Just Accidental?

[Deeje]

As usual, you don't answer the question as to what evidence can you provide to indicate that "micro-evolution" cannot lead to "macro-evolution", therefore I have to assert that you are guilt of what is commonly referred to as "intellectual dishonesty"

Metis, there was so much in that post that you completely ignored. Instead I get this snippet and an accusation of "intellectual dishonesty". One of us is being dishonest here....but I don't think its me. The readers will decide.

If this was a formal debatr, you'd lose hands-down because one loses points when they make a claim that they cannot provide one shred of evidence for-- and it's obvious that you can't.

This is your defense? Seriously? I will never subject my Creator and his works to a mere debate. Man-made rules do not apply to him or to anything he has made....sorry if you thought you had to squeeze him into a box that humans made for him.
Neither YEC nor Macro-evolution come anywhere close to revealing the truth about creation.

OTOH, "evolutionists" have shown evidence based on the fossil record, the genome testing, and what the geneticists have been telling us.

The "fossil record" is a joke as proof of evolution, and you know it. It engenders more questions than it answers. It also fits creation perfectly...the only difference is in the interpretation.

Genome testing? If you can relate a human to a banana, or an amoeba to a dinosaur, then its obvious to me that we are not linked by some imaginary chain, but virtually made from the same material by the same Creator.

A former evolutionist relates why he changed his mind after studying genetics....
Professor Yan-Der Hsuuw is the director of embryo research at Taiwan’s National Pingtung University of Science and Technology. He too once believed in evolution—until his research led him to conclude otherwise. Regarding cell division and specialization, he said: “The right cells must be produced in the right order and at the right places. First they assemble into tissues that will in turn assemble themselves into organs and limbs. What engineer can even dream of writing instructions for such a process? Yet the instructions for embryo development are superbly written in DNA. When I consider the beauty of it all, I’m convinced that life was designed by God.”

This man sees what no evolutionist wants to admit. He's not just a religious person vainly trying to support his view....he is a scientist who was led to his view by the evidence you say supports evolution. He saw the opposite. Is he intellectually dishonest?....or are other scientists just admiring the Emperor's new clothes?....vainly trying to describe the fabric, the embellishments and the colors from their own imaginations? Are they agreeing with one another because no one wants to admit that it's all strung together by a very flimsy amount of real evidence and lots of suggestion about what "might have" happened?

But, instead of even accepting this as possible evidence, you resort to the "intellectually dishonest" tactic of claiming that they are either ignorant, corrupt, or both.

"Possible evidence"? Are you kidding me? Isn't this what this thread has been about from the beginning? It isn't about the 'speculative possibilities', which in the minds of evolutionists, knows no boundaries....this is about what is provable and logical when we see what is right under our noses. My 'speculation' is as valid as yours and I need only a fraction of science's imagination to believe that great intelligence designed and directed all of it.

IMO evolutionary-science is ego driven for the most part, not evidence driven....we see that in the desperate attempts to force belief in what is not provable. To make speculation look like facts. Look how they denigrate anyone who does not uphold their view....it is all through this thread. People have been ostracized and lost their positions at universities for daring to question the validity of the interpretation of evidence. Doesn't that speak volumes? If evolution is true, then why do you need to force belief in it? Don't you make the same claim about us?

I knew I was making a mistake by responding to your post because you simply have nothing to offer with your disingenuous tactics here. If this is the best that the JW's and you can do, I really feel sorry for them and you.

Why do conversations with you always degenerate into emotional appeals and accusations of lack of intellect or intentional dishonesty or disingenuous tactics? Is that all you have? I have seen no conclusive evidence that evolution, on the scale suggested by science, is even possible, let alone the only explanation for the vast amount and variety of life on this planet. To suggest that it was all just a series of billions of fortunate accidents is a fantasy worthy of Walt Disney, IMO.

If you have some concrete evidence to back up your claims....lets see them. It can't be a 'belief' or a 'suggestion' or even proof of 'adaptation', because that is what we have, along with (what is to us,) a large amount of common sense and logic. So unless you have something more than educated guesswork......'evolutionary-science' is in no better position than we are.

 

[Mister Silver]

She just told us in post 4295 that she turns the sound off when watching the Attenborough documentaries so as to avoid hearing anything about evolution while calling evolutionists idiotic and pathetic.

Why would it be any different here? She glosses over the science offered her like somebody daydreaming while reading. Suddenly, you're at the end of the paragraph or page, and you have no recollection of what your eyes scanned while daydreaming.

You're a seasoned poster. I'm sure that you're very familiar with that phenomenon among creationists. You correct a comment and it has zero impact. You read the exact same comment from the same poster a few days or a few weeks later as if nothing happened in between.

