Creationists: What are your conceptions of evolution?

[Vile Atheist]

This is for creationists here. I want you to explain to me what your conception of evolution is. I don't want to hear what sort of moral degeneration you think it leads to. I don't want to hear what sort of evidence you find against it. I don't even want to hear that you disagree with it (that's self-evident if you are a creationist). I want you to explain evolution to me - whatever you think it is.

The first creationist to get it completely right will get frubals from me. And then we can let the fun begin of evidence, implications, etc. Any takers?

 

[The Wizard]

This is for creationists here. I want you to explain to me what your conception of evolution is. I don't want to hear what sort of moral degeneration you think it leads to. I don't want to hear what sort of evidence you find against it. I don't even want to hear that you disagree with it (that's self-evident if you are a creationist). I want you to explain evolution to me - whatever you think it is.

The first creationist to get it completely right will get frubals from me. And then we can let the fun begin of evidence, implications, etc. Any takers?

The Universe got tired of being just ONE. It wanted to be seperate and have infinite number of difference experiences of itself and within itself- so it made conscious life. We are merely the universes thoughts and crayon creations- a part of it that got bored with itself. It also did that so it can knock on the doors of heaven one day and ask God when it can take a nap.

THIS IS SPARTAAAAA!!!!....... :angel2:

 

[Man of Faith]

Evolution is anything evolutionists want it to be. There is no way to pin them down. It runs the gamut of simple change like a flu virus mutating to common ancestry of all life forms, and anything in between. If I argue against one type of evolution they argue for a different type. If evolutionists can't explain something then I get "it happend we just have to figure out how".

Simply put evolution is the tree model of the origin of the species.

 

[Quintessence]

My concept of evolution is exactly the same as whatever the current scientific consensus on the topic is.

And no, I'm not going to explain evolution to you. Getting it "completely right" would require me to write you a textbook. Why would I spend months of my time doing that for you?

 

[Big_TJ]

Simply put evolution is the tree model of the origin of the species.

Are non-Creationists allowed to tell the creationist that they are wrong?

 

[Man of Faith]

Are non-Creationists allowed to tell the creationist that they are wrong?

Only if they are wrong, which is rare.

 

[McBell]

Only if they are wrong, which is rare.

:biglaugh:

 

[McBell]

This is for creationists here. I want you to explain to me what your conception of evolution is. I don't want to hear what sort of moral degeneration you think it leads to. I don't want to hear what sort of evidence you find against it. I don't even want to hear that you disagree with it (that's self-evident if you are a creationist). I want you to explain evolution to me - whatever you think it is.

The first creationist to get it completely right will get frubals from me. And then we can let the fun begin of evidence, implications, etc. Any takers?

I predict that this thread will test the will power of those who have at least a rudimentary understanding of evolution.

i mean, to get creationists to list their strawmen in a single thread, boldly claiming that their strawmen are what evolution is...

 

[Vile Atheist]

The Universe got tired of being just ONE. It wanted to be seperate and have infinite number of difference experiences of itself and within itself- so it made conscious life. We are merely the universes thoughts and crayon creations- a part of it that got bored with itself. It also did that so it can knock on the doors of heaven one day and ask God when it can take a nap.

THIS IS SPARTAAAAA!!!!....... :angel2:

Close!! :bow:

 

[Vile Atheist]

Evolution is anything evolutionists want it to be.

No. It isn't.

There is no way to pin them down. It runs the gamut of simple change like a flu virus mutating to common ancestry of all life forms, and anything in between.

Because evolution applies to all life, ace. Hence, it would cover flu viruses to elephants. Should it apply to only flu viruses? Should it apply to only elephants? What are you on about?

If I argue against one type of evolution they argue for a different type. If evolutionists can't explain something then I get "it happend we just have to figure out how". Simply put evolution is the tree model of the origin of the species.

There is only one theory of evolution (though there are very minor disagreements over minor details in the scientific community). But you can't even state what the theory of evolution is, nevermind what those disagreements amount to.

