God used Evolution to 'create' man

[HAZARD]

53 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Even if you do not accept evolution, it could be worthwhile to become more familiar with the evidence. It makes no sense to try to use scientific arguments against evolution if you are unfamiliar with the evidence for it.

Thank you for your kind offer but again, no thanks. In accepting the theory of evolution, we are asked to accept as fact many other theories. Evolution is not one theory, but a complex series of theories. It is based upon many preconceived `facts`. Any time someone begins piling theory upon theory, the stack of theories becomes like a chain. The failure of any one theory can easily nullify the others. In `believing` in evolution, we are asked to believe that all of the different forms of life on earth began from a `primeval soup`. No one knows where this `soup` was, or what happened to it. No one can say what happened to suddenly bring forth life from the `soup`. What evidence is there to prove or disprove the theory of evolution? Is evolution a workable explanation for the origin of life on the planet Earth? I don't believe it is. I believe God created everything. 

[HAZARD]

What is life? Is it just having the right combinations of proteins in just the right order? Is a man nothing more than a collection of substances and chemicals that happened to somehow `become alive`? Evolutionists claim that the process of life was started by some unknown process, millions (or billions) of years ago. This is the foundation of the evolutionary theory. Is there proof that this is really what happened? One of the greatest weaknesses of evolutionary theory is that there are too many forms of life to have happened by chance, and the building blocks of life are too complex to have just somehow `happened`. Could a cell by chance come into being that "has the DNA instructions to fill one thousand 600-page books?" (National Geographic).

Examples: 1. Research has shown that the requirements for life are so complex that chance and even billions of years could not have produced them.

2. Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from inorganic materials) has never been observed.

3. Mendel's laws of genetics explain virtually all of the physical variations that are observed within life categories such as the dog family. A logical consequence of these laws and their modern day refinements is that there are limits to such variation.

4. The many similarities between different species do not necessarily imply a genealogical relationship; they may imply a common Designer.

5. The human body (or the body of any other creature) cannot live without most internal organs, such as the heart, the lungs, the liver, et cetera. Remove any of these organs, and the specimen dies. This implies that the entire body was created at one point in time.

6. Natural selection cannot produce new genes; it only selects among preexisting characteristics.

7. Mutations are the only proposed mechanism by which new genetic material becomes available for evolution.

8. Almost all observable mutations are harmful; many are fatal.

9. No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having both greater complexity and greater viability than its ancestors.

10. Over seventy years of fruit-fly experiments, equivalent to 2700 human generations, give no basis for believing that any natural or artificial process can cause an increase in either complexity or viability. No clear genetic improvement has been observed despite the many unnatural efforts to increase mutation rates. In addition, no `new` life form has been produced by mutation. No fruit fly `evolved` into a mosquito or a bee.

11. There is no evidence that mutations could ever produce any new organs such as the eye, the ear, or the brain.

12. If the earth, early in its alleged `evolution`, had oxygen in its atmosphere, the chemicals needed for life would have been removed by oxidation. But if there had been no oxygen, then there would have been no ozone, and without ozone all life would be quickly destroyed by the sun's ultraviolet radiation.

13. Two aspects ignored by studies of the origin of life are: a) The beauty of the different forms of life. b) The symmetry of virtually all forms of life. Evolutionary scientists ignore these aspects, primarily because these two things suggest a Creator. Virtually all recorded mutations produce malformed, `non-evolutionary` changes in the subject under study.

14. There have been many imaginative but unsuccessful attempts to explain how just one single protein could form from any of the assumed conditions of the early earth. The necessary chemical reactions all tend to move in the direction opposite from that required. Furthermore, each possible energy source, whether the earth's heat, electrical discharges, or the sun's radiation, would destroy the protein products millions of times faster than they could be formed.

15. If, despite the virtually impossible odds, proteins arose by chance processes, there is absolutely no reason to believe that they could ever form a self-reproducing, membrane-encased, living cell. There is no evidence that there are any stable states between the assumed naturalistic formation of proteins and the formation of the first living cells. No scientist has ever advanced a testable procedure whereby this fantastic jump in complexity could have occurred -- even if the universe were completely filled with proteins, as you will see.

16. The cells of living creatures are enormously complex. Every part must be present in order for the cell to survive. All the parts have different `jobs`. It is not illogical to state that if you remove any one part, the cell cannot survive. This obviously implies that the parts (ie, the cell membrane, the nucleus, the ribosomes, etc.) had to have come into being at the same time.

17. Computer-generated comparisons have been made of the sequences of amino acids that comprise a protein which is common to 47 forms of animal and plant life. The results of these studies seriously place the theory of evolution into jeopardy.