Or one asks for your evidence, you provide it, and it is rejected out of hand unread followed once again by the same error as if nothing happened in between. That's faith based thought - the complete lack of interest in evidence in making choices.

@Deeje
You need to be continually reminded of this. I'm afraid it's the only way to end the madness.

 

[gnostic]

Metis, there was so much in that post that you completely ignored. Instead I get this snippet and an accusation of "intellectual dishonesty". One of us is being dishonest here....but I don't think its me. The readers will decide.

Do you know many of us think that you have lied to us?

It is not just metis or me. Actually more people have agreed with Metis, then they have agreed with you.

If anyone's honesty is questionable, it is yours, Deeje.

 

[Deeje]

@Deeje
You need to be continually reminded of this. I'm afraid it's the only way to end the madness.

What madness MS? That is open to interpretation...much like all the evidence presented for macro-evolution.

You just can't imagine that you might be following a red herring because you like fish.

 

[Mister Silver]

What madness MS? That is open to interpretation...much like all the evidence presented for macro-evolution.

You just can't imagine that you might be following a red herring because you like fish.

Yes, you have a sense of humor. Hardy-har-har.

Imagine having a sense of scientific intelligence, as well.

 

[Deeje]

Do you know many of us think that you have lied to us?

Telling the truth is not "lying" just because you don't want to believe it. I think even a child can understand that. Accusing someone of lying is pretty serious if you have no proof...which you don't.

It is not just metis or me. Actually more people have agreed with Metis, then they have agreed with you.

As is their choice......is this a contest? Do the numbers count for something? Have they ever counted with God?

Choices have consequences and I hope that we are all prepared for them.
The Bible says that God did not create this earth for nothing.....he has plans for it. We either fit into those plans or we get permanently excluded from them.

You don't have to believe that, but at the same time you can't say you weren't warned, can you....?

 

[Deeje]

Yes, you have a sense of humor. Hardy-har-har.

Imagine having a sense of scientific intelligence, as well.

Why?....do you imagine that 'scientific intelligence' makes one less open to the suggestions of others when an idea appeals?
Think again.

 

[Deeje]

@ Mister Silver, since you want to promote macro-evolution then perhaps you can address a small portion of what metis ignored.....

My evidence for "planned" is right before everyone's eyes.

All throughout creation there is pre-conceived purpose demonstrated in everything. Purpose demonstrates planning and planning has to have a planner. Is it all just a series of very fortunate coincidences that the earth is designed for life and life is designed for the earth? Was this all 'just accidental'?

Is the mixture of gases here in our atmosphere just a fluke? If there was a bit more oxygen in the mix, then every spark would cause an explosion. We could never light a fire to keep warm or cook our food. Every thunderstorm would be life threatening.

Is the earth's size, distance from the sun, the tilt of its axis, and the speed of its rotation, all just coincidental?
It is also coincidental that trees and vegetation breathe out what we breathe in and vice versa? A self sustaining supply of a basic necessity, based on a system of mutually beneficial interactions just happened for no apparent reason? Plants and insects also demonstrate this amazing relationship with pollination....its all just a fluke though....right?

Is it accidental that the vast quantities of water on this planet are not consumable by its land dwelling creatures and that precipitation just magically transforms salt water into fresh water so that all land dwellers and vegetation can survive? Is it just a fluke that water floats when it freezes, when no other liquid does? What would happen if that was not the case? Think of all those creatures in the polar regions who live on and under the ice.

Is it just coincidental that nature's garbage disposal experts just happen to operate the greatest recycling program in existence to ensure that the millions of dead bodies don't litter the earth to stink up the place?

Haven't excursions into space proven that there is no evidence of intelligent life anywhere else? You have no more evidence for macro-evolution than I have for my Creator.....but I have so much more by way of logical evidence in the real world than you do IMO....and what's more, I need no science degrees to appreciate them.

Ready when you are.....

 

[Mister Silver]

Why...do you imagine that 'scientific intelligence' makes one less open to the suggestions of others when an idea appeals?
Think again.

I certainly have not seen you open to the scientific intelligence others have posted in this thread. If it does not fit your brand, you dismiss it as unessential.

 

[Mister Silver]

@ Mister Silver, since you want to promote macro-evolution then perhaps you can address a small portion of what metis ignored.....



Ready when you are.....

What I like most of all is how you have merely resorted to the typical creationist pseudoscience. Using the words "planned" and "planner" does not detract me from the truth that you're using the same old tired, unproven arguments which use the words "designed" and "designer".

