evolution?

[EricH]

fenwar, I could continue to refute your points, point-by-point, but don't feel that it is profitable. Every time I bring up legitimate problems to evolutionary theory you respond with "what could have happened," or "what might have happened" or "how do we know that the rate has always been the same... etc." Your science is a bunch of "what if" and "how do we know."

Sorry, bud. Your's is the science of Assumptions. You argue against lunar drift by saying "how do we know that the rate has been the same." Is that really a "scientific argument?"

I could say the same thing about carbon dating. Come on. Or, I could bring up the fact that they have dated RECENTLY DECEASED animals as being hundreds and thousands of years old. It is ridiculous.

So, to all of you "hope so, might have, could have scientists..." When you can show me ANY EVIDENCE of a dog producing a non-dog then we'll talk. Until then, I hold that evolution is a religion requiring tons more faith than Christianity.

Show me the evidence of one kind transitioning into another kind. Any evidence. Going once.... twice.... Can I get a witness?

There is nothing observable about biological macro-evolution, hence there is nothing scientific about it at all. It is speculation and inference at best.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Evolutionary theory also requires a step if faith. Since there are no transistional forms, they must be accepted by faith

[Bread_of_Life]

So as usual, you had no intention of actually arguing the point, rather you bring up another "objection" (from Rodriguez et al) to molecular evidence for evolution, and yet another quote. If I argue this point, will you argue back or just bring up another quote, that you don't understand, and havn't researched, so can't argue back about when I answer it?

But were does one find the transitional forms in the fossil record connecting elephant A with elephant ZZZZZ? Is it really there or is it just misguided theory based on evolutionist prejudice?

Firstly, you had a theoretical objection to evolution which I answered, namely than an elephant couldn't give birth to a viable non-elephant. Since you gave me a theoretical (non-evidential) challenge, I answered with a theoretical (non-evidential) solution. Will you at least now concede that I answered your theoretical challenge in my explanation.

Secondly, you now bring up a new, and this time evidential challenge. If transitions occur slowly over time, we ought to see transitional species and sequences in the fossil record. In fact, we do see transitional species (http://members.aol.com/darwinpage/transitionals.htm) in the fossil record, including in the human lineage.

Unfortunately, due to the sparsity of the fossil record in general, very closely graded transitions are few and far between, although as the website above records, they do exist. Furthermore, many less closely graded transitionals do exist (in fact, there are 4 categories of gradation for transitionals depending on how closely graded they are).

Thirdly, and lastly, we also have examples of modern speciation occuring right now, called "Ring Species". An example of a ring species is the Palearctic Gull (http://members.aol.com/darwinpage/rings.htm#Rings). These "living transitionals" have migrated around the world from a single starting point, adapting along the way to local conditions. But, when the gulls got back to where they started (came full circle), they couldn't breed with the original population. In other words, gull A can breed with gull B, B with C, C with D etc, but not G with A. Ring species are proof that speciation is still occuring, and that it is possible through gradual change.

"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology

[AgnosticFront84]

Humans are unique

Everything else is a kettle of fish, or swamp muck, depending on how you see things

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We are definately unique, I mean, c'mon, we did invent the toaster!

[Bread_of_Life]

Proof if any were still needed that it's easier to quote people out of context than it is to make a coherent argument. I'm not going to go through them all, I'm afraid.

If someone wants a serious argument about the state of the fossil record, or why transitions within it are poorly recorded, then do get back to me.

[Trust & Obey]

is it a sin or hipocritical to believe in evolution???  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There is no such thing as evolution. The Lord is still creating it all.

Actually, God is done creating. He finished His word after 6 days and rested on the 7th.

We do not see any new creating happening as it would violate the 1st law of thermodynamics, conservation of matter and energy.

Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am sorry my friend but you are wrong. You do not know where you are in the plan of GOD. You are quoting scripture told from God's perspective of timeless.

John 5

17But He answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working."

It is Christ who gives God's Spirit rest in the kingdom.

