Creationists -- Please answer David Attenborough for me...

Hockeycowboy said:

Is that what I really said?

Click to expand...

What else could I take from your last post, and Deeje's post in the context of the topic of a complex organism that utilizes complex life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences to do what it does? @Deeje made it clear that the organism wasn't "a direct creation of God", that "species may have been created simply as an adaptive response to changed conditions", and that "God did not interfere". You added that Jehovah would create in accordance with "natural Laws, processes, and cycles", wouldn't create via "magic", and "gave the genome the ability to mutate".

Sounds like the two of you were saying that the organism in question (and all its nasty, complex traits) came about via natural means. If that's not accurate, exactly how do you think those things came to be?

SkepticThinker said:

If my infant child, who has no experience with the outside world and no experience in determining between right and wrong, decided that they wanted to "go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control" it would be my duty as a parent to stop that child from doing so, because my job in raising them to be able to make intelligent and informed decisions so that they can manage in the world, is not finished yet. Allowing that child to go off on his own without imparting those important lessons upon him would be a failing, on my part.

Click to expand...

The fact that you use that scenario in the first place to make the Creator look like a neglectful parent just reinforces how ignorance feeds more ignorance. Your arguments are all straw men.

God did not leave "infant children with no experience in the outside world and no experience in determining between right and wrong".....that was never the case. The Creator educated the man for an unknown period of time before giving him the responsibilities of a husband and father. Humans are not born with the same survival instincts as animals....they learn by being taught knowledge and skills. Adam was educated by the greatest teacher in existence, and he was responsible for passing that knowledge and skills onto his wife and children....these in turn would have educated their children...and that is exactly what we still see happening. The only difference is that after their initial eviction, the knowledge and skills had to be taken in a new direction because of their changed circumstances and environment.

Adam did not need to determine the difference between right and wrong because God placed that responsibility on himself. All Adam had to do was obey one simple command and no evil thing would ever have intruded on their idyllic life in paradise. They had purposeful work to do and an assignment to carry out. Their children would have been raised with no knowledge of evil, but their choice to become independent (abusing the free will given to them by a very benevolent Creator) caused the loss of of his blessing and protection. It would serve the human race as a valuable lesson concerning the benefits of obeying their God, as opposed to disobeying him. Humans are slow learners apparently....

SkepticThinker said:

You accept evolution. You just call it "adaptation" which is kind of a Kent Hovind move, if you ask me.

Click to expand...

Adaptation is provable, but it is used to justify belief in macro-evolution, which is not. We have no problem with true science....we just have a problem with science fiction being passed off as science fact.

When science has genuine proof for its assertions and assumptions, then you let us know....OK?

Jose Fly said:

What else could I take from your last post, and Deeje's post in the context of the topic of a complex organism that utilizes complex life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences to do what it does? @Deeje made it clear that the organism wasn't "a direct creation of God", that "species may have been created simply as an adaptive response to changed conditions", and that "God did not interfere". You added that Jehovah would create in accordance with "natural Laws, processes, and cycles", wouldn't create via "magic", and "gave the genome the ability to mutate".

Sounds like the two of you were saying that the organism in question (and all its nasty, complex traits) came about via natural means. If that's not accurate, exactly how do you think those things came to be?

Click to expand...

Families (possibly) of creatures, breeding pairs, were created first... diversification grew from there.

Tell me, what exactly is natural selection going to “select” from , in a single-celled organism, to eventually begin forming de novo, functioning appendages & organs? How would mindless, unguided processes gain this information?

And for @TagliatelliMonster , regarding you and your colleagues’ adamant stand that humans & chimps have extremely close genetic similarities:

How similar are human and chimpanzee genomes? – Richard Buggs

It makes sense....otherwise, How do you explain the extreme phenotypic differences?

It just reveals, there’s much more to life forms than their genetics.

I don’t care whether you accept that observation or not.

Evangelicalhumanist said:

Creation also means...

Click to expand...

I must add to your very excellent example, the following Hymn:

Hockeycowboy said:

First of all, Attenborough begins with a false premise....the Genesis account doesn’t say that God created every species. God created “kinds,” which apparently corresponds to the family taxon level. I say apparently, because the text isn’t specific.

(For example: There were no dachshunds. Or Alaskan Malamutes.)

If you read Isaiah 11 6-9, and meditate on it (like noticing the future tense it’s written in), you’ll see that lifeforms, as we have currently, are not displaying behaviors and living according to God’s original purpose. It all changed — including Jehovah removing His blessing — when His son Adam chose rebellion, and raised the issue of sovereignty. Genesis 3.