When you can think outside the obvious confines of religion, then I will consider what you have to state.

 

[Deeje]

I certainly have not seen you open to the scientific intelligence others have posted in this thread. If it does not fit your brand, you dismiss it as unessential.

Ditto.

Don't we all dance to our favorite tune?

Scientists will gravitate to the musings of other scientists of like mind.....who says their reasoning is sound....?
other scientists of course......adding to the pile of evidence? NO! Just adding to the pile of gullible "believers"

Isn't this what we get accused of? Pot calling the kettle black, much?

Please feel free to prove that the theory is true.....nothing based on assumption or belief...just real solid evidence that macro-evolution ever took place. Shouldn't be hard for a scientifically minded person like yourself.

 

[Deeje]

What I like most of all is how you have merely resorted to the typical creationist pseudoscience. Using the words "planned" and "planner" does not detract me from the truth that you're using the same old tired, unproven arguments which use the words "designed" and "designer".

When you can think outside the obvious confines of religion, then I will consider what you have to state.

Nice dodge.....

 

[Mister Silver]

Ditto.

Don't we all dance to our favorite tune?

Scientists will gravitate to the musings of other scientists of like mind.....who says their reasoning is sound....
other scientists of course......adding to the pile of evidence? NO! Just adding to the pile of gullible "believers"

Isn't this what we get accused of? Pot calling the kettle black, much?

Please feel free to prove that the theory is true.....nothing based on assumption or belief...just real solid evidence that macro-evolution ever took place. Shouldn't be hard for a scientifically minded person like yourself.

If you played around less and placed more effort in understanding the truth, you'd certainly surpass this immaturity that you call knowledge.

 

[Mister Silver]

Nice dodge.....

If by that you mean I narrowly missed being hit by scientific illiteracy, then you would be correct.

 

[Deeje]

If you played around less and placed more effort in understanding the truth, you'd certainly surpass this immaturity that you call knowledge.

Can't do it eh? That speaks for itself. I will stand my "immaturity" up against your "gullibility" any day.

I "play" with this topic to diffuse the anger of those who can't prove a thing science believes about macro-evolution.

Its better to laugh at the empty talk of scientists than it is to simply offer a dry "religious" argument.

I am not here to convince you of anything, but to show the readers here how little science has to offer by way of "proof" for their theory, compared to how much speculation is offered as if it were fact. I hope they will be able to see the difference.
The responses so far have not disappointed.

 

[Mister Silver]

Can't do it eh? That speaks for itself. I will stand my "immaturity" up against your "gullibility" any day.

I "play" with this topic to diffuse the anger of those who can't prove a thing science believes about macro-evolution.

Its better to laugh at the empty talk of scientists than it is to simply offer a dry "religious" argument.

I am not here to convince you of anything, but to show the readers here how little science has to offer by way of "proof" for their theory, compared to how much speculation is offered as if it were fact. I hope they will be able to see the difference.
The responses so far have not disappointed.

As long as you're having fun. Whom am I to rob you of that?

 

[Deeje]

As long as you're having fun. Whom am I to rob you of that?

You're dodging again. Do you have something of value to add to this thread? Can you address the questions put to you?
I am challenging you to answer them from a scientific perspective. Are you not qualified to answer? Can you provide evidence for macro-evolution that does not rely on pure educated guesswork? I'm all ears....

 

[Mister Silver]

You're dodging again. Do you have something of value to add to this thread? Can you address the questions put to you?
I am challenging you to answer them from a scientific perspective. Are you not qualified to answer? Can you provide evidence for macro-evolution that does not rely on pure educated guesswork? I'm all ears....

Others already have answered them sufficiently. It is not my fault you have dismissed that which could have educated you.

 

[Deeje]

Others already have answered them sufficiently. It is not my fault you have dismissed that which could have educated you.

Might I say the same about you?

You assume that you support the 'winning side'......who said?

I was a staunch evolutionist in my youth, but I could not reconcile what I saw in nature with flukes and accidental mutations.
The more I studied evolution, the more convinced I was that it was nonsense. If you want to admire the Emperor's new clothes...feel free.

 

[Mister Silver]

Might I say the same about you?

You assume that you support the 'winning side'......who said?

I was a staunch evolutionist in my youth, but I could not reconcile what I saw in nature with flukes and accidental mutations.
The more I studied evolution, the more convinced I was that it was nonsense. If you want to admire the Emperor's new clothes...feel free.

If you stop referring to evolution as a fluke and accidental mutation, then perhaps you would realize that you do not understand evolution. You can shrug it away, but the science is still there. You can deny it with a religious insistence, but science provides reality.