Just how much evolutionary change do creationists accept?

[Enoch07]

Poverty makes it harder, but hardly impossible. The resources are there, you need to be bright enough and hard working enough and you need to persevere.

I'm not saying that's right, or moral, or anything other than possible. Let's get back to the real discussion:

I agree it is possible. I am living proof. But I also had help. When I was 15 I got a job through a program called "Hi-Tech". The whole purpose of this job was to learn about aviation. I spent that summer studying diagrams of little Cessna 172, learning how the mechanics worked. Also the differences between low wing craft/high wing, and principles of flight etc. We also spent many hours on a flight simulator to learn how to pilot. I even got in 1 hour of real life flight time to go towards my flight license. This opened the world of aviation up to me, an expensive world if you didn't know. Back then 1 hour flight time was $1,000, and you needed 40 hours of flight time to get licensed.

This program while only 3 months long and only paid minimum wage. Opened doors for me that would not have neen opened otherwise, barring joining the air force. It along with 1 or 2 other programs that no longer exist. Are directly responsible for showing me that I don't have to settle for less. This is what every poverty stricken kids needs. Not a handout, but a handup, they will take it from there.

Bright enough and working hard enough is not enough, if opportunities are not given. What is needed is more opportunities, and if they eff it up aftet that, then thats on them.

 

[Enoch07]

Hold on. Evolution is a specialized discipline useful for those whose profession is oriented towards biological sciences. There is no reason for general public to pay for courses that does nothing but satisfy curiosity. School level knowledge of evolution ought to be enough for lawyers, artists or business folks. The problem is that certain religious groups are rejecting the science being taught in school for ideological reasons. If they have problems with the science, they can pay their pastors to take a course on evolution in college to understand the experimental and observational evidence in detail. Surely, if it's that important, they can cough up the dough to take such a 2 semester regular or evening course for their pastors and theologians before spending money to propagate unscientific creationist nonsense and embarrassing themselves?

Some religious people will never believe you. Its a free country they can waste their money however they want. Nothing you, I, or anyone can do about that.

 

[sayak83]

Some religious people will never believe you. Its a free country they can waste their money however they want. Nothing you, I, or anyone can do about that.

Yes I know. Just saying what seems reasonable.

 

[Sapiens]

I agree it is possible. I am living proof. But I also had help. When I was 15 I got a job through a program called "Hi-Tech". The whole purpose of this job was to learn about aviation. I spent that summer studying diagrams of little Cessna 172, learning how the mechanics worked. Also the differences between low wing craft/high wing, and principles of flight etc. We also spent many hours on a flight simulator to learn how to pilot. I even got in 1 hour of real life flight time to go towards my flight license. This opened the world of aviation up to me, an expensive world if you didn't know. Back then 1 hour flight time was $1,000, and you needed 40 hours of flight time to get licensed.

We have some similar interests and background, but a basic difference ... you're looking for programs, I make my own. I did not join Boy Scouts, I was a Civil Air Patrol cadet. I hung out at the local airport. I got to know folks. I ran errands. I swept hangers. I cleaned rental planes. Eventually it was clear I was there for the long haul and I learned how to fly, Pipers, Cessnas, Beaches, even some ex-military aircraft.

This program while only 3 months long and only paid minimum wage. Opened doors for me that would not have been opened otherwise, barring joining the air force. It along with 1 or 2 other programs that no longer exist. Are directly responsible for showing me that I don't have to settle for less. This is what every poverty stricken kids needs. Not a handout, but a handup, they will take it from there.

Handouts are great! So are handsup. But what really counts is getting it done when you have neither.

I started right-seating for deliveries and built up my hours, finally soloed and started helping out ferrying rental planes. VFR, IFR, Weather, Multi-Engine, even a Seaplane Endorsement. I rarely got paid, but I didn't care. When I left for university I was ready for a commercial license that I never bothered to get. It took initiative, smarts, personality, and a host of other traits ... but it did not require money. BTW, even today you can rent a VFR Cessna 172 for about $120/hr ... what's with this $1,000 per hour? What kind of aircraft?

Bright enough and working hard enough is not enough, if opportunities are not given.

Bright enough and hard working enough is often (not always) enough, opportunities need not be given, they can often be made.

What is needed is more opportunities, and if they eff it up after that, then thats on them.

