Evolution is the only theologically plausible answer

[Hockeycowboy]

Sorry for the late reply, I’ve had responsibilities to care for.
You present some interesting arguments representing supposedly ’bad’ design, but I’ll have to answer most of them later, as I’ve got time.

- Our s-shaped spine isn't very fit for bipedalism, causing lower back pains in 70% of humans

Usually, spines work fine! Just ask Damien Walters, or other gymnasts. They perform fantastic stunts!

What you’re really finding fault with, is the fact the Bible highlights, that due to inherited imperfection from Adam, we eventually break down, get sick & die. And some come out of the womb, broken.
But our spine works fine…. I’m sure most gymnasts would agree.

- our mouth is to small to house all teeth, causing many people to have their "wisdom teeth" pulled

First off, you do know that I do believe evolution has effected much change, right? Due to pressures and evolutionary processes working on already-well-suited living systems, like cellular functions, unique body plans and their features. These were created.
Regarding human mouths… Briefly, it’s due to diet and lifestyle changes…. These have experienced the greatest changes in the past 150 years, with our modern conveniences and foods being softer and requiring longer preservation for marketing.

- male nipples (waste of resources)

(Later.)

- largyngeal nerve (waste of resources)

Already discussed in an earlier post.

- backwards eyes (all the wiring in front of photosensitive cells, causing a blind spot and in turn causing wasteful use of resources to make the brain "fill in the blanks"

(Later.)

- inactive DNA (waste of resources again)

No such thing. You should be aware of that. Some perform regulatory functions…. More are being discovered everyday.
(Maybe this explanation can apply to some of your other arguments.)

Meanwhile, such stuff is unexpected in a world where species were "design" by an "all powerfull all intelligent entity".

From my understanding of what the Bible really teaches, it is expected. This “all powerful all intelligent entity” has allowed humans & this Earth to continue on their own without His complete control, letting natural processes & methods to operate without guidance.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You've missed the point again.

If you're claiming that somebody designed the trees, you'll need to demonstrate that.

Whoosh!

 

[Hockeycowboy]

[Re: the Cambrian Explosion:]Sudden means over about ten million years in this context.

That is about the length of time they all appeared, but species representing those families / orders — the trilobites, anomalocaris, other Cambrian fauna — appeared suddenly, without obvious precursors.

Good evidence supporting a creative event, ‘according to their kinds.’

What's the problem…?

The problem is that all this guesswork, based on these concepts that are touted as facts, I believe will never be resolved.

Still, the "theory" that you descended from generations of human beings producing offspring is not in doubt.

I agree! I descended from generations of human beings! That’s a fact. No theory needed.

Sure you can. You can read about how.

(You didn’t address this to me but thought I’d reply….)
Only with literature that makes plentiful use of subjective wording, like “probably”, “could have”, might have been”, etc.
That follows the realm of beliefs.
It is not science, but rather, philosophy.

For you, but not the critical thinker.

So Meyer, Axe, Minnich, Morris, Egnor, Denton, Ross, etc., are not critical thinkers?
And before you claim them to be biased…. you don’t have a bias?

And which published literature, without resorting to subjective language, explains and describes the pathways evolution took to create the cellular machinery we observe, like the bacterial flagellum, for one? With its many parts functioning as one unit, and interacting with other machines, how would it arise de novo?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Your "argument" about the Cambrian Explosion was debunked several decades ago. And over and over again on this forum.
And yet you keep trying to use it again and again, despite this being pointed out to you endless times.
Why??

Why? Because presenting counter arguments is not debunking.

The Cambrian Explosion is a problem for LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) evolutionists.
And getting more so.
The fossil record of the Cambrian, in most places, has been very well-preserve, so the arguments that the “fossil record is imperfect” don’t face up to scrutiny.

“Debunked”? Hardly!

 

[Hockeycowboy]

It is ridiculous what is passed off as scientific fact that is just made up.

With Ken Ham, I agree with you about some of his arguments. Kent Hovind, too.

But have you found arguments raised by scientists like Meyer, Axe, or Behe to be “made up”?
Which arguments?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry for the late reply, I’ve had responsibilities to care for.
You present some interesting arguments representing supposedly ’bad’ design, but I’ll have to answer most of them later, as I’ve got time.
Usually, spines work fine! Just ask Damien Walters, or other gymnasts. They perform fantastic stunts!

