• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Evidence For And Against Evolution

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Man alone has the intelligence necessary to make clothing. Other animals can sometimes make rudimentary coverings, but I would not call them clothing. Still it shows that what we do is not unique.

And since all of the evidence points to evolution and only evolution you would have to explain why God made it look exactly as if life was the product of evolution. You are in effect saying he planted false evidence. That would make him a liar. Very few Christians believe in a lying God so those that understand evolution tend to accept it.
About uniqueness. Again. Why don't you tell me that the ability of humans and not gorillas to make and look through microscopes is not unique to humans. OK? Also clothing. Why don't you tell me that the ability to teach others about sewing machines and needle and thread, etc., is not unique to humans? (Let's not forget about reading and writing.)
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Hermit crabs don't come with their own shells. Instead, they dress themselves in whatever cast-off shells may be available -- sometimes even in cast-off food tins left by careless humans.
I don't know that much yet about hermit crabs and exactly how they are born. But that doesn't really make a difference when it comes to humans. It only speaks of the fabulous majesty of God's creation. How it all transpired I surely cannot say. But humans are uniquely different in that they do not instinctively make clothes.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So what reason are you giving for why humans wear clothes? Because God made "aprons" for Adam and Eve? Just to hide their naughty bits?

But surely, God did not make neckties, or muumuus, or tuxedos, or socks and shoes. From the Bible, you get zero hint that God was doing anything except trying to make humans feel ashamed of the exposure of their sex organs. Aprons were not going to keep anybody warm, or advertise social status.
I know that Genesis says God made coverings for them. If you think their body parts are naughty, well so do many, many humans who make clothes to cover themselves. I do not draw the same conclusions you do about the "naughty" body parts. My only conclusion here is that animals do not make and teach each other how to cover themselves. Going with your consideration of shame, animals evidently did not "evolve" to that shameful idea you present. Yes, humans are certainly unique in this area.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
One cannot believe in evolution as currently explained and the Bible at the same time. Here's something more about evolution: findings appear to refute speculations by some scientists that Neanderthals and humans interbred in more recent times. Now isn't that interesting? Really? Neanderthal: 99.5 Percent Human
You mean that you cannot believe in both. That is okay, since we know that life is the product of evolution belief is not involved. And there you go breaking the Ninth Commandment again.

And your article is out of date.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I want to understand. Butterflies and other types have a metamorphosis not of their own will. Humans are certainly unique in the respect of making and wearing clothes. So how and why you think this is evolved brain is beyond me. Yes it is beyond my realm of reasoning. So maybe I have Neanderthal brain. (lol...) Just not as developed as yours and others. :)
if you refuse to learn no one can help you.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
You mean that you cannot believe in both. That is okay, since we know that life is the product of evolution belief is not involved. And there you go breaking the Ninth Commandment again.

And your article is out of date.
Have a better one? Sure belief in evolution is necessary because the voids show evidence of the gaps, misinterpretations and guesses therein. Thanks for the conversation. ☺️
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
You mean that you cannot believe in both. That is okay, since we know that life is the product of evolution belief is not involved. And there you go breaking the Ninth Commandment again.

And your article is out of date.
Again you leave yourself without foundation as usual by just saying the article is out of date. Meantime archaeological evidence is being discovered leading many to conclude it verifies what the Bible says.
 

JasAnMa

Member
Again, not really sedimentary, volcanic which even though they were deposited

Actually that was @Jose Fly , but it was still an incredibly poor argument.
It's a bad argument to go against the idea that geological processes have been at least close to the same food millions of years? That's a huge assumption. And I do realize that there was Ash in the deposit below the volcano, there were many other sediments as well and they were deposited rapidly as well as peat. We have direct evidence that sedimentary rock can firm quickly and very little to think it forms slowly.
 

JasAnMa

Member
Why would you assume they have a beginning? That would imply there is a time when they are not operative, but time itself is part of those physical laws.

More to the point, the notion of causality is *one* of the physical laws (to the extent it is true---it isn't always). So to talk about a cause (beginning, origin) of the natural laws is self-contradictory.

What I would say is that the physical laws are coexistent with matter, energy, space, and time. And the spacetime structure simply exists--it isn't caused at all.
They either had a beginning, or they are eternal. If they had a beginning it's hard to imagine they came about on their own. They are forces that produce observable effects but they have no mind or will. Without the presence of a Creator they were made by a random force and thus would be difficult to explain how a random force could create guiding forces. If you take the position it wasn't random, then it was guided. It's also hard to explain how a guiding force formed other guiding forces because that argument goes backwards indefinitely. Now if you believe the universe is eternal that's a difficult argument as well since infinity appears to be used in mathematics but applies no where else.
 

JasAnMa

Member
A point seemingly designed to move the goalposts and simultanously dodge the point that was actually made.............




So, are you really completely oblivious concerning the natural processes of physics and chemistry?




It's called physics and chemistry.



So you're just going to completely ignore that the forces of nature (the nuclear forces, electro magnetism, gravity) work on matter and thereby makes stuff happen?
Just because they make things happen does not mean they bring order from chaos... When a plate near the ocean drops it causes a tsunami that forces anything in it's way... Out of the way. It made a lot happen but it didn't bring order. The laws themselves cant bring about order. I'm not sure how anythingi said is ignoring the forces of nature...I actually mentioned that they were forces.
 

JasAnMa

Member
The laws of thermodynamics state nothing at all concerning the origins of laws or physical constants... what the heck are you talking about...



It seems your case doesn't even have lunch - free or otherwise.




Contrary to what, exactly?
1: An example that any law of nature creates order from chaos.
2: all things move toward entropy and away from order. Entropy can be brought toward order only when the right information is added.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Try again, I must have missed it. Should be easy for you. By the way, it seems that ocean fossils were found in the tops of some mountains. And of course many wonder, how can that be so?

Sorry, you can only ask the answer to the same question so many times. You are not qualified to say "Try again". People that run away cannot make that demand.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Again you leave yourself without foundation as usual by just saying the article is out of date. Meantime archaeological evidence is being discovered leading many to conclude it verifies what the Bible says.
No, it is a popular science article. They often get facts wrong. If you were polite and honest I would be more willing to help you out. Sadly you have confirmed the adage that there is no such thing as a honest and informed creationist. You are not even all that informed and you are already trying to use dishonest arguments.
 
Top