More opportunities are great ... but even better is learning how to create opportunities for yourself.

 

[Enoch07]

More opportunities are great ... but even better is learning how to create opportunities for yourself.

I won't argue against that one bit. It is the best way no doubt! But its not possible for everyone.

You see when I was 11 years old I drove around town in a grey 1983 Cutlass Supreme selling dope (mostly pot). It was after all the family business. The local Sheriff was paid off in those days so I done whatever I wanted when I wanted to. The first time I got shot at was 12 years old, double barrel shotgun 3 inches from my head. I lost 50% hearing in my left ear permanently that day.

That life was all I knew. Had someone not helped me I would be dead or in jail now.

 

[Profound Realization]

Just over the last few months, I've seen one creationist say that evolutionary change within a taxonomic class is nothing more than "microevolution" and no big deal, another creationist say that evolutionary change within a taxonomic family is just "adaptation" and no big deal, other creationists insist that no one has ever seen a new species evolve, and other creationists insist that no evolutionary change happens at all, ever.

So what's the deal creationists? Can any of you clear this up?

If I didn't know better, I'd say you were just making things up as you go along.

Classes, species, families,etc. are routinely being re-classified, re-defined, re-organized by "scientists." Apparently this evolves too.

If you were to stay true to your model, there is no need for you to ask any questions. "Creationists" and "Evolutionists" all evolved non-intelligently, for no reason, spontaneously just as they are. There is no correct/incorrect, intelligent/non-intelligent, right or wrong, no big deals/no small deals, making things up/not making things up. All just naturally is and spontaneously is.

Why would anything be a big deal, it is all natural and spontaneous. Words, their meanings... all evolved spontaneously and naturally by however the human using them spontaneously and naturally evolved to naturally and spontaneously define them. Who the heck cares? Others evolved spontaneously and naturally to not give 2 craps about evolution or creation... both naturally and spontaneously. Nobody is making anything up, everything evolved naturally and spontaneously as is.

And obviously to answer your question with the obvious answer.....from nothing and then through a serious of meaningless, random, spontaneous events you evolved to ask random, spontaneous, meaningless questions through random spontaneous meaningless complex biochemical processes and receive answers in the same meaningless fashion.

 

[Profound Realization]

Just try to get them to define a 'kind'. It's amazing how much variation is allowed in a 'kind' if the evidence is there for changes!

Everything is defined by how said human naturally and spontaneously evolved to define something meaningless anyhow. I would think you'd be reasonable enough to already know this. I'd also think you'd be reasonable enough to comprehend that there is no purpose for your statement and we know that any potential intent/purpose of enlightening others on any proper meanings or definitions would be scientifically impossible because 1) No purpose evolved, and 2) You'd have to pass on your genes rather than communicate over the Internet. I'd also think you'd be reasonable enough to not be judgemental and classify anything as "them" since "them" evolved from the same "common" ancestor as "you" and through the same random, spontaneous, meaningless, natural processes.

The irony of your statement is that there are many variations of the human and neither is incorrect nor correct due to random, spontaneous, meaningless biochemical processes. What would make anyone supreme judge of true definitions of spontaneous, random, naturally meaningless words during the evolutionary process? Did they evolve from all of the kings of the jungle? Am I witnessing the very evolution of "God" as a supreme judge of definitions of random, natural, spontaneous, and meaningless words?

Why wouldn't you expect variation in definitions when variation is from meaningless, random, spontaneous, evolution?

 

[sayak83]

Everything is defined by how said human naturally and spontaneously evolved to define something meaningless anyhow. I would think you'd be reasonable enough to already know this. I'd also think you'd be reasonable enough to comprehend that there is no purpose for your statement and we know that any potential intent/purpose of enlightening others on any proper meanings or definitions would be scientifically impossible because 1) No purpose evolved, and 2) You'd have to pass on your genes rather than communicate over the Internet. I'd also think you'd be reasonable enough to not be judgemental and classify anything as "them" since "them" evolved from the same "common" ancestor as "you" and through the same random, spontaneous, meaningless, natural processes.

The irony of your statement is that there are many variations of the human and neither is incorrect nor correct due to random, spontaneous, meaningless biochemical processes. What would make anyone supreme judge of true definitions of spontaneous, random, naturally meaningless words during the evolutionary process? Did they evolve from all of the kings of the jungle? Am I witnessing the very evolution of "God" as a supreme judge of definitions of random, natural, spontaneous, and meaningless words?

