Just Accidental?

[SkepticThinker]

Does no one think it is odd that tiny life as at the beginning isn't still happening?

I don't know that they aren't. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that current conditions on earth are much different than they were billions of years ago.

 

[savagewind]

I don't know that they aren't. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that current conditions on earth are much different than they were billions of years ago.

According to what I know about the Earth billions of years ago (which is little) my guess is that it was much more hostile to life then than it is now.

 

[SkepticThinker]

So somewhere along the evolutionary line, a "sort of" life crept into existence without telling a soul and then gradually became a dinosaur over several billion years! Here......let me give you a diagram...... just to make it simple.....

or how about

Yes I can see clearly how an amoeba morphed itself into a T-Rex and then back to a chicken.



Is a brick a house? Is a tile a roof? Is a blade of grass a lawn?



That is the fantasy with not a shred of actual evidence that any of it is true.



Anyone who has ever done color theory knows that red and blue are each primary colors. (colors that cannot be made using other colors) Once you blend them, no matter how much or how little, they cease being a primary color. How amazing then that the colors in nature are seldom made up of just primary colors alone....they are mostly blends of the primaries...red blue and yellow (sometimes lightened with white or darkened with black, neither of which is classified as a true color since they have no wavelength.)

The Creator is an artist who can blend colors and designs and creatures who can all replicate themselves.....but that would mean nothing without sight and a brain to process the images. Then we need a sense of appreciation, (unique to humans) without which none of these things would even be acknowledged as beautiful. Yet we all find them to touch an inner part of us....a part that evolution can never explain.

Science leaves out all the nice parts of nature and substitutes meaningless, dry, baseless assertions that turn us into nothing more than end products of a mindless process. I know that we are soooo much more than that.

Except for all the ugly stuff in nature like parasites and flesh-eating bacteria and such. Do those touch your inner parts too?

I've learned a helluva lot more fascinating information from science than I could ever learn from just looking at pictures of animals on the internet. By the way, all this stuff you know about animals that goes beyond the surface beauty you see in them - you can thank science for all that. (The same science that you denigrate at every other turn, but only when it comes to the parts that conflict with your preconceived religious beliefs.) The Bible doesn't teach us any of it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Remaining ignorant when something that is merely assumed, can be presented as established fact (as long as you take the time to form the mental images suggested by science) and shown to be a dishonest misrepresentation of the evidence, is worse IMO.

Do you accept germ theory?

 

[SkepticThinker]

What is designed, requires a designer.

Wow, could you come up with a more circular argument?

How have you determined in the first place, that any of it is designed? (We've already established that you can't, given that we are able to determine that things are designed by comparing them with undesigned things.) And since you believe everything is designed, I'm still wondering, 117 pages into this thread, how you've made that determination, given that you have nothing to compare anything to. No speculation allowed, as per your own personal standards.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It would seem to be a different kind if it could reproduce with its own kind but not with its parent's kind.

How long did it take to produce a specimen under special conditions which can reproduce, but not with a formally existing kind?
Were two produced?

Pasternian back in the 60's and early 70's found an instance of maze that had very low cross breeding ability with other maze and after his experiments less than 1% of the population of this new maze could cross reproduce with other maze.

Oenothera Lamarckiana was a huge spark of interest as it was a recent evolution discovered that was incompatable for breeding with other Oenothera. This was actually sparking the debate against darwinian evolution but later came to provide good information on how genes affected speciation rather than just "traits" .

 

[SkepticThinker]

Except for all the ugly stuff in nature like parasites and flesh-eating bacteria and such. Do those touch your inner parts too?

I've learned a helluva lot more fascinating information from science than I could ever learn from just looking at pictures of animals on the internet. By the way, all this stuff you know about animals that goes beyond the surface beauty you see in them - you can thank science for all that. (The same science that you denigrate at every other turn, but only when it comes to the parts that conflict with your preconceived religious beliefs.) The Bible doesn't teach us any of it.

By the way, the discovery of DNA could have destroyed the theory of evolution. But it ended up confirming and reinforcing it instead.

 

[Jose Fly]

Remaining ignorant is made most easy by merely pretending to read what's in front of you, while dismissing it internally before the words even begin to form mental images.

That's why it's generally a waste of time to show science to creationists. All they do is scan it for something they can use as an excuse to wave it all away. "Oh look, they used the word 'may'...that means the entire thing is speculation and I don't have to think about it anymore!"

 

[Jose Fly]

Does no one think it is odd that tiny life as at the beginning isn't still happening?

No. The conditions under which it happened on the early earth don't exist here today.

 

[Shad]

I think that would come under the category of proper conditions. The condition would be the fight.

Irreverent

I know that.

Yet you called my comment is about brand so I doubt you know about it until I told you

I think plain evolutionists are missing an important factor. If ever anyone will care to look for it (I am not holding my breath) the world will be amazed!

Hardly. Biologist are looking at the world in a way you never dreamed.

What factor is missing? The reason why I think I know that is because there doesn't seem to be any forms of organic materials in the process of becoming anything.

These processes are happening all the time even in your stomach

What I mean is that the three factors essential for evolution to work are 1. the materials 2. a force and 3. the proper conditions.

I think that a single force is not able to aid in the making. Just look at the wind! Does the wind ever actually produce anything? Of course not!

There is no single factor

I compared the making of a new living thing to the making of a machine. It is a machine. Correct?

