1. 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!

Featured Evolution vs Creationism?

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by The Hammer, Jul 3, 2022.

  1. rational experiences

    rational experiences Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    10,369
    Ratings:
    +619
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    God said men theists gave humans dominion on earth. God being earth plus its heavens. Said by humans. Via the terms everything I name.

    I still give new ideas now new names proving I did it...naming.

    Transitionists claim now I want humans to be part machine. As they claimed it already as the exact status by evolution as and by a human theism.

    As they claim the same strings of earth mass advice to build a machine was the same advice to build a human.

    As they say I use mass owning numbers owning patterns that I give to reactive changes. In chemistry. To state how I can add onto an animal to give you some numbers and chemistry. Human life.

    As you're formed from a creator. The same as my machine.

    Machine position however is first with man scientist and not natural God earth.

    So he already presumed we are part machine first. As he says so.

    A man adult whose supposed to as a man adult be a humans father.

    Nowadays conscious presence is gone. You prove you have sex with children or your brother...maybe an animal or two.

    Might be why your mind proves father isn't with us anymore as a human mind balanced.

    So I was told by coders that A DAM meant a scientist man was A MAD...having given us DAM nation.

    Claiming we are his maths mental problem. As a human man that thinks claiming it mental.

    Mental associated to natural health.

    So if natural health was removed so was his mental capacity.

    Hence he confessed already as a man with his brothers what his own self summation meant. As just a theist about any chosen human subject he says is a topic to discuss.

    Always just as the human first.

    He told us he tried to change our human life into the beast himself. By first looking at the beast life then at earths mass. Looking back.

    As a theist.
    As a scientist.
    As a man with his new life partner a machine body.

    It is his owned summation of our life's reality on earth as a human.

    Humans...notice human is known and identified as natural place by a man human. He says what was once a human was a beast.

    He doesn't say a beast was only ever just a beast. As he wouldn't be enabled his roleplaying as a man god then.
     
  2. Windwalker

    Windwalker Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    13,482
    Ratings:
    +9,423
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    Falling was created by gravity. :) BTW, evolution itself is "creating". It is a creative process or 'force'. But that still leaves you wondering, what caused the process of evolution itself, considering that everything that exists owes its forms to it? It is quite literally, the creator of everything that has form.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    15,996
    Ratings:
    +14,055
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I was talking about the process itself.
    It's not created. Neither is "falling".

    Instead, it's what occurs inevitably due to circumstantial context.


    This is literally addressed in the post.
    It happens inevitably when you have systems that reproduce with variation and which are in competition over limited resources.

    What caused the process is a wrong question imo.
    It's not like you can turn it on and off.

    When you ask the same about falling, the answer will always consist of an explanation of the circumstantial context in which simple laws of physics operate.

    You could ask what caused the first self-replicating organism to originate. That would be a good question.

    But what caused evolution?
    Well... the presence of things that replicate with variation and compete over limited resources.
    The mere existence of such things, is what "caused" evolution.

    If you insist on anthropomorphing it, sure.

    I see little sense in doing that though.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. Stonetree

    Stonetree Genuine Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2021
    Messages:
    4,791
    Ratings:
    +1,617
    Religion:
    Christian Agnostic
    I apologize for using a response to you to offer a different opinion not related to your post.......I would recommend for any reader a book......"Who Wrote the Bible"...as there are many books with similar titles.....I must also supply the author....Richard Elliot Friedman
     
  5. Windwalker

    Windwalker Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    13,482
    Ratings:
    +9,423
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    As am I. But you seem to be talking about biological evolution. I'm talking about evolution as a process that creates everything from atoms, to solar systems, to planets, to plants, and to people. Evolution created and creates everything that exists.

    So it is an eternal process, or at least something that predates the universe? If you think about it, without evolution, you'd have nothing formed at all in the universe. Likewise, if you think of it as a force, such as electrostatic, electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces, and gravity, those with the possible exception of gravity we created with the birth of the universe, all these were necessary to be there in order for a universe to exist at all.

    But falling is the result of, or created by gravity. Evolution on the other hand, like gravity, causes the formation of stable objects. Stable objects exist as the result of evolution.

    Not to my satisfaction, which is why I replied. :)

    Those systems are the result of evolution, they don't cause it. You're putting the cart ahead of the horse.

    I think it's a more than worthwhile question. And you are right, you can't turn it on or off, just like you can't turn off gravity. Unless I suppose you were able to make everything absolutely inert and stop time. :) I suppose the opposite of evolution is static, or non-being. But we don't live in a static reality. We exist in a reality created by evolution, and is upheld by evolution.

    The circumstantial context for evolution is existence itself. And just like the laws of physics are processes that are the "hands" of creation, evolution is the "creating" itself, or the "creator" if you will.

    Again, step back from limiting the process of evolution to biology. Biological evolution is simply the process of evolution creating the biological forms we see, and explaining how evolution created them.

    But the presence of things that replicate only exist because of evolution creating them. You could think of evolution as the 'orchestrator' with the interacting forces and raw materials. Replicating systems are the result of them coming together in such as way as to do that.

