Bad scientific arguments against evolution: Part 1

[Spock]

On 8/24/2018 at 9:59 AM, GandalfTheWise said:

  You're not in a dialog about science and evidence here.  You are in a dialog of conviction and faith that God did things a particular way.  I learned this last year in a "dialog" (I'll be polite) with a flat-earther.  At first I suspected he was a troll, but came to the conclusion he was absolutely convinced God created the earth flat.  For him, it was not a matter of physical evidence (because he had evidence of his own proving the earth was flat) and discussing which evidence was more credible.  It was a matter of defending scripture for him.  He seemed absolutely convinced scripture taught the earth was flat, therefore any evidence to the contrary had to either be fake, in error, intentional lies, or some type of spiritual deceit.  He kept pulling out the same half a dozen or so proofs and would not tolerate the slightest criticism of any of them.  He'd pull out inane descriptions of the scientific method and then insinuate that anyone who didn't agree with his proofs was not a scientist nor rational.   If you are interested, here is the thread.  https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/212853-examples-of-applied-physics/   I was rather dense and it took me awhile to realize it, but I eventually realized that it was not about weighing and evaluating evidence for him, it was a conviction that scripture taught a particular thing and he was defending the Bible against me.  Nothing short of renouncing my belief in a globe-earth was acceptable.   These "proofs" that he held to so tenaciously were a part of his trust in the Bible's authority.   To cast any doubt on those proofs was to cast doubt on the Bible itself and God Himself.

 

My observation is that some Christians seem to have an all or nothing belief in the trustworthiness and authority of scripture.  It's either perfect, or should be discarded.  For those with this conviction, their faith in God to a large extent rests on this. Anything that casts doubt on this is basically an assault on their faith in Jesus Christ.  My sense is that many with YEC views have this type of conviction.  What to you is a measured weighing of evidence (with a deep conviction and confidence that God could have decided to do things however He wanted to and you're fine with that), is an out and out assault on the authority and trustworthiness of scripture to some YEC believers.  Any evidence potentially showing macro-evolution could have occurred is a direct assault on the authority of scripture to them and casts doubt on the gospel.  Such "evidence" (in their eyes) is either in error, intentional deceit, or misunderstood in some way.   For some YEC Christians, the strong conviction that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamic disproves macro-evolution is a part of their belief in the trustworthiness of scripture.  To discard this is to cast doubt on the Bible and indeed salvation through Christ and everything else it teaches. 

Thus, you and anyone else who casts doubt on scripture have to be in spiritual error of some sort because a "real" Christian would never cast doubt on scripture.  At best you are deceived.  At worst, you are an intentional false prophet and a wolf in sheeps clothing or possibly not even a Christian.    For some of them, it is partially a matter of showing you the error of your ways,  and partially a matter of shutting you down and warning others away from you so that you don't destroy people's faith in God and the Bible.  

I understand your intention for this thread.  It was much my intention when I started the thread I linked to.  However as I learned, there are some Christians that are convinced that FE and YEC are an essential part of having faith in Jesus Christ.  For some of them, things such as the 2nd LoT disproving macro-evolution has become an unquestioned and important part of YEC or that the sun does not light up the moon is an essential part of the faith of FE believers.  They are going to continue to teach and preach those things.  It does not matter what evidence or arguments you bring up, they are convinced you are in error somewhere and will continue to reject most everything you try to bring up no matter how patient and reasonable you are about it.  For some, the only acceptable outcome is if you become a diehard YEC yourself.   Since then, I realize that the real battle is helping people understand that our convictions are not in an absolute trust in science but rather an unshakeable faith and confidence in God that allow us to simply trust that He is there and He is good no matter how He decides to do things.  We are free to ask questions because no matter what answer shows up, our trust and confidence in God remains.   We have full confidence in the authority and trustworthiness of scripture, just not full confidence in our or others' understanding of it.

Having said all that, I still often write for the lurkers who might be reading a post or thread and that God might simply use me as an example to those struggling with doubts that it is possible to ask hard questions, not get all the answers we want or expect, and still have a strong trust and confidence in Jesus Christ.  You never know who is reading.  I've been finding some of the stuff you bring up interesting.  

I see how you got your name. Clap clap. 

[one.opinion]

15 minutes ago, Spock said:

I just started reading this thread so I apologize for any inconvenience.

No problem at all!

15 minutes ago, Spock said:

Did you just say that you accept the scientific theory of evolution meaning man evolved from goo to fish to amphibian up to ape and finally to man?

If by “goo”, you mean single-celled organisms, then yes. If by “goo”, you mean non-living, organic material, then no. At this point, I think the evidence favors the idea that God directly created the first living things.

