Evolution My ToE

[Hockeycowboy]

I don't think anyone is harrassing me about genetics, nPeace. They have their viewpoint and trying to tell me how silly I am to believe in the Bible rather than evolution, I suppose. But I just can't accept the idea that, let's say, lions are genetically built from fish per evolution with a creative, intelligent force. And really, there's no scientific proof that it happened as taught by evolutionists. It's all up in the air. And philosphically driven. What I've seen here is the idea that Bible-based belief is for stupid people. And frankly, I used to feel the same way when I was in college and before and after. Until I became, as the song goes, a believer in God, who does not lie.
Just because there are similar genes from bonobos to humans, and bonobos are said to have 98-99% of human genes so they say, does not, in my mind, prove evolution. Obviously to some it does. Thank you for your well thought out comment.

Similarity of genes just means that Jehovah used a similar "blueprint," if you will, in creating these organisms.
Really when you compare us w/ chimps, there is a huge gulf between man's capabilities and what they call our "nearest cousin" the bonobo: comparing IQ, language creation, application of justice, etc., etc., etc.
And bobobos are our nearest? Lol. The chasm is too great!

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I don't now know bro. I have known only too well, for a long time, and only too well whom those posters are, that make you go .

@YoursTrue someone harassing you about genetics? Feel free to point them to the post here. They are ignoring it.
However, there is a lot of hard facts, in that one section. Facts evolution believers don't like to face up to.
It demonstrates that there is a lot of circular reasoning to support the theory.
It's also from scientists, and not the Bible.

Unfortunately, well actually it's not unfortunate, but I would have liked to share more on this, but I won't have that time for the next few days, but I have time to throw in just a little bit.

The claim of similarities in human-chimp DNA is exaggerated, and the truth is not given to the public - including the differences in mutations, which they claim add up to produce a change from one animal to the other.

There is a lot more I'll follow up with later, but I have to go in a few minutes.

More baseless conspiracy theories and denial of the evidence. I expected no more, but should, given the level of actual knowledge available, even to the public.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Similarity of genes just means that Jehovah used a similar "blueprint," if you will, in creating these organisms.
Really when you compare us w/ chimps, there is a huge gulf between man's capabilities and what they call our "nearest cousin" the bonobo: comparing IQ, language creation, application of justice, etc., etc., etc.
And bobobos are our nearest? Lol. The chasm is too great!

Perhaps this is true, but it is merely belief with nothing to support it. All the evidence leads to is the current interpretation from science.

There are huge gaps between the capabilities of some siblings, but the are not the characters that establish a relationship.

Our relationship with other species of apes exists despite your churches doctrine and demands. Which appears to be the sole basis of your objections.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The latter appears to be the only real basis for objection and denial of the science I witness from creationists. Coupled with a real or feigned ignorance of science, biology and theory.

@Hockeycowboy my observations on this are easily made and my conclusions are logically valid. They in no way require creationist-level creativity to be drawn.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Our relationship with other species of apes exists despite your churches doctrine and demands. Which appears to be the sole basis of your objections.

Sole basis?

I gave you a basis. It was not a religious one.

The differences are too great.....the greatest disparity in the entire history of life, for two such supposedly 'closely-related species.'

We transcend far above all animal species!

 

[Astrophile]

He can except for one thing, says the Bible. God cannot and does not, lie. Furthermore, some do believe that God makes deformed infants, makes people maimed, crippled, brain damaged in circumstances of life, but that is not true. Titus 1:2 exclaims: "in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began." He can do anything He wants, but is not responsible for mutations and horrible circumstances.

There are several things that God cannot do. He cannot commit suicide. He cannot abdicate his position. He cannot have sexual intercourse with a being of the same kind as himself. He cannot be conscious of having done something morally wrong. Human beings can do all these things, as well as lying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sole basis?

I gave you a basis. It was not a religious one.

The differences are too great.....the greatest disparity in the entire history of life, for two such supposedly 'closely-related species.'