What you’re really finding fault with, is the fact the Bible highlights, that due to inherited imperfection from Adam, we eventually break down, get sick & die. And some come out of the womb, broken.
But our spine works fine…. I’m sure most gymnasts would agree.



First off, you do know that I do believe evolution has effected much change, right? Due to pressures and evolutionary processes working on already-well-suited living systems, like cellular functions, unique body plans and their features. These were created.
Regarding human mouths… Briefly, it’s due to diet and lifestyle changes…. These have experienced the greatest changes in the past 150 years, with our modern conveniences and foods being softer and requiring longer preservation for marketing.


(Later.)

Already discussed in an earlier post.

(Later.)

No such thing. You should be aware of that. Some perform regulatory functions…. More are being discovered everyday.
(Maybe this explanation can apply to some of your other arguments.)

From my understanding of what the Bible really teaches, it is expected. This “all powerful all intelligent entity” has allowed humans & this Earth to continue on their own without His complete control, letting natural processes & methods to operate without guidance.

Let's go over these points one at a time. You need to be able to support your claims with reliable sources.

How do you defend the totally wasteful recurrent laryngeal nerve. In giraffes. In humans. In whales.

 

[Subduction Zone]

With Ken Ham, I agree with you about some of his arguments. Kent Hovind, too.

But have you found arguments raised by scientists like Meyer, Axe, or Behe to be “made up”?
Which arguments?

So you have arguments that could be refuted by a middle school student.

Kent is either a liar a complete idiot, or both.. He has been caught so many times that it is not funny any more. Everyone watch the Han Nye debate that can reason at all knows exactly when Ham lost the debate. Neither one appears to be honest at all.

How do you justify Lying for Jesus? Is Jesus that weak?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

S
Usually, spines work fine!

Fine, yes. Not great. Not perfect. Instead, just good enough.

Just ask Damien Walters, or other gymnasts. They perform fantastic stunts!

For every one of them, there are thousands who's backs can't handle such stunts.

I used to play highly competitive tennis. I'm from the generation of Xavier Malisse, Kim Clijsters, Justin Henin, etc. There were HUNDREDS of us. Some of us even bigger talents then Clijsters and Malisse.

But all but those 3 didn't "survive" a youth of such intensive sports. The bodies of pretty much every one else, were simply not capable of enduring that kind of stress. Mine included.

At 15, my knees gave me problems.
At 17 back problems literally put an end to my tennis career. This is when I had to realize that professional tennis was not going to happen for me. Not because I wasn't good enough (I was able to keep up with the likes of Malisse). Rather because 99% of human bodies, which included mine, out there simply aren't capable of enduring the level of stress that pro-sports demands.

A few years later, at 23 - years after I stopped playing intensive high level competition - my body was still responding to the enormous stress it had to endure the previous decade. This time, it was my shoulder that gave out, requiring surgery. Tennis was completely over and done with at that point.

To point at the rare exceptions of ultra-rare athletes and pretending that they are "the standard" is simply intellectually dishonest.

The fact is that the VAST majority of human bodies wouldn't be able to handle such stress.
The point remains: 70% of people have to deal with lower back pains at some point in their life, as a direct result of the overall shape and workings of the spine in combination with bipedalism.

What you’re really finding fault with, is the fact the Bible highlights, that due to inherited imperfection from Adam, we eventually break down, get sick & die. And some come out of the womb, broken.

Post hoc rationalizations that are not in evidence.
Meanwhile, the list I gave you is 100% in evidence.

First off, you do know that I do believe evolution has effected much change, right? Due to pressures and evolutionary processes working on already-well-suited living systems, like cellular functions, unique body plans and their features. These were created.
Regarding human mouths… Briefly, it’s due to diet and lifestyle changes…. These have experienced the greatest changes in the past 150 years, with our modern conveniences and foods being softer and requiring longer preservation for marketing.

This is not something that only occurred in the last 150 years. This is a homo sapiens thing. Far older.
Our mouths are too small because they had to make place for the enlarging brain.
It was a tradeoff (like most things in evolution usually are).

The pro's of a larger brain outweighed the contra's of a smaller mouth.

No such thing. You should be aware of that. Some perform regulatory functions…. More are being discovered everyday.
(Maybe this explanation can apply to some of your other arguments.)

Off course there is such a thing.

There's an experiment where 20 million base pairs of nonfunctional dna was removed from mice. There was nothing wrong with the mice.