17 minutes ago, Spock said:

And that first man from ape was Adam.

I believe that Adam was the first human supernaturally imbued with a “spirit” and capable of a relationship with God, as a result.

19 minutes ago, Spock said:

Thanks for clearing this up with me.

Of course! I would also be happy to discuss any of this in further detail, including the theological ramifications.

[Spock]

On 3/24/2019 at 4:56 PM, one.opinion said:

No problem at all!

If by “goo”, you mean single-celled organisms, then yes. If by “goo”, you mean non-living, organic material, then no. At this point, I think the evidence favors the idea that God directly created the first living things.

I believe that Adam was the first human supernaturally imbued with a “spirit” and capable of a relationship with God, as a result.

Of course! I would also be happy to discuss any of this in further detail, including the theological ramifications.

Thank you brother for clearing this up with clear concise answers. I appreciate that very much. 

For the record, I will just share a few thoughts I have after reading this thread started by you.  To be forthright here, some posts in this thread saddened me very much: 

1. I appreciate the intent you had in starting this (to better educate believers so that we won’t make foolish scientific arguments that will blow up in our faces). 

2. I would NEVER say you are not my brother in Christ just because we may disagree on the origin of man (Adam and eve).  I believe your scientific background has led you to such beliefs.......even though in my mind, said without malice and admittedly a lack of scientific knowledge, I  believe your beliefs do go contrary to the written word in Genesis one.  I take that “one day” to mean one day, thus no evolution. 

3. In my mind and heart, and albeit, a minimal amount of scientific upbringing, I could never accept the theory of evolution beyond micro evolution (within species). (If a cat cannot ever evolve into a dog, neither can an ape evolve into a human.) There is no amount of evidence anyone can show me to make me believe otherwise, so I guess I am closed-minded on this topic.

4. I apologize for some people questioning your faith...it is not their call to make.  You have NEVER denied Christ as Lord and as Messiah....ONLY this makes one a believer......not whether you believe in an old earth or a young earth, or if you believe Adam evolved from Ape Or didn’t.  I’m pretty sure the Bible does not say that everyone’s non-essential beliefs have to be exactly one way.....THEIR WAY, whoever the “their” is. And I know for a fact the Bible does not say, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and a young earth in order to be saved!” 

5. God understands our desires, limitations, faults, efforts, and our motives.  In other words, only He knows our heart. I’m glad my salvation is determined on what He thinks and knows and not on what any other man thinks and knows. 

6. I don’t know who this Gandalf is but I sure would like to get to know him. Wise indeed.

7. I love you brother, but I can understand to some degree apart from the judgmental spirit by some, that you have opened yourself up to receive some criticism.  I’m sure you knew it was coming. You seem to be taking it rather well, so this tells me you are pretty grounded in your faith (even though I hope you can someday reevaluate why you believe what you believe. I still think it is wrong. Lol) 

To God be the glory in all things, especially our conversations and our thoughts. 

Spock ?

PS For the record, I have not put my allegiance COMPLETELY behind either the old or new earth camp and I usually try to stay out of debating this issue, but it seems pretty logical to me (I am Spock after all) that the universe is pretty old, assuming the speed of light has not changed, which I doubt it has.  Having said this, this means little to me (non essential).

[Spock]

To one.opinion,

Okay, back to the thread you started. Dennis1209 asked the following of you on August of 2018, but I do not see a response. Do you plan on responding?  Why haven’t you?   I’m following this.....

Without using adaptation and metamorphism (larvae - caterpillar - butterfly - etc.), I'd like just one example of evolution myself. A changing of species from say a horse to a lion or such, a DNA structure change evolving into something totally different by natural selection.

 

No not "class" or "kind", let's get our terms correct. Genetic 'species' changes. We can plainly see alterations, adaptations and changes in classes and kinds of the same species, man-made and natural. You can include a virus mutating over time into a bacteria, grass genetically changing into a tree. corn into a tomato, or primate to man. After their own kind in Bible terminology. 

Horses to zebra's, breeds of dogs and genetic splicing and the like, etc., doesn't qualify as a change of species. 

Thanks,

spock

Edited March 24, 2019 by Spock

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, Spock said:

even though in my mind, said without malice and admittedly a lack of scientific knowledge, I  believe your beliefs do go contrary to the written word in Genesis one.

I could not ask for anything more. I realize that some of my brothers and sisters will disagree with me. I just ask that they (as you have done) disagree without malice.

 

1 hour ago, Spock said:

God understands our desires, limitations, faults, efforts, and our motives.  In other words, only He knows our heart. I’m glad my salvation is determined on what He thinks and knows and not on what any other man thinks and knows.