We transcend far above all animal species!

No, you claimed a huge difference but could not substantiate it. When you cannot support your claims then the default is what we have to go with. Your only objection is in reality based upon your religion. Have you forgotten your perpetual attempts to justify the Flood myth? That one should be even more obvious to be a fairy tale to those that have a low level of science education. For those with a science education there is no excuse for believing that story.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are several things that God cannot do. He cannot commit suicide. He cannot abdicate his position. He cannot have sexual intercourse with a being of the same kind as himself. He cannot be conscious of having done something morally wrong. Human beings can do all these things, as well as lying.

Not to mention his problems with large rocks.

 

[YoursTrue]

Similarity of genes just means that Jehovah used a similar "blueprint," if you will, in creating these organisms.
Really when you compare us w/ chimps, there is a huge gulf between man's capabilities and what they call our "nearest cousin" the bonobo: comparing IQ, language creation, application of justice, etc., etc., etc.
And bobobos are our nearest? Lol. The chasm is too great!

I agree. And a recent article about the development of language, including comments from someone I respect and admire for his brilliant use of words (Noam Chomsky), despite protests that it's evolved, really does show the impossibility of genetic evolution, again, despite the theories of those trying to conjecture how it all must have happened by genetic mutations. Alfred Wallace's Problem | Psychology Today

 

[YoursTrue]

There are several things that God cannot do. He cannot commit suicide. He cannot abdicate his position. He cannot have sexual intercourse with a being of the same kind as himself. He cannot be conscious of having done something morally wrong. Human beings can do all these things, as well as lying.

You don't have the context of the text. Thanks for offering. It doesn't apply though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You don't have the context of the text. Thanks for offering. It doesn't apply though.

The problem is that you, like other creationists, constantly claim that God is a liar. Earlier you claimed that the one thing that God could not do was to lie. It is a very gross error to read Genesis literally since on has to claim that God lied again and again by doing so.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Similarity of genes just means that Jehovah used a similar "blueprint," if you will, in creating these organisms.

Problem is that this explanation could equally be used if our genes were entirely different (Jehovah just made us all differently). Secondly, if that's what you believe, then why is it difficult for you to imagine that the mechanism Jehovah used to create living things "according to similar blueprints" was common ancestry? Thirdly, why would God need to use "similar blueprints" anyway? What advantage does that have?

Really when you compare us w/ chimps, there is a huge gulf between man's capabilities and what they call our "nearest cousin" the bonobo: comparing IQ, language creation, application of justice, etc., etc., etc.

And yet the difference in our genes is incredibly minimal.

Also, have you ever compared yourself to somebody who has, say, severe developmental disabilities? They can be incapable of those things too. Would you argue that they aren't human, or are entirely unrelated to you? Because I think you would find that's not true at all.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sole basis?

I gave you a basis. It was not a religious one.

The differences are too great.....the greatest disparity in the entire history of life, for two such supposedly 'closely-related species.'

We transcend far above all animal species!

And yet, again, our genes are almost entirely the same. If anything, all you're really doing is arguing that a relatively small change in genes can support a huge divergence in physiology and biology. You're essentially arguing in support of the idea that mutations CAN account for significant changes.

Also, your language here belies an uncomfortable perception. Once again, if you ever met a human who is, say, differently abled or suffers from a severe developmental difficulty, do you consider yourself "above" them?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So let's say again that each day of creation in the Bible was hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of years. But here's something I thought of. Although there was water with life in it (fish, for example, and plant life), humans came after that.

Fun fact: if you represent earth's history on a 24 hour clock, then humans only show up in the last 3 seconds...

So for the "You don't know" scenario, that is if God used genes to make animals and humans and fish, I know pretty well sure that you don't remember what was going on while you were conceived or while you were first born.

This doesn't seem to make any sense.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Being created in the image of God, we are unlike any animals.

Any animal species is unlike other animal species. It's what makes them seperate species.

The similarities should not fool us.

Neither should we ignore them.