Once this issue is settled, then Isaiah 11; Ephesians 1:10; Revelation 21:3-4; Psalms 37 9-11, 29; & other Scriptures, will be fulfilled under Jesus’ rulership.

Click to expand...

"kinds" is a null term-- it is 100%, utterly and completely without useful meaning.

Your entire "argument", therefore? Is null and void.

Evangelicalhumanist said:

Creation also means...

Click to expand...

An omnipotent God can create the Universe in any amount of time including all the fake fossil and carbon dating evidence. God's proving ground for faith is an expression of perfection.

Salvador said:

As I've noted elsewhere in some other discussions about Christianity, Jesus's family tree has a time span of 77 generations listed between his generation and Adam whom the Bible claims was the "first man". Reference: (Luke 3:23-38) and Eve whom the Bible claims as the mother of all the living. (Genesis 3:20)

However, the Australian aborigines have evidently been in Australia for over a thousand consecutive generations. Reference: Aboriginal Australians - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

The one thing that people tend to overlook in that discussion, is the length of each generation. Check out the ages of those who lived before the flood......Noah was 500 years old before he even had children. (Genesis 5:32) And 600 when the flood came. (Genesis 7:6) He lived a further 350 years, and was 950 when he died. (Genesis 9:28)

Along with the flood obviously came vast climatic changes and an increased amount of radiation from the sun, no longer protected by the water canopy that was above the atmosphere. (One of the means used by God to flood the earth. 2 Peter 3:5-7) I believe that this greatly reduced man's lifespan, as we see in the ages of those living after the flood getting shorter. Their life expectancy was drastically reduced to 70 or 80 years. This would have increased the number of generations, as the further they got away from the physical perfection of their first parents, the more reduced their lifespan became. In some nations and time periods, it was even less. A reduced lifespan would have meant sexual maturity occurred very early in order for generations to go on reproducing. Australian Aborigines reproduced at quite a young age. It was nothing unusual for women to be grandmothers in their 30's. Do the math.

Counting generations that had shorter life expectancy does not answer the question.

Salvador said:

There have been hundreds of generations of Native Americans between the time their common ancestry migrated from Asia until the time of Christ.

Click to expand...

See above....

Salvador said:

Of course, the Bible is wrong; in fact, there were people prior to the 76th generation before Christ that allegedly was spawned by Adam and Eve.

Click to expand...

You cannot provide evidence for such a claim.
The Bible's entire narrative is based on the fall of Adam. (Romans 5:12) Jesus came to undo the damage that Adam did to his future offspring. If there were humans prior to Adam, then you may as well throw the whole book out of the window. I am not prepared to do that, because the Bible is the most reliable book in existence IMO. I would rather throw out the musings of flawed humans because they are a dime a dozen......the Bible has not changed in the thousands of years of its existence. It tells one story from start to finish, and by all accounts, that "finish" is not far away. A new era is about to begin....this time God will run the show, rather than his pathetic adversary....and the gullible, godless humans who blindly follow him because they don't have a spiritual bone in their bodies, and would rather believe in what men of science tell them is true.

Science knows nothing about the origin of life. Not a single thing.....

People give permission to evil spirits to operate in human affairs(by witchcraft/sorcery) and those spirits cause harmful animals(among other evils) to oppress human communities which evils can include parasites and disease. Not everything is always God's fault. If you people would stop witchcraft within your communities then children couldn't be harmed so easily.

It's simple. For every practice of witchcraft there is evil entering the world and for every good prayer from a righteous person there is great good entering the world.

Jose Fly said:

What else could I take from your last post, and Deeje's post in the context of the topic of a complex organism that utilizes complex life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences to do what it does? @Deeje made it clear that the organism wasn't "a direct creation of God", that "species may have been created simply as an adaptive response to changed conditions", and that "God did not interfere". You added that Jehovah would create in accordance with "natural Laws, processes, and cycles", wouldn't create via "magic", and "gave the genome the ability to mutate".

Sounds like the two of you were saying that the organism in question (and all its nasty, complex traits) came about via natural means. If that's not accurate, exactly how do you think those things came to be?

Click to expand...

I think that among other odd things our creationists
are saying that their "god" lacked the capacity to
create a universe that can operate without constant
tweaking and meddling.

If that is not how they see it, perhaps one of them could
explain how their view is different. Evidence for such
views would be most welcome.

Hockeycowboy said:

Families (possibly) of creatures, breeding pairs, were created first... diversification grew from there.

Tell me, what exactly is natural selection going to “select” from , in a single-celled organism, to eventually begin forming de novo, functioning appendages & organs? How would mindless, unguided processes gain this information?

