Creation vs. Evolution

[StanJ]

I think he meant 6days. :idunno:

It is a common strategy YECs use when they are losing the argument. They claim they have some mystical knowledge that preempts what can be determined through empiricism. See, their concern is not about getting closer to truth. They are simply trying to win each perceived argument as it comes, without also considering a broader view of everything else they have claimed.

It's not mystical noguru, it's called faith. Faith gives us the ability to accept and believe what God say is true, despite peer pressure and so-called science. Faith is the enemy of logic. Faith is the enemy of so-called educated people.

 

[6days]

You either willfully ignored or didn't read the part where I specifically said that humans exhibit artificial selection, not natural selection, and therefore SHOULD exhibit accumulation of negative mutations.

uh....NO.

You were replying to a comment I made about geneticists and the "population bomb"...obviously I was talking about humans. (And now you know that geneticists are concerned about our decaying genome).You like to change the topic when losing...or not understanding the argument.
(And... "You willfully ignored" that I DID address your remarks about natural selection and animals.)

You also exhibit an inability to understand the word "eretz." Color me shocked

Color you baffled. 'Eretz' has a number of definitions, but understood by context.

He thinks this because 6days kept claiming it was an "evolutionist fraud" for pages and pages even after he'd been told repeatedly that Piltdown was exposed by other scientists, and that's the reason why science is reliable

You are confusing evolutionism with science.

Piltdown was a fraud perpetuated by evolutionists.....promoted in textbooks as a proof of common ancestry. Science proved that evolutionary belief was wrong (MANY years later). The Bible also tells it was was wrong, since we are are descendants of Adam and Eve created on the 6th day.

 

[noguru]

Duplicate.

 

[noguru]

It's not mystical noguru, it's called faith. Faith gives us the ability to accept and believe what God say is true, despite peer pressure and so-called science. Faith is the enemy of logic. Faith is the enemy of so-called educated people.

So your faith means you can ignore reality and discard logic and reason, is that what you want us to accept?

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear Kdall,

6days does not mean that God would consider the first two days of the Creation to be longer than a day, when He gave the rest of the days as 24 {23} hours. So that exits that a day is an 'eon' of time in the book of Genesis. It should be understood by now. Why keep harping on it. Same with the Great Flood. If God would not have covered all of the mountains on the Earth with water, then the birds would have lived by flying to the nearest mountaintops. But God said He would kill the birds on earth. But not the ones in the Ark. Think about it!!

Michael

 

[everready]

Dear Kdall,

6days does not mean that God would consider the first two days of the Creation to be longer than a day, when He gave the rest of the days as 24 {23} hours. So that exits that a day is an 'eon' of time in the book of Genesis. It should be understood by now. Why keep harping on it. Same with the Great Flood. If God would not have covered all of the mountains on the Earth with water, then the birds would have lived by flying to the nearest mountaintops. But God said He would kill the birds on earth. But not the ones in the Ark. Think about it!!

Michael

I'm afraid he has thought about it Michael. :help:


everready

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear everready,

He has? Well, good!! If you say so.

Michael

 

[way 2 go]

and what did science do when it was discovered that Piltdown man was not a real find?

I'll give you a hint - Piltdown man was removed from any display, investigations into just how the fraud was perpetrated were carried out and science has never denied that it got duped rather wanting to learn how not to get fooled again.

No contrast that response with your own out of hand rejection of anything and everything that you don't happen to like.

Rodhocetus
faked and still on display

4min-6min mark
Rodhocetus discoverer Phil Gingerich admit that the fossil never showed evidence of whale flippers nor of a fluked tail.

http://kgov.s3.amazonaws.com/bel/2015/20150525-BEL103-32k.mp3

 

[StanJ]

So your faith means you can ignore reality and discard logic and reason, is that what you want us to accept?

What or who's reality? Yours?
Yes...my faith means I ignore your reality, because it ISN'T.
What Carl Sagan said about so-called scientific reality is very true.

"Finding the occasional straw of truth awash in a great ocean of confusion and bamboozle requires intelligence, vigilance, dedication and courage. But if we don't practice these tough habits of thought, we cannot hope to solve the truly serious problems that face us -- and we risk becoming a nation of suckers, up for grabs by the next charlatan who comes along."
​

Personally I learned to identify the scientific charlatans long ago, along with the regular ones.

 

[Kdall]

uh....NO.

You were replying to a comment I made about geneticists and the "population bomb"...obviously I was talking about humans. (And now you know that geneticists are concerned about our decaying genome).You like to change the topic when losing...or not understanding the argument.
(And... "You willfully ignored" that I DID address your remarks about natural selection and animals.)


Color you baffled. 'Eretz' has a number of definitions, but understood by context.


You are confusing evolutionism with science.

Piltdown was a fraud perpetuated by evolutionists.....promoted in textbooks as a proof of common ancestry. Science proved that evolutionary belief was wrong (MANY years later). The Bible also tells it was was wrong, since we are are descendants of Adam and Eve created on the 6th day.

Be honest, do you or do you not understand the difference between natural selection and artificial selection?

 

[StanJ]

Be honest, do you or do you not understand the difference between natural selection and artificial selection?