True, although you probably think you share relatives with a banana!

As demonstrated by genetics, yes.
All life is ultimately related.

You admit being unable to prove your contentions about evolution itself being the sole responsible agent of life.

I have no such contentions.
This is true for every scientific idea.
Germ theory also doesn't claim that germs are exclusively responsible for the deseases associated with germs. For the simple reason that there is no way to test that.

All we can say, is that the available evidence is consistent with the model.
It's called intellectual honesty. You should try it some time...

No science models about creation actually exist.

We're talking about evolution. The scientific model of evolution exists and you have to deny it because it conflicts with your religious beliefs.

Again: that the scientific model contradicts your a priori religious beliefs, is a problem for your beliefs - not for the science.

So I am not sure who really cares what they contradict or agree with!

You certainly seem to care enough to come here and rant against the science.

Got anything at all that is not belief based on topic??

Yes. All of science.
You're the one with the mere beliefs.
Science is the thing based on evidence.

Why would I ignore science??

Because it conflicts with your religion.
You ignore all science that conflicts with your religion. Clearly.

Science is great in many ways and covers many things.

Except when it contradicts your fundamentalist religious beliefs, apparantly.

Origins is just not one of them. That is religion so what you don't like is that all people will not bow down to your beliefs.

It's hilarious how you insist on bringing down science to your level of makebelief only to then try and fault it for it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Sole basis?

I gave you a basis. It was not a religious one.

The differences are too great.....the greatest disparity in the entire history of life, for two such supposedly 'closely-related species.'

We transcend far above all animal species!

And just the answer I would expect based on a religious and doctrinal view and not on an understanding of science or the evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I agree. And a recent article about the development of language, including comments from someone I respect and admire for his brilliant use of words (Noam Chomsky), despite protests that it's evolved, really does show the impossibility of genetic evolution, again, despite the theories of those trying to conjecture how it all must have happened by genetic mutations. Alfred Wallace's Problem | Psychology Today

The article supports the evolution of language.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Similarity of genes just means that Jehovah used a similar "blueprint," if you will, in creating these organisms.
Really when you compare us w/ chimps, there is a huge gulf between man's capabilities and what they call our "nearest cousin" the bonobo: comparing IQ, language creation, application of justice, etc., etc., etc.
And bobobos are our nearest? Lol. The chasm is too great!

The actual difference between us and chimps, aren't as big as you would like to believe.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Satan and Jesus had different ideas about what Scripture meant. That does not mean Scripture was wrong, it just means that it is from God, and only God can tell us what it means. That would leave the heathen out of the loop until they decided to become his peopleas far as comprehending that particular book. Now among belivers on some issues of course there is a lack of full understanding. We have all eternity to learn, that does not mean Scripture is wrong either.

Again, you're telling me what these entities think and how they behave without ever demonstrating to anybody that they actually exist in the first place. If you can't demonstrate the existence of some thinking entity, how on earth are you determining what said entities are thinking or feeling?

And you seem to be telling me that the Bible can only be understood once a person is already a believer? Sorry, but that's an asinine and illogical way of thinking.

 

[metis]

Origin sciences is a religion.

Categorically, and even logically, false. "Religion" posits deities and supernatural events, both of which are not found or are acceptable within science without objective evidence.

You are right though, that is not science! If you cannot prove that the present nature, upon which science bases all it's past models on existed in the far past, then the models must remain belief only.

You really don't know what you're talking about. Ever hear of "forensic evidence", for example?

And what the dna testing is confirming is that the fossil record on the evolution of life that we have millions of evidence of, rather clearly show links to current life form even though there will always be some gaps. Just because you don't understand nor believe the evidence doesn't negate what we well know.

It's truly unfortunate that you church/denomination is lying to you on this, much like my fundamentalist Protestant church did to me decades ago prior to me leaving it. When any denomination teaches one to put blinders on, that denomination has to be declared "bogus" because the Truth isn't variable in either science nor honest religion.