Click to expand...

It's amazing how you manage to contradict yourself so much in between sentences.

So on the one hand you say that this eyeball eating parasite evolved its nasty traits. That these traits DID NOT EXIST in the "original" worm that your god created.

In the next breath, you ask what natural selection is going to select from, how de novo functions can arise from mindless unguided processes.......

Are you really being serious?

How did this worm gain the ability and information and de novo metabolism pathways and necessary biological functions to enable it to nest itself in eyeballs and eat them from the inside out?

You say your god didn't do it.
But you're also saying that nature can't do it....................................

And for @TagliatelliMonster , regarding you and your colleagues’ adamant stand that humans & chimps have extremely close genetic similarities:

How similar are human and chimpanzee genomes? – Richard Buggs

Click to expand...

What's your point?
In your own words, what do you think this blogpost is saying?

It makes sense....otherwise, How do you explain the extreme phenotypic differences?
It just reveals, there’s much more to life forms than their genetics.
I don’t care whether you accept that observation or not.

Click to expand...

It's completely unclear what point you are trying to make.

Deeje said:

Science knows nothing about the origin of life. Not a single thing.....

Click to expand...

For the record, and in spite of how much you think you've learned from the Bible -- neither do you.

Deeje said:

The fact that you use that scenario in the first place to make the Creator look like a neglectful parent just reinforces how ignorance feeds more ignorance. Your arguments are all straw men.

Click to expand...

I was going off your example where the Creator lets people who are ignorant about the difference between good and evil (they hadn't yet eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil) just “go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control.” That’s not responsible parenting, is it?

Deeje said:

God did not leave "infant children with no experience in the outside world and no experience in determining between right and wrong".....that was never the case.

Click to expand...

How much experience did Adam and Eve have with the world outside the Garden of Eden, prior to eating the fruit?

How did they have knowledge about the difference between good and evil PRIOR to eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil? How would they even know that eating the fruit was evil/wrong given that they didn’t know the difference between right/good and wrong/evil? How does that make sense?

In my analogy, that would be a like a parent not bothering to teach their children the difference between right and wrong and then sending them off into the world expecting them to know the difference between right and wrong.

Deeje said:

The Creator educated the man for an unknown period of time before giving him the responsibilities of a husband and father. Humans are not born with the same survival instincts as animals....they learn by being taught knowledge and skills. Adam was educated by the greatest teacher in existence, and he was responsible for passing that knowledge and skills onto his wife and children....these in turn would have educated their children...and that is exactly what we still see happening. The only difference is that after their initial eviction, the knowledge and skills had to be taken in a new direction because of their changed circumstances and environment.

Click to expand...

Funny how the “greatest teacher in existence” couldn’t be bothered to teach his creations about the difference between good and evil.

Deeje said:

Adam did not need to determine the difference between right and wrong because God placed that responsibility on himself. All Adam had to do was obey one simple command and no evil thing would ever have intruded on their idyllic life in paradise. They had purposeful work to do and an assignment to carry out. Their children would have been raised with no knowledge of evil, but their choice to become independent (abusing the free will given to them by a very benevolent Creator) caused the loss of of his blessing and protection. It would serve the human race as a valuable lesson concerning the benefits of obeying their God, as opposed to disobeying him. Humans are slow learners apparently....

Click to expand...

Humans are actually quick learners, for the most part. Children can pick things up much faster than adults can.

God expected his creations to know the difference between good and evil without bothering to teach them those differences. And once Adam and Eve supposedly ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they were cast out of Eden – as though God didn’t want them to know the difference between good and evil. If he did, he would not have responded so harshly.

Deeje said:

Adaptation is provable, but it is used to justify belief in macro-evolution, which is not. We have no problem with true science....we just have a problem with science fiction being passed off as science fact.

Click to expand...

I’ve read your explanation of adaptation and what you’ve described is evolution.

I’m glad you agree that it’s demonstrable. What you’re doing here is just a Kent Hovind-esque sleight of hand where you just call it something else, but what you’re actually talking about is evolution.

Deeje said:

When science has genuine proof for its assertions and assumptions, then you let us know....OK?

Click to expand...

Independent groups of scientists from all over the world have produced mountains and mountains of evidence in support of evolution for the last 150+ years.


Evolution is a fact of life. The theory of evolution explains how evolution operates.

Hockeycowboy said:

Were they completely unable to care for themselves? It seems not....
They and their offspring started building society. We’re part of an extension of it, and apparently you like the world you’re living in.

Click to expand...

After they supposedly learned the difference between good and evil which God apparently didn't actually want them to learn.