Maybe you can sum it up in your OWN words Kdall so we can see it?

 

[Kdall]

Dear Kdall,

6days does not mean that God would consider the first two days of the Creation to be longer than a day, when He gave the rest of the days as 24 {23} hours. So that exits that a day is an 'eon' of time in the book of Genesis. It should be understood by now. Why keep harping on it. Same with the Great Flood. If God would not have covered all of the mountains on the Earth with water, then the birds would have lived by flying to the nearest mountaintops. But God said He would kill the birds on earth. But not the ones in the Ark. Think about it!!

Michael

Michael trust me I've thought about it. Are you sure you have? We've been through this before, but the only answer that I've ever received to my question of how Noah fed all of the animals on the ark is that "God let them all eat plants," which is at best unsubstantiated and at worst complete insanity

 

[Kdall]

Maybe you can sum it up in your OWN words Kdall so we can see it?

This isn't that hard to understand. As I mentioned, unless the recipient of a positive mutation ALSO has no major negative ones, then the positive mutation will not be passed on as the creature will not be more fit than its competitors. The vast majority of mutations are negative, but these aren't passed on normally because, in nature, being less competent will be the result of negative mutations. This is why evolution takes hundreds of generations to produce major change in wild species.

Humans and domesticated species are different in that natural selection is almost always replaced by artificial selection, in which mutations that produce desirable traits are chosen over those that enhance survivability. Humans have for thousands of years been so secure due to the safety of civilization that what looks good is chosen over what is evolutionarily beneficial. An example would be blue eyes (much greater chance of vision loss than brown) and as a result, many mutations have built up in our species' genome over time. In domestic animals, humans breed animals with traits they like together, such as a certain fur color pattern. Frequently animals were bred together that were closely related to effect this, as they have similar gnetic make ups and are far more likely to both exhibit the same trait than individuals that aren't closely related. But, as you should know, breeding close relatives also greatly enhances the likelihood of bad genetic defects, which is why, for example, dalmations have beautiful spotted coats yet also are prone to horrible genetic illnesses.

So to recap:
natural selection = positive mutations promoted, negative mutations selected against, ultimately resulting in a more fit species
Artificial selection = mutations that produce desirable traits promoted (often through breeding close relatives) ultimately resulting in a less fit species

 

[Kdall]

Rodhocetus
faked and still on display

4min-6min mark
Rodhocetus discoverer Phil Gingerich admit that the fossil never showed evidence of whale flippers nor of a fluked tail.

http://kgov.s3.amazonaws.com/bel/2015/20150525-BEL103-32k.mp3

That's because it wasn't a whale, dingus. It was a transitional species. It had highly webbed feet that had elongated into something resembling a flipper with fingers and had a flattened tail similar to a crocodile or sea snake. It's the kind of animal that precedes the flipper/tail fluke stage.

Additionally, we can look at the skulls of animals in cetacean (whale) evolution and order them just according to the structure and location of their earbones. Flippers are just a bonus.

100% real. Still on display because of that. I've seen a skeleton of one up close. It's not a fake.

 

[Kdall]

I'm afraid he has thought about it Michael. :help:


everready

Finally. We agree

 

[StanJ]

Kdall....I asked for your OWN words, but here, read this.

Gen 1:21 (NIV) and Gen 1:24-25

There, is your so-called evolution. God started the genetic process and subsequent pro-creative process, and if it wasn't for sin, it would never have mutated in ANY way.

 

[Kdall]

Kdall....I asked for your OWN words, but here, read this.

Gen 1:21 (NIV) and Gen 1:24-25

There, is your so-called evolution. God started the genetic process and subsequent pro-creative process, and if it wasn't for sin, it would never have mutated in ANY way.

Stan are you serious? I quoted myself. Those are my own words.

Fun fact: Genesis isn't a science book. I do believe that God started the process of evolution, but the order in which it's portrayed in Genesis is incorrect

 

[StanJ]

Stan are you serious? I quoted myself. Those are my own words.

Fun fact: Genesis isn't a science book. I do believe that God started the process of evolution, but the order in which it's portrayed in Genesis is incorrect

Sorry it didn't come across as being YOUR OWN words. Guess I'm a tad skeptical.

I know the Bible isn't a science book thanks. That is NOT the point.
What some may see as a self dependant or unrelated evolution, was in fact created by God. How unbelievers view and report on it is another issue all together.

 

[Kdall]

I know the Bible isn't a science book thanks. That is NOT the point.
What some may see as a self dependant or unrelated evolution, was in fact created by God. How unbelievers view and report on it is another issue all together.

Well if you're good with God creating evolution and using it as His means of creation, then I'm not sure that we disagree much

 

[MichaelCadry]

Michael trust me I've thought about it. Are you sure you have? We've been through this before, but the only answer that I've ever received to my question of how Noah fed all of the animals on the ark is that "God let them all eat plants," which is at best unsubstantiated and at worst complete insanity

Yes, Kdall, the lions ate straw just like they will do in the future. It is written that the lions shall lie down with the lambs and eat straw. Nothing is impossible with God. Your faith isn't strong enough to believe this? Are you a Christian if you don't believe the Bible?

Michael