From my understanding of what the Bible really teaches, it is expected. This “all powerful all intelligent entity” has allowed humans & this Earth to continue on their own without His complete control, letting natural processes & methods to operate without guidance.

So humans share ancestry with all other creatures?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Cambrian Explosion is a problem for LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) evolutionists.
And getting more so.

It's not. Creationists misrepresenting the science tend to claim that, I know.
But they are just wrong.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But have you found arguments raised by scientists like Meyer, Axe, or Behe to be “made up”?
Which arguments?

Yes. And not just us.... even courts have found that.

Take Behe for example........ in order to be able to call his arguments "science", he actually had to redefine what a "scientific theory" is. And his redefining caused him to acknowledge, under oath, that under THAT definition, astrology is "science" also. You know, like.... horoscopes and stuff.


Yes, their arguments are made up.
They only exist because of their no-so-well-hidden-agenda of promoting biblical creationism in schools, that's all.

Google cdesign proponentsists.
Google the wedge document in context of the discovery institute.

This is the level of dishonesty those people engage in.
They are exposed liars and con-men.

 

[rational experiences]

Natural humans in laws is man's law. Law only. Or spatial laws the history of which a human isn't.

So we can't be evolution as we aren't creations history.

Is rational humans answer first.

If a gas spirit mass is sacrificed first O its earths God history the planet. Owned gases. Which we arent as lights owner.

It was evolved by O earths sex with space the womb. So said the science man theist.

Sex.

So then he says but it's immaculate sex as it wasn't really sex.

Oh okay so it's not Jesus then.

Oh do you mean is volcanic gas emissions in.spatial voiding the conception not Jesus first and not Christ either as it's sex.

Oh now I know lying theist how you man as Mr sexual being put thesis in unnatural orders.

As Jesus and Christ aren't there first. You said in creation laws gases spirit non sexual theisms.

Why men today say I'm not a satanist theist I'm his brother a scientist theist. He's already proven wrong historic science man.

Same man however. Learnt.

In human legal is the naturalist human not really a theist versus theism theories as humans liars.

As naturalist says I name and detail the order of life. As a human man.

By my human studies but I'm still just a man just a human and not a God idolator.

Meaning inside my body I'm man.my image is man's. Skeleton. As gods body is hard mass the planet in scientific thesis of men.

My image within is also man's.

My DNA is man's.

I don't need to claim I'm god owned I'm man owned. So I don't false preach anymore.

Okay. But you still want my life to believe a human was a monkey?

Or we were very ugly humans.

As a Monkey is still a monkey. Has sex can have sick mutated babies...monkeys. Their God is a healthy highest monkey type a monkey baby is healthy. Two sick monkeys produce a monkey. Not a human.

We are in evolution mass heavens. Not past heavens... so as a monkey doesn't produce a human baby he's wrong.

Predictive self warning's. His human owned mind body conditions and loss of mind. Consciousness.

When Jesus life sacrificed returns in our future 1000 years stars fall returned. From timed zero 0. You'll lose conscious mind will be bio saved yet mind changed.

As you were proven by Baha'i. False Christ terms. Star didn't own earths gases...space pressures had.

Then it will return again....it did the received Russia explosion.

Your self destructive human science theist life mind body healed evolved but you're still not conscious for life saving awareness. Not to be the theist claiming a human today was a monkey.

Leading men to believe if they caused humans monkeyism now life DNA in our heavens mass...it will be removed. Sacrificed they could practice evil heavens sciences ...yet we'd all still be alive.

Creationism evolutionism. Same same.

No we aren't he claims.

Yes you are. One science group reads bible as data. New scientists are using data too. Maths numbers calculus and old genesis terms.

Not humans...monkeys.

Evolution he says.

Answered mutual equals is the only answer. Not old data...now data. Evolution is now not before.

Evolution is cooled returned mass. In space laws with ice.

Ice man said was on the suns star mass prevelant a law. In space exact infinity pressures.

Hence you can't theory it's destruction of mass. Stars sun mass.

As mutual equal to star space laws is earths ice saviour mass.

Not Jesus. Jesus is sacrificed. Ice mass reborn was returned.

Hot gases still present cooled.

 

[Astrophile]

The assumption that they are the oldest rocks is highly debatable.

