explanations for them - if you did, you'd be asking different questions. It would only take a little reading on those topics - detailed research isn't necessary for a basic understanding.

For example, symbiosis and your parasitic wasp vs spider examples are classic examples of coevolution; the former cooperative, and the latter antagonistic (an evolutionary 'arms race'). If you knew this and found it implausible, you'd be expressing doubts about the specifics of coevolution in those cases, not the doubts that you posted.

Similarly, just Googling for "evolution of the circulatory system" will give you plenty of descriptions of the stages involved (and how examples of each stage can be seen in creatures alive today). If you'd followed such explanations, you'd be expressing doubts about the evolutionary explanation, not expressing incredulity about imaginary problems.