    I don't see it any less a metaphor than anything else we language reality with using scientific terms. "Science is all metaphor" said Timothy Leary. :)
     
  6. Kfox

    Kfox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2021
    Messages:
    1,080
    Ratings:
    +312
    Religion:
    Atheist, Agnostic, Humanist, etc
    I think that depends on which God or Gods you believe in. If you believe your God created mankind from the beginning with the ability to speak, reason, calculate, and behave as modern man does today, that flies in the face of mankind being an evolved being, that evolved into what he is today/
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  7. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    15,996
    Ratings:
    +14,055
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Obviously. That's the topic of the thread.

    Then you are not talking about the scientific theory that the OP is talking about.
    No. Instead, you are talking about something entirely different then everyone else in this thread.
    The thing you are talking about, isn't even a thing, actually...

    Again, no.
    Biological evolution is the scientific theory, which is the topic of this thread.

    What you are talking about has nothing to do with science.
    There is no "theory of evolution of everything". It's nonsense.

    The topic is biological evolution vs religious creationism.
    It deals with the origins of species.


    No.


    You are not talking about science.
    I have no idea what you are talking about.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Kenny

    Kenny Face to face with my Father
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    19,472
    Ratings:
    +7,532
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Very simple... let's just take the elephant... what was the transitional species of the elephant.
     
  9. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    64,373
    Ratings:
    +43,395
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I hope that you meant to ask "What is a transitional species leading to an elephant?"

    There are tons of them.

    Elephants | Paleo Sleuths

    [​IMG]
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  10. stevecanuck

    stevecanuck Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,783
    Ratings:
    +668
    Yes, that's the 'Get out of Logic-Jail' card. The religious can simply claim that the evolutionary process is all God's idea.
     
  11. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    25,560
    Ratings:
    +32,577
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    First problem: you ask for *the* transitional species, when there were many over a considerable period of time.

    Second problem: there is more than one species of elephant and the different species have different evolutionary histories.

    Third problem: while there are only three species of elephant alive today, there were many others in the past.

    Fourth problem: what criteria are you using to distinguish elephant ancestors from elephants? For example, the Eritherium was an early evolutionary precursor, was designated as a proboscid, but was the size of a fox. later species, like the Gomphotheres, had tusks, proboscis, and such, but were distinctly different than modern elephants. Then there were mastodons, which were yet another evolutionary line. Mammoths were yet another.

    This leads to the fifth problem: which characteristic do you want to focus on to define the transition? If you pick a different characteristic, you will get the transition happening at a different time and with a different species.

    And, again, this is how evolution works: it is a mosaic of related species, each with slightly different characteristics, each transitional from its ancestors to its descendants. Different characteristics appear at different times and may appear in more than one related species.

    So, if you are really interested, you can start with the wikipedia particle and follow some of the references:

    Proboscidea - Wikipedia

    or maybe the cladistic diagram of the Elephantida would be of assistance:

    Elephantida - Wikipedia

    Notice, for example, the the mammoths are more closely related to the Asian elephants than the African ones.


    Ypu might also be interested in this article:

    The rise and fall of elephant ancestors

    In any case, I suspect that what you *expect* a transitional form to look like is nowhere close to what they *actually* look like. All were fully functioning species, but the characteristics of the species changed over time in adaptation to the environment. That is how evolution happens.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    64,373
    Ratings:
    +43,395
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The way that he asked his question about transitional species tells me that he is still conflating transitional with ancestral.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Kenny

    Kenny Face to face with my Father
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    19,472
    Ratings:
    +7,532
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Thank you for a very detailed response... I will look into this! :)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. idea

    idea Question Everything

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    7,108
    Ratings:
    +1,325
    Religion:
    spiritual, not religious
    Intelligence is reaction to external stimuli based on internally stored information. Everything in existence has always done this. A rock cracks as ice forms in it, reforms when pushed deep into the mantle - reacts to its environment based on chemical bonds. Cause/effect follows natural laws for all.
     
  15. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    13,763
    Ratings:
    +1,996
    Religion:
    Christian
    Amazing. My way of saying that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen. OK, one of the most ridiculous things. Now here's another one that's 'amazing..' if you will, taken from a scientific thing of sorts: "Compared to the rest of our primate relatives, humans have a uniquely long childhood. From picking a mate to having a baby – and raising it to make more babies –what are the evolutionary pressures that made us this way?" I thought what a stupid question. Science Events | New Scientist
     
  16. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    13,763
    Ratings:
    +1,996
    Religion:
    Christian
    We do? Where? Because they show signs of one sort or another, that means they "transitioned"? The more I look into it the more ridiculous and bordering on the insane it becomes. The theory. :)
     
  17. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    13,763
    Ratings:
    +1,996
    Religion:
    Christian
    That is because the Creator made it to be that way, giving things elements needed to sustain life on the earth. Rocks don't "think," and instinct is not considered as conscientious intelligence. In fact, some consciences are so distorted the brains are slanted. Human so-called intelligence, that is.
     
  18. blü 2

    blü 2 Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    11,426
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    First of all, happy birthday!

    Second, thanks for the suggestions. I already have a few such resources in my library.
     
  19. Stonetree

    Stonetree Genuine Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2021
    Messages:
    4,791
    Ratings:
    +1,617
    Religion:
    Christian Agnostic
    Thank You for the good wishes....
     
  20. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    25,560
    Ratings:
    +32,577
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    We know these species existed. We know *when* they existed. We know that the modern species did NOT exist at that time.

    So yes, that means that they were part of a Transition from the older species to the newer ones.

    How else do explain the fossils we actually have and their timing?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...