The oldest known terrestrial rocks, which were found in Quebec, are 4280 million years old, 94% of the Earth itself. Zircon crystals as much as 4404±8 million years old (97% of the age of the Earth) have been found in Western Australia. Geologists are unlikely to find rocks that are significantly older than these Quebec rocks or the Australian zircon crystals.

Terrestrial rocks more than 4000 million years old are extremely rare, and you could argue that we have simply been unlucky and that fossil-bearing rocks of this age formerly existed but have been destroyed by tectonic activity and metamorphism. However, the fact remains that later Precambrian rocks, which are abundant, contain only the fossils of single-celled organisms, and multicellular organisms appear only in Ediacarian (latest Precambrian) and Cambrian rocks. This fact implies that the 'Cambrian explosion' was preceded by a period of more than 3000 million years with only single-celled organisms, and therefore that Hadean rocks (> 4000 million years old) probably never contained more complex fossils.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes. And not just us.... even courts have found that.

Take Behe for example........ in order to be able to call his arguments "science", he actually had to redefine what a "scientific theory" is. And his redefining caused him to acknowledge, under oath, that under THAT definition, astrology is "science" also. You know, like.... horoscopes and stuff.


Yes, their arguments are made up.
They only exist because of their no-so-well-hidden-agenda of promoting biblical creationism in schools, that's all.

Google cdesign proponentsists.
Google the wedge document in context of the discovery institute.

This is the level of dishonesty those people engage in.
They are exposed liars and con-men.

@Hockeycowboy you rate this "optimistic".

Did you bother googling those terms?
Did you bother searching for science papers authored by those people?
Did you bother reviewing the court case in which Behe redefined "science" so that he could include his creationist design nonsense, only to acknowledge that in that case astrology qualifies as science also?

I guess not.

Willful ignorance is like a curse with you people.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@Hockeycowboy you rate this "optimistic".

Did you bother googling those terms?
Did you bother searching for science papers authored by those people?
Did you bother reviewing the court case in which Behe redefined "science" so that he could include his creationist design nonsense, only to acknowledge that in that case astrology qualifies as science also?

I guess not.

Willful ignorance is like a curse with you people.

He was telling you how hat you were being optimistic if you thought that he was going to act properly. Unfortunately with creationists you have to tie them down and force feed them at times and tomorrow they will deny it. That is why creationism is dead in the world of science. In the sciences there are records of what happened. One cannot pretend that one had not been shown to be wrong.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

appeared suddenly, without obvious precursors

That's the religious version - creation of the kinds as a single act of creation. The scientific version involves evolution, which is a stepwise process that only operates on precursors.

The problem is that all this guesswork, based on these concepts that are touted as facts, I believe will never be resolved.

That's not a problem. I also will probably never know my own personal pedigree back more than a few generations. It might be interesting to know which hominin fossils are ancestral and which are branches that went extinct, but the answers may be impossible to decide. You seem to see this as a weakness in the theory and a reason to distrust or discard it. The theory is correct. It unifies mountains of data from a multitude of sources, accurately makes predictions about what can and cannot be found in nature, provides a rational mechanism for evolution consistent with the known actions of nature, accounts for both the commonality of all life as well as biodiversity, and has had practical applications that have improved the human condition in areas like medicine and agriculture. Why would we trade that in for faith-based alternatives that can do none of that?

And I'm not aware of anything being called a fact by the scientific community that the religious community would be able to identify as incorrect.

I agree! I descended from generations of human beings! That’s a fact. No theory needed.

No, not if that's all you want to know about the process. I'd like to know what man descended from and how and why. Our best understanding is that much of the African jungle became savanna, which forced the arboreal, vegetarian apes living there to come down from the trees, stand up, lose much of their body hair, and hunt with ever more articulate hands and larger brains.

So Meyer, Axe, Minnich, Morris, Egnor, Denton, Ross, etc., are not critical thinkers?

I only recognize the first three names, and I believe they're all creationists. No, the ID people are not critical thinkers, and are not doing science properly. Science begins with evaluating evidence and deriving sound conclusions from it. When you go into the enterprise assuming that you will find God, you evaluate the evidence after making that assumption, which introduces observer bias. It's not surprising they kept finding phantom irreducible complexity. It's what they expected to see. You're probably aware of the great lengths those designing clinical trials go to in order to blind both the patient and the clinician regarding who got the study therapy and who got the placebo.

And before you claim them to be biased…. you don’t have a bias?

