-
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!
Adam and Eve
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Ow boy.
notjustatheory.com
Here are some other "just theories":
atomic theory, germ theory of desease, plate tectonic theory, theory of relativity,...
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
One a thinker always a thinker
Try not to waste this good trait on folk myths and instead perhaps learn some basics of evolutionary biology and try thinking about that.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Humans didn't evolved from apes.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Well that is true, since we still are apes. A concept that creationists cannot seem to get their mind around.
Altfish
Veteran Member
OK, Apes is the collective noun for the creature, humans evolved alongside the likes of orangutangs, bonobos, gorrillas, chimps,,,
Sorry to hear that. The point was that when people were created, they didn’t have any mistakes that can happen in reproduction. In insemination two cells are basically connected and DNA processed. In that process there may happen unwanted changes that weakens the heredity. Also, if person has been affected by something negative, it may be transferred to the offspring. The more there is generations, the more there can be potential defects and that means the person is not as good quality as person without those defects. Adam and Eve didn’t have any such defects; therefore, they were less corrupt.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I would suggest that you try to learn a bit of genetics. A change in genetics is not necessarily a weakening. In fact it can be an improvement. Once you add natural selection into the mix the negative changes are not a problem for the genome anymore.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Again, that makes no sense.
It's what produces variation. Variation is good. Low variation dooms one to extinction.
Also "unwanted changes that weakens the heredity" don't tend to stick around for long.
Those who are best at reproducing will generally be the genes that spread through the genome.
It's what keeps species on top of their game. It's what makes them adapt to an ever-changing environment, ensuring their survival.
Your statement of calling this "corruption" and "mistakes" makes no sense whatsoever.
Without it, we wouldn't be here.
But it likely won't spread very far and die out just as fast as it came in.
You seem to be completely ignoring the role of natural selection in this.
Again, you make no sense.
"When people were created?" When was that? You seem to think humans suddenly emerged de novo.
"Weakens the heredity?" What does that mean?
"Adam and Eve?" Do you really think there once existed only two humans? Why do you think this? Is there any evidence for this hypothesis?
Humans developed over millions of years; millions of generations, each imperceptibly different. By the time a recognizable hominin appeared, we'd been through millions of reproductive cycles, over several billion years, with DNA changes at each step.
Why do modern humans still have DNA coding for gills? How did we acquire that?
DNA gets copied every time a cell reproduces. "Errors" occur all the time.
I believe humans were created as told in the Bible. I don’t know the exact date for that.
Sorry, if you didn’t understand the point about heredity, I doubt I can make it more clear.
Do you think it is true that there happen mutations, alteration in the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA, like explained in: Mutation - Wikipedia?
Those alterations accumulate in time. The longer humans have existed, the more there will be those alterations. Some believe that is the reason why for example X-chromosome is dying.
Is the Y chromosome dying out? | Live Science
That all indicates that there was once god genome that has degenerated in all this time. I think that is one evidence for that humans were created.
I don’t believe in the millions of years or that humans have developed. All evidence in nature indicates the opposite, like for example the degeneration of genome.
If we would really have DNA coding for gills, we would have gills. We don’t have, therefore I think that is absurd claim that we would have that coding. Maybe we have something that looks similar, but I think it is misinterpret, because we don’t have gills.
And just because those errors occur all the time, it means there was once form that had no errors and the more those errors come, the weaker people will be.
Can you show scientifically any genetic improvement?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Yes.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
An inability to believe or understand reality is not a refutation.
You should be asking how we know that it took billions of years for life to get where it is today.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
What's the evidence for that? Please post with a link if possible.
In that process there may happen originally unwanted changes that end up strengthening the heredity.
And when a person has been affected by something positive, it may be transferred to the offspring. The more there is generations, the more there can be potential improvements and that means the person is of better quality as person without those improvements, like the two originals.
That's not what you said earlier.
What is a god genome and its function? Does it still exist in humans today? Who was the person who discovered and how?
If it no longer exist in humans, how do you know that it existed in the past? And did you determined that it no longer exist is due to degenerative breakdown?
If you admitted that you don't know the exact date when humans were created, then how do you know that the events that occurred in the garden of eden didn't take millions of years ago? The only literal concept of time that was written in Genesis is the 7 days of creation. How did you determined the length of time from the end of the day that God rested to time when the eating of the fruit event took place? By not knowing the exact date of the creation of humans, then what did you used as the reference point for calculating the existence of time, from day 1 until now?
If we go by your reasoning, why don't we have that particular thing you said, the one that looks similar to gills. And before you even start using fallacies, no, lungs do not look similar to gills.
I just want to make sure, you believe that nothing can come from nothing? And I'm not talking about God and the supernatural here. I'm talking "biology." At first, there were 2 perfect forms containing "nothing," no errors. Then out of nothing, no errors exist, errors just exist.
You made many many errors in your explanation of the "evidence" that you presented and they support your argument. But your biggest error was your scientific evidence in the form of a scientific article. Since it's science, you expect us to must accept it as evidence supporting your argument, correct? Well, you're wrong. In fact, we accept as scientific evidence that refutes your own argument. Since you accept that scientific evidence is true, you must accept that it took millions of years of evolution to get humans to out current state. So you are wrong about how humans came to being is true like how it's presented in Genesis. You, yourself provided the evidence against that narrative.
So welcome as the newest member of acceptors of Darwinism Evolution, home to the acceptance that accounts of creation as told in Genesis is nothing more than myth.