 

[Vile Atheist]

My concept of evolution is exactly the same as whatever the current scientific consensus on the topic is.

And no, I'm not going to explain evolution to you. Getting it "completely right" would require me to write you a textbook. Why would I spend months of my time doing that for you?

No, it wouldn't. I'm not asking you to list every fossil ever found. A couple paragraphs will cover the important points of genetic mutation, natural selection, and speciation.

 

[Deaver]

This is for creationists here. I want you to explain to me what your conception of evolution is. I don't want to hear what sort of moral degeneration you think it leads to. I don't want to hear what sort of evidence you find against it. I don't even want to hear that you disagree with it (that's self-evident if you are a creationist). I want you to explain evolution to me - whatever you think it is.

The first creationist to get it completely right will get frubals from me. And then we can let the fun begin of evidence, implications, etc.

Any takers?

I am not sure why you are asking “creationists this question. We belief that “In the beginning God created…” which is not what evolution is. Evolution is a change in the frequency of genes in a population over time. Even though I believe that evolutionists, years ago, wanted to be able to trace the concept back to the origin of life, they failed and now we have abiogenesis, the study of how biological life could arise from inorganic matter through natural processes. Good luck with that.

 

[Vile Atheist]

I am not sure why you are asking “creationists this question. We belief that “In the beginning God created…” which is not what evolution is. Evolution is a change in the frequency of genes in a population over time. Even though I believe that evolutionists, years ago, wanted to be able to trace the concept back to the origin of life, they failed and now we have abiogenesis, the study of how biological life could arise from inorganic matter through natural processes. Good luck with that.

I am asking because frequently, when creationists argue against evolution, they make wild accusations and have many misconceptions of what evolution actually is. The "debate" then has to take on a role of teaching them what evolution is, just so they can oppose it.

But, I'll give you kudos. You're, so far, the most correct.

 

[McBell]

Only if they are wrong, which is rare.

I really wish some of these rarely wrong creationists would start posting here on RF.


So far the only ones who have been posting are the ones who present strawmen and call their strawmen "evolution".

 

[The Wizard]

Close!! :bow:

LOL, I'm just being creative and humorous. The Universe is an organism. But, it can't travel in its current form to the next demension or multi-verse. So, it had to change its shape....

 

[rusra02]

I predict that this thread will test the will power of those who have at least a rudimentary understanding of evolution.

i mean, to get creationists to list their strawmen in a single thread, boldly claiming that their strawmen are what evolution is...

I see that evolutionists will power to avoid ridicule and have a rational discussion has been tested to the limit, and found wanting... what a surprise.

 

[rusra02]

Evolution is anything evolutionists want it to be. There is no way to pin them down. It runs the gamut of simple change like a flu virus mutating to common ancestry of all life forms, and anything in between. If I argue against one type of evolution they argue for a different type. If evolutionists can't explain something then I get "it happend we just have to figure out how".

Simply put evolution is the tree model of the origin of the species.

I would agree with what you say about evolution being a slippery concept that means different things to different people. My understanding of evolution, and what I believe most people think of when the term evolution is used, is:
The belief that small changes accumulate over time in living things and eventually produce the big changes needed to make fish into amphibians and apelike creatures into men.

 

[McBell]

I see that evolutionists will power to avoid ridicule and have a rational discussion has been tested to the limit, and found wanting... what a surprise.

cry me a river.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

cry me a river.

He seems to think that when an evolutionist gives up debating him, it's because he won the debate. He doesn't realize that it's more than likely due to exasperation of the part of the evolutionist, because there's only so many times you can explain the same thing over and over to the same person, before you realize that it's getting nowhere.

 

[McBell]

He seems to think that when an evolutionist gives up debating him, it's because he won the debate. He doesn't realize that it's more than likely due to exasperation of the part of the evolutionist, because there's only so many times you can explain the same thing over and over to the same person, before you realize that it's getting nowhere.

Pigeon Syndrome at it's finest.