18. The genetic information contained in each cell of the human body is roughly equivalent to a library of 4000 volumes. For chance mutations and natural selection to produce this amount of information, assuming that matter and life `somehow` got started, is analogous to continuing the following procedure until 4000 volumes have been produced: (a) Start with a meaningful phrase. (b) Retype the phrase but make some errors and insert some additional letters. (c) Examine the new phrase to see if it is meaningful. (d) If it is, replace the original phrase with it. (e) If it is not, return to step (b). To accumulate 4000 volumes that are meaningful, this procedure would have to produce the equivalent of far more than 10^3000 (10 to the 3000th power) animal offspring. To begin to understand how large 10^3000 is, realize that the entire universe has `only` about 10^80 atoms in it.

19. Based on present day observations, DNA can only be replicated or reproduced with the help of certain enzymes. But these enzymes can only be produced at the direction of DNA. Since each requires the other, a satisfactory explanation for the origin of one must simultaneously explain the origin of the other.

20. Amino acids, when found in nonliving matter, come in two forms that are chemically equivalent; about half can be described as "right-handed" and half "left-handed" (a structural description -- one is the mirror image of the other). However, the protein molecules found in all forms of life, including plants, animals, bacteria, molds, and even viruses, have only the left-handed variety. The mathematical probability that chance processes could produce just one tiny protein molecule with only left-handed amino acids is virtually zero.

21. The simplest form of life consists of 600 different protein molecules. The mathematical probability that just one molecule could form by the chance arrangement of the proper amino acids is far less than 1 in 10^527 (10 to the 527th power). The magnitude of the number 10^527 can begin to be appreciated by realizing that the visible universe is about 10^28 inches in diameter.

22. There are many instances where quite different forms of life are completely dependent upon each other. Examples include: fig trees and the fig gall wasp, the yucca plant and the pronuba moth, many parasites and their hosts, pollen-bearing plants and the honey-bee family consisting of the queen, workers, and drones. There are many, many others. If one member of each interdependent group evolved first (such as the plant before the animal), the other member could not have survived. Since all members of the group obviously have survived, they must have come into existence at essentially the same time.

23. Earthly life forms reproduce after their own kind. Different animals do not inter-breed. This suggests that each of these life forms were distinctly created. Cats and dogs do not interbreed to produce `cat- dogs`. Therefore it is highly unlikely that different life forms were formed by species interbreeding.

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, HAZARD said:

I believe God created everything. 

We are in 100% agreement here.

[grahampaul]

simply speaking,God had the earth bring forth the animals first before  discribing how he made, formed, and created adam.why on earth would he need an ape to do so? certainly didnt say so. 

[The Barbarian]

Actually he's very familiar with the evidence.

23 hours ago, dad2 said:

So am I.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area.

The researchers attributed the trend to a problem of metacognition—the ability to analyze one’s own thoughts or performance. “Those with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it,” they wrote.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/dunning-kruger-effect

 

[The Barbarian]

On 2/23/2020 at 9:59 PM, Cletus said:

you just said Gods image is a monkey.  i am done speaking to you now, until you repent. 

No.   As he says, our likeness to God is not a physical likeness, since God has no body (as Jesus says).

Edited February 26, 2020 by The Barbarian

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, HAZARD said:

In `believing` in evolution, we are asked to believe that all of the different forms of life on earth began from a `primeval soup`.

No.   Evolutionary theory assumes that life began somehow, and describes how it changes over time.   But how it began is not part of evolutionary theory, nor does it matter to the theory.   Darwin, for example, just thought that God created the first living things.

Remember what one.opinion told you?   You just demonstrated the truth of his statement.    If you don't understand the science, you're hopelessly lost here.

 

[The Barbarian]

On 2/24/2020 at 7:26 PM, HAZARD said:

Humans have 46 and chimps have 48.Chromosomal differences between Homo and Great Apes. Humans have a characteristic diploid chromosome number of 2N=46 whereas the other Great Apes (orangutans, gorillas, and chimps) are all 2N=48.

Yep.   As one.opinion told you, the evidence for a chromosome fusion in humans is overwhelming.   Not only does one human chromosome look almost exactly like two chimpanzee chromosomes joined together, at the fusion site, the remains of the telomeres for each end can be found in the fused human chromosome.  The reason we know that the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees had 24 pairs of chromosomes is that 24 is the normal condition for apes.   Meaning humans had a fusion,not that chimpanzees had a chromosome split.   Both of these mutations do happen, but in this case, the fusion clearly occurred.

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by The Barbarian

[dad2]

49 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

 

Quote

 people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area.

Since I look to God's word, I could never overestimate the knowledge He gives. As for the guy who supposedly thinks evolutiondunit is a highly estimated concept, we must flush.

 

 Your opinion that man shares relatives with flatworms cannot be hidden behind Scripture, no matter how intensely you think no one can see.

 

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by dad2

[dad2]

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

Quote

 Evolutionary theory assumes that life began somehow, and describes how it changes over time. 

 

It assumes that so called lower life forms are where 'higher' life forms came from.

 

Quote

  But how it began is not part of evolutionary theory, nor does it matter to the theory.

I agree. Since they have no clue anyhow. We can start with the ancestor to flatworms and man if you like. You see it does matter that you claim this is where man came from.

 

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by dad2