Hebrews 4 "read the whole chapter"

1 Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it.

9 There remains therefore a rest for the people of God.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Zhavonay, maybe I misunderstood you. I thought you meant that God is still creating physical/tangible things. This thread is about such things so I assumed that was your point.

God bless.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought you meant that God is still creating physical/tangible things.

That is exactly what I was saying. Every time anything is born, Every time a volcano erupts, Every time a new comet comes by and every time a earthquake restructures the shape of the earth. God is working and has not rested to date.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Zhavonay, the Conservation of Matter and Energy deals at the atomic and molecular levels. The examples you put forth are merely transfers of matter and energy into different forms. The only thing that is "new" in those examples would be the spirit in the newborn child, and that is not a physical thing.

When a volcano erupts the molten lava doesn't "come out of nowhere." It has been in the earth before the eruption. An earthquake may change the landscape, but it doesn't "create" anything new. Not any more than a sledge hammer to an automobile creates anything new, anyways.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is what I am talking about. God did not create something and walk away. The Spirit of God Brings the Constellations in their season and feeds the baby lions in their dens. He is working still.

Go to Job 38 where God talks to Job out of the whirlwind and you will read all that God does daily.

38:32

Can you bring out Mazzaroth in its season? Or can you guide the Great Bear with its cubs?

38:33

Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you set their dominion over the earth?

38:34

"Can you lift up your voice to the clouds, That an abundance of water may cover you?

38:35

Can you send out lightnings, that they may go, And say to you, 'Here we are!'?

38:36

Who has put wisdom in the mind? Or who has given understanding to the heart?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Working and creating are 2 separate things. We're talking about the creation here... not whether or not God is still working.

[Trust & Obey]

On the seventh day God rested from all his work of creation, which has not come yet. This is what I thought we were talking about.

Ge 2:2

And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

Ge 2:3

Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, brother. You just opened up a whole new can of worms that is completely beyond the scope of this evolution thread.

God bless ya, Zhavonay.

[ColleenLovesMischief]

Adaptation seems more correct than anything.

[fenwar]

fenwar, I could continue to refute your points, point-by-point, but don't feel that it is profitable. Every time I bring up legitimate problems to evolutionary theory you respond with "what could have happened," or "what might have happened" or "how do we know that the rate has always been the same... etc." Your science is a bunch of "what if" and "how do we know."

Sorry, I'm not trying to make a watertight case... I'm just saying that what you say is impossible - is not impossible. I could certainly be wrong - science is not about rigidly sticking to one view, it's about listening to new evidence and new theories, and re-assessing your knowledge accordingly.

And this includes theology. (Otherwise the gospel would never have been preached to the Gentiles - myself included!)

So, to all of you "hope so, might have, could have scientists..." When you can show me ANY EVIDENCE of a dog producing a non-dog then we'll talk. Until then, I hold that evolution is a religion requiring tons more faith than Christianity.

As I've said: "a dog producing a non-dog" is a straw man. Evolution does not say a dog produces a non-dog.

Show me the evidence of one kind transitioning into another kind. Any evidence. Going once.... twice.... Can I get a witness?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

or if you prefer one Christian's perspective:

http://www.theistic-evolution.com/transitional.html

[Arthur Durnan]

The hypothesis of mega-evolution: the greatest fairy-tale not in Aesops! Its god is the Blind, Mindless & Inert god "Chance." It's out of its depth in a puddle.

Thank You, Lord Jesus, for setting us straight!

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[fenwar]

The hypothesis of mega-evolution: the greatest fairy-tale not in Aesops! Its god is the Blind, Mindless & Inert god "Chance." It's out of its depth in a puddle.

Thank You, Lord Jesus, for setting us straight!

Hi Arthur,

... "random" mutations aren't where I'm coming from. I don't think God plays dice. He designed this process and knew the outcome before the very first self-replicating molecule was formed.

With the greatest of respect... how did Jesus set us straight on the matter of evolution?

[reworded]

Edited June 22, 2005 by fenwar