Different Opinions....Who is right?

[Deeje]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

 

[Samael_Khan]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

Another reason could be that an intelligent being used evolution as the process to create these things?

Would you also say that the intelligence also created parasites and viruses?

 

[Sunstone]

I cannot understand how anyone might suggest that evolution proceeds purely by 'fluke', if that is what is being suggested here. It would be simply mind-boggling that anyone could do that and still believe they were discussing evolution.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

In addition:

If God made all creatures vegetarian (as per the bible) and later on some of those herbivores became carnivores, was that change God's doing as well?

And if evolution is false, do you think then that we couldn't make accurate predictions of it? And what does it mean to its validity if we could use the ToE to make accurate predictions?

And if useful in this way, then why can we make accurate predictions based off ToE and how does this compare to the predictability of the idea of an intelligent designer?

 

[Sunstone]

And if evolution is false, do you think then that we couldn't make accurate predictions of it? And what does it mean to its validity if we could use the ToE to make accurate predictions?

And if useful in this way, then why can we make accurate predictions based off ToE and how does this compare to the predictability of the idea of an intelligent designer?

Exactly! Were some creationist -- any creationist -- to show me that intelligent design could "out-predict", so to speak, evolutionary theory, I would be compelled to consider intelligent design the superior model, and in all likelihood, closer to the truth.

There can be other means or grounds for deciding between competing notions of what the case might be, but a notion's usefulness in making accurate predictions is more or less the queen of them all.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Exactly! Were some creationist -- any creationist -- to show me that intelligent design could "out-predict", so to speak, evolutionary theory, I would be compelled to consider intelligent design the superior model, and in all likelihood, closer to the truth.

Same here. I think that is the core of the issue.

 

[stvdv]

If God made all creatures vegetarian (as per the bible) and later on some of those herbivores became carnivores, was that change God's doing as well?

According to Bhagavad Gita...'yes'... as BG declares ".. digestive fire is Brahma". If meat would not be digested, herbivore won't live long on meat.

 

[Samael_Khan]

According to Bhagavad Gita...'yes'... as BG declares ".. digestive fire is Brahma". If meat would not be digested, herbivore won't live long on meat.

Exactly! I was addressing a certain belief that animals only ate vegetation before the flood but then after the flood carnivores came to existence. Since according to that believe God made all animal "kinds" in Genesis and variation occurred within them to make them the different subcategories they have today, how was this achieved if all animals only ate vegetation?

So I agree with the BG.

 

[stvdv]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

Thank you for sharing. Beautiful creatures. And to me, they are evidential proof of a big mystery far beyond science, which cannot be scientifically proven.

 

[Altfish]

Evolution isn't an 'opinion'; it is a proven fact/theory.

 

[danieldemol]

...
Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

Not all believers would see it that way. I believe in God and that all these things evolved without “intelligent direction”

 

[Samael_Khan]

Evolution isn't an 'opinion'; it is a proven fact/theory.

I think we can make the prediction that certain theists would innevitably say that a theory means it is just guesswork.

Perhaps you could explain the difference between the meaning of the word theory in the scientific community?

I would say a comparison of the use of the word theory in the scientific context is:

"Theory of gravity"

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

You need to include the emerald cockroach wasp on your list.

 

[Altfish]

I think we can make the prediction that certain theists would innevitably say that a theory means it is just guesswork.

Perhaps you could explain the difference between the meaning of the word theory in the scientific community?

I would say a comparison of the use of the word theory in the scientific context is:

"Theory of gravity"

Many of the general public understand a theory to be a good guess; like in this phrase "I have a theory that if you eat carrots you can see better in the dark"
In science that is NOT a theory, it is at best a hypothesis.
Hypothesis are ideas that are being worked on, by scientists, they may become theories, but more likely they will be discarded.

The Theory of Gravity is not challenged because it doesn't contradict the Bible or other religious books.

 

[viole]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

Why does it need to camouflage, in your opinion? To escape another design?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Samael_Khan]

Many of the general public understand a theory to be a good guess; like in this phrase "I have a theory that if you eat carrots you can see better in the dark"
In science that is NOT a theory, it is at best a hypothesis.
Hypothesis are ideas that are being worked on, by scientists, they may become theories, but more likely they will be discarded.

The Theory of Gravity is not challenged because it doesn't contradict the Bible or other religious books.

Thanks for this. It is very useful.

So the public use of theory corresponds to the word hypothesis in the scientific community. Theory is then an accurate explanation of a phenomenon thoroughly supported by evidence.

I have come across flat earthers who reject the theory of gravity and base that on the bible.

 

[ChristineM]

I came across this today....its a Flower Mantis.....beautifully designed to be camouflaged on the flowers it lives on.

Science would describe how this just evolved with no intelligent direction at all.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

What about this one...

Who could imagine that such beauty could be hidden under a living leaf?

Or this guy who just perfectly blends in with his surroundings....?

How about a bit of floating seaweed?

Spot the owl...

Chameleons are just incredible...

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

Natural selection is a wonderful thing. Those animals whos skin pigmentation provided a modicum of camouflage allowed them to survive and reproduce thus passing on their genes to their offspring.

 

[epronovost]

Another reason could be that an intelligent being used evolution as the process to create these things?

Why should we assume or even propose such a thing? It's a useless layer of complexity without any evidence or even possible method by which said intelligence could manipulate the evolutionnary process.

 

[exchemist]

According to Bhagavad Gita...'yes'... as BG declares ".. digestive fire is Brahma". If meat would not be digested, herbivore won't live long on meat.

It is perhaps not surprising that the imagery of "digestive fire" should come from a part of the world in which a lot of hot spices are used in cooking.

 

[Nimos]

This creature is as beautiful as the flowers that it walks on.....so what makes the most sense....deliberate and thoughtful creation....or just an accident of nature?

Definitely a result of many years of evolution.

Believers would see an exquisitely crafted creature designed by an intelligent Creator to be invisible to predators but facilitating catching prey of its own.

Why do believers think that God did this for the butterfly, but not for this poor creature?

(Insert picture of Crocodile eating wildebeest)

Why weren't it made "invisible" by the creator... intelligent design or what?

Did nature just fluke these? Or was this camouflage clever and deliberate creation?

Variations of these patterns over many years made those individuals more likely to survive compared to those that didn't got good camouflage and therefore they could pass on their genes.