Interplanner
Well-known member
You might want to define the terms of the said 'Creator' before you dismiss the odds. Evolution itself is way, way past Ferrellian odds as it is.
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
You might want to define the terms of the said 'Creator' before you dismiss the odds. Evolution itself is way, way past Ferrellian odds as it is.
iouae
Well-known member
Huh? A definition is worthless if everyone agrees on it?
Can't do that until you give a useful definition of "kind".
Everyone believes allele frequency changes Captain Obvious!
Show any macro evolution, I am not fussy.
Greg Jennings
New member
How long do you think the Cambrian explosion lasted? It seems like you think it was about a week, and not millions of years
Greg Jennings
New member
Those aren't for me to define. If he's out there, that's his job
Go take a genetics course at the local university. How wrong you are about something that will seem so simple when explained by a professor will become evident
iouae
Well-known member
Everyone is in agreement populations change, such as when your wife has a baby. I call it diversify.
Jose Fly
New member
And do you agree that the earth is about 4 billion years old, and that life has existed on it for around 3.5 billion years?
iouae
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
Fascinating post, considering that I regard the genetics as the sign that 'He's out there.' It is your job not to misrepresent or misconceive him.
I won't be attending any colleges because they are busy making lists of topics you can and can't talk about, and getting rid of the 1st and 2nd amendments as soon as Obama is popular enough, and can further snow us with his Muslim jihadist protection, as in San Bernadino through HS. http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...email&utm_campaign=Jolt12172015&utm_term=Jolt
Not my idea of a safe place to go to.
Besides asking how did this place create itself, I now am compelled to ask you how did the complexity of genetics create itself. Darwin, and the guy on the genome project, both said there is too much here that is too wondrous to have come about by evolutionary mutation.
But thanks for your thoughts.
Jose Fly
New member
Do you also agree that if life on earth began via natural means, we would expect to see evidence that the first life forms were single-celled organisms? IOW, we wouldn't expect to see evidence of things like birds or mammals in the oldest rocks, correct?
iouae
Well-known member
God made algae first because there was no O2 for birds and mammals to breath. And the sea was full of iron.
Jose Fly
New member
Ok, never mind. You asked me to make a case for evolutionary theory, but if every step of the way you're just going to say "God made that", there's no point in continuing.
iouae
Well-known member
No, keep going to the Cambrian explosion, when most phyla appear.
Evolution teaches that simpler body forms change to more complex.
Yet Trilobites are earliest and most complex, as are fish/Cordates.
Evolution needs time. There was none between simplest and most complex Phyla.
Greg Jennings
New member
Bump
Greg Jennings
New member
iouae, I showed you with an article from a scientific publication that you are incorrect about the above information.
You countered with a Wikipedia link that didn't work
Greg Jennings
New member
Let me guess.....that opinion isn't coming from personal experience? I can assure you as someone who attended a private Christian institution, that you're wrong.
It's not known for certain, but the building blocks of life (amino acids) and of DNA (nucleic acids) have been proven to be able to be naturally synthesized from inorganic compounds. So that's a good start.
If you're compelled to ask me how the complexity of genetics created itself, I am compelled to ask you how the complexity of the creator who created those complex genetics created itself?
iouae
Well-known member
http://prehistoricearth.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Cambrian_biota_by_phylum
Click on the top list.
How could flatworms disappear from Cambrian fossils?
iouae
Well-known member
But it is like compressing all evolution into a week since they all occur together.
Here is what Richard Dawkins said of Flatworms....
"I have dealt with the Cambrian Explosion at length before. Here I'll add just one new point, illustrated by the flatworms, Platyhelminthes. This great phylum of worms includes the parasitic flukes and tapeworms, which are of great medical importance. My favorites, however, are the free-living turbellarian worms, of which there are more than 4,000 species: that's about as numerous as all the mammal species put together. They are common, both in water and on land, and presumably have been common for a very long time. You'd expect, therefore, to see a rich fossil history. Unfortunately, there is almost nothing. Apart from a handful of ambiguous trace fossils, not a single fossil flatworm has ever been found. The Platyhelminthes, to a worm, are "already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history." But in this case, "the very first time they appear" is not the Cambrian but today. "
http://europe.newsweek.com/excerpt-richard-dawkinss-new-book-evolution-79345?rm=eu
Glad you accept evolution!
Now kindly define what you consider "macro-evolution" and what sort of evidence (pay att. to the time frame) you would need in order to accept it?
iouae
Well-known member
- Status