Yes, I do have a bias. Mine is rational, and based in the stunning success of the scientific method and the inability of faith-based thought to add anything to man's fund of knowledge. That evidence is what makes the bias rational. Isn't all learning accumulating rational biases - evidence-based thoughts about how reality works? I assume that you have a bias against drunk driving. I do. I have a clear preference that I not do it and others not do it. But because it is based in reason and evidence, and is an idea that makes life better to the extent that others agree and comply. It's only irrational biases we want to avoid, like seeing LGBTQ+ as abominations in the eyes of a good god. Those are ideas based in nothing but ancient bigotries and which harm people.

And which published literature, without resorting to subjective language, explains and describes the pathways evolution took to create the cellular machinery we observe

What difference does that make? The gaps in knowledge in the pathways is not a problem. I sense an ad ignorantiam fallacy - that what isn't known is being used to argue that the theory is wrong.

the bacterial flagellum, for one? With its many parts functioning as one unit, and interacting with other machines, how would it arise de novo?

Once again, what difference does it make, unless your point is that if we can't define the pathway, there was none and it didn't happen. That's the ad ignorantiam fallacy again - an invalid argument.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I don't believe that the overall theory of evolution is rational, or that defending it is sound reasoning.

Why should that matter to people who have studied it and disagree with you? Do you see yourself as the measure of what reasoning is valid, someone whose opinions should be taken seriously if they disagree with informed opinions? No offense is intended here, but how can it not be offensive to be told that one's opinion has no value in the discussion? And it's a common occurrence with the faithful who really don't know what critical thinking is, what it looks like, or what it does. Why shouldn't such people think that their opinions are as informed and useful as anybody else's?

The assumption that they are the oldest rocks is highly debatable.

By you or other creationists? First, they don't debate. They merely disagree, and without sound argument or an understanding of the known science. The creationists are not part of the scientific discussion. The experts in scientific fields are, and only in their fields of expertise. And only their ideas on the science matter. I've already advised you that you are not being discriminated against by these scientists because you disagree with them. They also don't care that the people who happen to agree with them agree. Why would they?

"Peer review" is actually often another term for "bias." as in, "we only accept material that fits our preconceived notions."

Yes, and that bias is one of the greatest ideas man has ever conceived, namely, that no ideas should be believed by faith (skepticism) and that empiricism is the only path to discovering what is true about the world. Peers in science bring critical thinking to the process, and you are correct that they are very biased in favor of that method and against faith. That idea transformed astrology to astronomy, alchemy to chemistry, and creationism to Big Bang cosmology and biological evolution - three sterile, faith-based approaches that provide no useful information into the opposite.

Thanks for pointing out the need for a designer and architect.

Not for trees, just houses. Trees are living things capable of assembling themselves. Houses need designers and builders.

Evolution is the religion of many. Nothing wrong with religion, but don't pretend is doesn't require faith.

It's only faith to those who don't know the science. Without critical analysis of evidence, every belief is by faith. And yes, there is something very wrong with faith. It's a path to false belief.

 

[shunyadragon]

That is about the length of time they all appeared, but species representing those families / orders — the trilobites, anomalocaris, other Cambrian fauna — appeared suddenly, without obvious precursors.

The problem with this is the evidence of strategraphy where thousands of feet of different discrete kinds of rocks made of sediments that contain the fossils of the progressive evolution of life over millions of years. It is impossible that it all happened at the same time. In these rocks are thousands of discrete layers of lake sediments, meandering rivers, swamps, beaches, sand dune deposites, and hundreds of feet of limestone deposited in shallow seas with coral. All this takes billions of years to for over time.

Good evidence supporting a creative event, ‘according to their kinds.’

Absolutely no evidence except for your dishonest imagination based on an ancient religious agenda.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Lol, that like saying a rock in the woods is a house.
Only much worse, because life is much more complex than that. You need a DNA code for starters.

You already tried this analogy and failed.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Whoosh!

Indeed.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Why? Because presenting counter arguments is not debunking.

The Cambrian Explosion is a problem for LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) evolutionists.
And getting more so.
The fossil record of the Cambrian, in most places, has been very well-preserve, so the arguments that the “fossil record is imperfect” don’t face up to scrutiny.

“Debunked”? Hardly!

Yes, debunked. Many decades ago. And you guys still trot it out as though it's some sort of gotcha! Over and over and over and ....

You don't seriously think the fossil record is the only line of evidence for evolution, do you? That's how you know this "argument" is super outdated.