Absolutely, I realize that I could be wrong, but take comfort in the fact that God knows I have done my best to understand what He has revealed - both in His Word and in His works. And even if I am wrong about our biological origins, He is still my wonderful Savior who loved me enough to die for me and powerful enough to conquer death.

[one.opinion]

23 minutes ago, Spock said:

Okay, back to the thread you started. Dennis1209 asked the following of you on August of 2018, but I do not see a response.

I will check and get back to you. I won’t have the time to do it today.

[one.opinion]

15 hours ago, Spock said:

Okay, back to the thread you started. Dennis1209 asked the following of you on August of 2018, but I do not see a response. Do you plan on responding?  Why haven’t you?   I’m following this.....

This was my response to Dennis1209 at the time:

Quote

 

I was using the word “class” in taxonomic terms. The horse is a mammal of Class Equidae and the lion is a mammal of Class Felidae.

To get terms straight, is this what you are looking for? The exact DNA differences between Equidae and Felidae? You’ve mentioned species, as well. Most Young Earth Creationists fully recognize that speciation is possible. What they tend to reject is the idea that (with enough time) species can eventually diverge enough to make new Genera or new Families.

 

I don't think I heard from him after that point. I suspect what he was asking me to produce is something he knows that no scientist can produce - evidence of "caught in the act" evolution across entire taxonomic classes. The example he used was "A changing of species from say a horse to a lion or such". This query really only shows a misconception about what evolutionary theory suggests. Changes on that scale are not physically possible in the time frame that humans have been recording observations about living organisms. In other words, this was simply a strawman argument from the start. If he wanted (or you want) examples of actual speciation, I would be happy to oblige, but YEC scientists do not have the issues with speciation that they once did. In fact, YEC scientists have had to change arguments recently to accommodate speciation (after the Flood) on a scale that is inconsistent with scientific observation.

[Spock]

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

This was my response to Dennis1209 at the time:

I don't think I heard from him after that point. I suspect what he was asking me to produce is something he knows that no scientist can produce - evidence of "caught in the act" evolution across entire taxonomic classes. The example he used was "A changing of species from say a horse to a lion or such". This query really only shows a misconception about what evolutionary theory suggests. Changes on that scale are not physically possible in the time frame that humans have been recording observations about living organisms. In other words, this was simply a strawman argument from the start. If he wanted (or you want) examples of actual speciation, I would be happy to oblige, but YEC scientists do not have the issues with speciation that they once did. In fact, YEC scientists have had to change arguments recently to accommodate speciation (after the Flood) on a scale that is inconsistent with scientific observation.

I’m not really a YEC proponent, but I know many YEC advocates are such because they want to conclusively put any evolution argument to rest.  I’m not threatened by an old earth “possibly” leading to evolution because like I previously said, I do not believe in macro evolution at all. I don’t believe a fish somehow walked out of the water with lungs. I don’t believe the dinosaur grew wings, or the ape became man.  I’m not bothered the least if someone does believe all of the above. 

I was just following this thread and Dennis asked the following....

Without using adaptation and metamorphism (larvae - caterpillar - butterfly - etc.), I'd like just one example of evolution myself. A changing of species from say a horse to a lion or such, a DNA structure change evolving into something totally different by natural selection?

I think He then qualified his request by saying “species” rather than “kind.”

So I was hoping to read a response from you. I guess your response to me here on this last  post you just made to me, would be your response to Dennis, right?  

Anyhow, if ther is something more you wanted to add, at the very least I’m reading it....can’t promise you any more. Lol

Cheers and thanks for responding. By the way I’m reading a readers digest version of Deatons book, Evolution: a theory in crisis.  I would also welcome any thoughts you may have on that book if you read it. 

Spock

 

[one.opinion]

2 hours ago, Spock said:

So I was hoping to read a response from you. I guess your response to me here on this last  post you just made to me, would be your response to Dennis, right?

I just didn't know what Dennis was looking for, and I still don't. Do you want examples of speciation events that have been observed? I'll be happy to give a few examples of those. I'm assuming you aren't also looking for me to provide an example of a horse turning to a lion (as in Dennis's example), but are you asking for anything additional to speciation events?

Edited March 25, 2019 by one.opinion

[Spock]

12 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

I just didn't know what Dennis was looking for, and I still don't. Do you want examples of speciation events that have been observed? I'll be happy to give a few examples of those. I'm assuming you aren't also looking for me to provide an example of a horse turning to a lion (as in Dennis's example), but are you asking for anything additional to speciation events?

That should work. Thanks.