The butterfly

[Guest HisG]

Long time no see

Straight into it however - The butterfly - not only does it change from one creature into another - a crawling land dweller into a flying beauty but also this massive transformation takes less than a month.

Is the butterfly a sound example of evolutionary timeframe?

According to evolutionary thinking, man evolved over millions of years to the point we are at now and according to evolutionist thought, we have come down from the trees to standing upright, however, physically speaking, if the illustrations of pre-modern man are anything to go by, the general "look" of man has not changed too dramatically.

And yet the butterfly, not only does it change looks, it gains wings - complete new look, new structure, new condition etc - and all in speed time.

Evolutionists, please respond...?

Thank you.

[AWBS]

The caterpillar-butterfly transformation is metamorphosis, not evolution.

Comparing metamorphosis (or the change of an individual insect or amphibian from one form their physical development to the next during a few months) to evolution (or the change of an entire species's genotype and phenotype over millenia) is pointless.

Thus, the "butterfly" argument holds no ground.

[Guest HisG]

The butterfly transforms from one creature into an entirely new creature through metamorphism, correct.

So as we can see the metamorphic state is extremely quick.

The information to change from a caterpillar into an insect - which as we know does not take long, makes me wonder (if evolution is the canopy for all living things), why did evolution branch into quick speed metamorphism to extreme minute changes over time eg: man?

Simultaneously, we have two different speeds of change occurring.

For the evolutionist, who says metamorphosis is not evolution - then where would the metamorphic change come under? Why would father evolution go from one extreme to another?

[other one]

the change to butterfly is part of the genetic makeup of the butterfly.  I don't think we can call it evolution for it really isn't changing anything......   the offspring of the butterfly will always be a worm and the worm will always become a butterfly.........    or bird food.

[Guest HisG]

Absolutely other one - the make up to change completely from one form to a complete new form is in the genetic make up from .... day one.

So..... In the story of evolution - being that evolution is the canopy for ALL living things in the evolutionary tree of life, can we say that speed changes as in metamorphism was present along side apeman in the branches of trees? In one instant we have information to change right there within the caterpillars DNA , yet man in evolutionary thought had to wait millions of years to what we have become now.

I'm just trying to see the logic in evolution.

If under the canopy of evolution - why did father evolution go from one extreme in nature to another in mankind. It comes across as illogical.

Why have complete information to change rapidly in a caterpillar but nothing in man.

What purpose has a slow changing evolvement in man served?

[missmuffet]

The changing of the caterpillar to a butterfly is called metamorphosis.It is evidence of creation not evolution.

[Guest HisG]

I know this bopeep . I'm a believer of Intelligent Design.

I guess my question to the evolutionist is why did man "evolve" at such a minute pace according to evolution, whereas metamorphism was present at the same time yet operating by different speed.

My other question to the evolutionists is - what purpose has slow evolvement served to man?

[missmuffet]

The evolutionists have their beliefs,I have mine.That is their choice.

[Guest HisG]

True bopeep, and I want to see why the evolutionist believe what they do.

It won't affect my belief in Intelligent Design - the Creator God, but it will give me a better understanding I hope of evolutionists - whether they are Christian or atheist.

Just seems to me, as science is further advanced and more discoveries are being made, we are seeing involvement of Intelligent Design rather than random chance/chaos.

[LatentAuthor]

 

I'm just trying to see the logic in evolution.

 

Then you'll have to invest some time and energy in understanding biology - your question appears to have been answered several times already.