A machine is not a proper comparison

Now I shall compare it to construction. The proper condition is enough land to build on and it usually should be flat. The materials are wood and steel for the most part. I don't know what the force is in evolution. but in construction it is the workers. They are following the orders of the foreperson and he or she is following the orders of the contractor. Before all that, there was a design decided upon.

A machine is not a proper comparison nor a workforce. All you are doing is projecting your designer view point, nothing more

Can no one really see why someone like me who believes in God can't see that anything can make
itself like they say everything gets made without a design. (or even a pupose other than make), without a direction and without any outside help except for the right conditions?

I see why. You have a distorted view of evolution.

Has anyone posted yet about where the force comes from each and every time there is any progress in the making of anything?

No as your idea of force will always be God. So no one is going to bother to appeal to the only answer you want.

What about the sticking together? What makes foreign materials stick together like it had to have happened? How many times has it had to have happened?

Some basic classes in chemistry and physics would answer those questions

That is a real question.

No it isn't

How many times did two, three, four or whatever number of previously foreign materials (from where those came from, who knows?) come together to stick together and become something new?

More times than we could possibly realize

I can see pieces of substances alone and all those substances in the universe bumping into each other. I imagine most of the time they do not stick. Sometimes they do. What is the ratio of not sticking together to sticking together?

Nonsensical question.

I imagine it is huge. Too huge to fit into this universe imo.

Your imagination is your imagination, nothing more. It is not an argument.

 

[savagewind]

Yet you called my comment is about brand

What does this mean?

Can you see that people (including me, OMG) even with learning, knowing, and practice, sometimes can't put words together right?

But you want us to acknowledge that mindless matter can make a working 'machine'!

 

[savagewind]

Hardly. Biologist are looking at the world in a way you never dreamed.

Except that I was the one who brought it up, so I have dreamed it.

A machine is not a proper comparison

Says you. Do you believe you are right about everything?

 

[savagewind]

.

A machine is not a proper comparison nor a workforce. All you are doing is projecting your designer view point,

Yes, but we wonder if you know you are projecting the opposite?

You have a distorted view of evolution.

Mindlessness has no goal. True?

 

[savagewind]

I think most scientists can agree with the machine analogy. A cell works like a factory of machines.

 

[savagewind]

My view of evolution is that it is mindless. Is it not so?

 

[Deeje]

Wow, could you come up with a more circular argument?

It is just logic. What do you use in your life that was designed for a specific purpose that had no designer? And how useful is a design if the thing is not manufactured...again by intelligent humans, often using machinery designed by other intelligent minds?

How have you determined in the first place, that any of it is designed? (We've already established that you can't, given that we are able to determine that things are designed by comparing them with undesigned things.) And since you believe everything is designed, I'm still wondering, 117 pages into this thread, how you've made that determination, given that you have nothing to compare anything to. No speculation allowed, as per your own personal standards.

The purpose of this thread was to demonstrate that all the huffing and puffing of the evolutionists about how much "evidence" they have for their theory, is nothing more that conjecture and educated guessing dressed up as scientific fact. I wanted to show people that there are no facts, and that the whole theory could go up in smoke tomorrow if some new discovery is made.....or God taps them on the shoulder.

By the way, the discovery of DNA could have destroyed the theory of evolution. But it ended up confirming and reinforcing it instead.

Science's interpretation of DNA evidence is the same as all their other evidence.....based on their own imagined scenario.

I am tired of the finger pointing and accusations made against those who believe in a Creator as if we are a brainless lot incapable of understanding the science, like all you scientific geniuses and your mentors.....the truth be known, science has nothing but its own ideas and the power of suggestion to convey what it thinks "might have" or "could have" happened million or even billions of years ago when no one was around to record any of it. You are "believers" just as we are. You put your faith in the words of men...we put our faith in the words of God.

Now you can protest about that all you like, but you have no more actual solid proof for what you believe than we do. That is the message. Tell the truth and choose your belief system.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I've already posted a paper describing the observed evolution of single-celled organisms evolving into multicellular organisms in real time. Do I need to post it again?

What are you talking about?!! You're not Østman the pleiotropy guy, are you? Chlorella vulgaris, really? I've posted on that, many times on other sites. What a laugh!

That is not multicellularity, in the true sense of the word! The daughter cells simply joined with the mother cell.

Humans have done the same thing, basically forming colonies for protection. You'd call that evolution?

When the environmental threat was removed, they reverted back to their normal shape.

Pleiotropy: Watching multicellularity evolve before our eyes

(Deeje, read the comments below the article.)

How misleading can you get?! As bad as some religionists. 'Special pleading, anyone?'

 

[Shad]

Yes, but we wonder if you know you are projecting the opposite?

The opposite would be natural which evolution is so I project nothing.

Mindlessness has no goal. True?

Goals are only important to those that need teleological explanations for everything

 

[Shad]

Except that I was the one who brought it up, so I have dreamed it.

No you point is very common. A believer looks at the world in wonder and says "God did it". You said nothing new.

Says you. Do you believe you are right about everything?

In this case I am right as machines are very different from other objects. One key difference is we make machines.....

 

[Shad]

What does this mean?

Simply I did not believe your statement that you know what I was talking about. I said calling my view a "brand" gives it away.

Can you see that people (including me, OMG) even with learning, knowing, and practice, sometimes can't put words together right?

Sure

But you want us to acknowledge that mindless matter can make a working 'machine'!

Matter is combined into all sorts of forms around you all the time. You think this is impossible yet you believe in a entity with a mind but no body, which is outside of time and can make anything at will that is logically possible which spends it's spare time talking to a culture that had no significance until a major Empire made a splinter religion from this culture legal.