I wonder what the moral of the story is supposed to be ...

Deeje said:

Yep

Who can argue with that kind of reasoning? Straw man after straw man, beaten to death...did that make you feel better? You answered nothing.

This is not our planet....we are just the tenants and there were rules governing our tenancy. Life here was supposed to be enjoyable, peaceful and pleasant, with the human race tending it and keeping things in order....but disobedient idiots messed it up. They continue to do so, using their clever science and greed for wealth, fame and accolades, that end up bringing all living, breathing things on this earth to the brink of extinction.....why? Because it's good for the economy....not because it's good for mankind.

Perhaps you need to watch Michael Moore's documentary on "Capitalism"....you will get a glimpse into how deluded the general public can be in a world ruled by the devil exploiting their self interest and gullibility. But you don't believe in him either.....oh well. You can't fight an enemy that you don't believe exists....

There are only two sides in this battle for the hearts and minds of men.....if you have chosen your side, then that is your decision to make.

I will side with Creator and abide by his rules....that is my choice.
I look forward to the outcome predicted by the Bible.....what outcome are you anticipating? The world at present is in its death throes.....under the burden of fires, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, war, political chaos, economic mismanagement....not to mention rampant crime, drug addiction and violence, to the point where emergency service workers are threatened and attacked every day......don't you just love a world without God....?

Click to expand...

You completely avoided that poster's point.

74x12 said:

People give permission to evil spirits to operate in human affairs(by witchcraft/sorcery) and those spirits cause harmful animals(among other evils) to oppress human communities which evils can include parasites and disease. Not everything is always God's fault. If you people would stop witchcraft within your communities then children couldn't be harmed so easily.

It's simple. For every practice of witchcraft there is evil entering the world and for every good prayer from a righteous person there is great good entering the world.

Click to expand...

I find it strange when people state this stuff so matter-of-factly.

When has anyone ever demonstrated the existence of "evil spirits" operating in the world?? The Bible may say that sorcery is real, but it simply isn't in any demonstrable way.

Hockeycowboy said:

Families (possibly) of creatures, breeding pairs, were created first... diversification grew from there.

Click to expand...

And by what mechanisms did that occur?

Tell me, what exactly is natural selection going to “select” from , in a single-celled organism, to eventually begin forming de novo, functioning appendages & organs? How would mindless, unguided processes gain this information?

Click to expand...

That's pretty much the point of what I've been asking you. Again, the organism in the OP utilizes complex life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences to do what it does. I'm asking how you think those things came to be. When folks suggested that God made them, you objected. When folks suggested they came about via natural means, you objected.

So how do you think they came to be?

Audie said:

I think that among other odd things our creationists
are saying that their "god" lacked the capacity to
create a universe that can operate without constant
tweaking and meddling.

Click to expand...

The Jehovah's Witnesses (@nPeace and @Hockeycowboy in particular) seem to not have a clear position on this. At times they insist that "God doesn't tinker with genes" and present God as basically a watchmaker who sets things in motion and lets it all run on its own. But then they object to the notion of natural mechanisms running on their own.

If that is not how they see it, perhaps one of them could
explain how their view is different. Evidence for such
views would be most welcome.

Click to expand...

If you can get them to explain it in a clear, consistent manner, I would be most impressed.

TagliatelliMonster said:

It's amazing how you manage to contradict yourself so much in between sentences.

So on the one hand you say that this eyeball eating parasite evolved its nasty traits. That these traits DID NOT EXIST in the "original" worm that your god created.

In the next breath, you ask what natural selection is going to select from, how de novo functions can arise from mindless unguided processes.......

Are you really being serious?

How did this worm gain the ability and information and de novo metabolism pathways and necessary biological functions to enable it to nest itself in eyeballs and eat them from the inside out?

You say your god didn't do it.
But you're also saying that nature can't do it....................................

Click to expand...

DING DING DING!!!! Exactly!

Jose Fly said:

When folks suggested that God made them, you objected.

Click to expand...

I objected to this? If so, I must have misread the statement.

Now, if they said God made every species, then I don’t agree. I believe Jehovah created the families , equivalent to the Hebrew ‘baramin’, and from within those families, species diversified.

Hockeycowboy said:

I objected to this? If so, I must have misread the statement.

Click to expand...

So you believe God made the organism in the OP with it's complex life history, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences...all of which allow it to afflict humans in terrible ways. Thanks for clarifying.

Of course that now leads to some obvious issues, namely....what kind of God intentionally designs such horrible things? In any other circumstance we would call such an act "evil", wouldn't we?