Why wouldn't you expect variation in definitions when variation is from meaningless, random, spontaneous, evolution?

Evolution is neither random nor meaningless nor purposeless. It has natural order as well as inherent random variability (just like QM), and while it is not driven by an external purpose or externally imposed meaning.. it has an intrinsic logic and purpose out of which it creates meaning and function within the phenomena it generates.

Now that your strawman is refuted.. what is a kind? Thanks.

 

[Profound Realization]

Evolution is neither random nor meaningless nor purposeless. It has natural order as well as inherent random variability (just like QM), and while it is not driven by an external purpose or externally imposed meaning.. it has an intrinsic logic and purpose out of which it creates meaning and function within the phenomena it generates.

Now that your strawman is refuted.. what is a kind? Thanks.

Now, you sound like a "Creationist." Mentioning purpose, creating meaning, order, intrinsic logic. Logic just magically created itself, logic just magically instilled itself within creation with specific instruction. Yes, in my opinion you're totally a "Creationist" pretending you're not while trying to fit in with the wannabe genius cool kids. Good for you. Nothing wrong with that.

Okay, so it's not random then you mention random variability.

Then there is natural selection which has no intent.. the entire driving mechanism behind it all.

Then it is internally driven and has nothing to do with its externally driven environment. Purpose magically came from within when all of the withins came from the external environment.

I don't personally refer to the word "kind" but have no issue with those that do.

 

[sayak83]

Now, you sound like a "Creationist." Mentioning purpose, creating meaning, order, intrinsic logic. Logic just magically created itself, logic just magically instilled itself within creation with specific instruction. Yes, in my opinion you're totally a "Creationsist" pretending you're not while trying to fit in with the wannabe genius cool kids. Good for you. Nothing wrong with that.

Okay, so it's not random then you mention random variability.

Then there is natural selection which has no intent.. the entire driving mechanism behind it all.

Then it is internally driven and has nothing to do with its externally driven environment.

I don't personally refer to the word "kind" but have no issue with those that do.

Is quantum mechanics not both random and well ordered. Your proposition that things either be ordered or random is simplistic. Further randomness has its own logic and mathematical structure, as anybody who has taken multiple courses in statistics and Mathematics of stochasticity will know.

Finally, by internal, I implied both the evolutionary process and the natural world it emanates from and acts in.

I am already an honored and cool member of nerd Nation. No need for me to fit in further.

 

[Profound Realization]

Is quantum mechanics not both random and well ordered. Your proposition that things either be ordered or random is simplistic. Further randomness has its own logic and mathematical structure, as anybody who has taken multiple courses in statistics and Mathematics of stochasticity will know.

Finally, by internal, I implied both the evolutionary process and the natural world it emanates from and acts in.

I am already an honored and cool member of nerd Nation. No need for me to fit in further.

Seems like humans are freaks of nature.

Stick with the nerd nation. Try to steer from the cool kid club... they tend to bully, belittle anyone who doesn't believe or think like them.

 

[Jose Fly]

I shouldn't derail this thread? Oh, can you post the list of the only arguments we are allowed to make then?

Try and stick to the topic of the thread. If you want to discuss a different topic, start a different thread. Not that difficult of a concept to understand.

In general species evolve slowly? No, they don't.

Define "slowly".

Natural selection does not affect future development.

On a population scale it most certainly does.

 

[Jose Fly]

Classes, species, families,etc. are routinely being re-classified, re-defined, re-organized by "scientists." Apparently this evolves too.

If you were to stay true to your model, there is no need for you to ask any questions. "Creationists" and "Evolutionists" all evolved non-intelligently, for no reason, spontaneously just as they are. There is no correct/incorrect, intelligent/non-intelligent, right or wrong, no big deals/no small deals, making things up/not making things up. All just naturally is and spontaneously is.

Why would anything be a big deal, it is all natural and spontaneous. Words, their meanings... all evolved spontaneously and naturally by however the human using them spontaneously and naturally evolved to naturally and spontaneously define them. Who the heck cares? Others evolved spontaneously and naturally to not give 2 craps about evolution or creation... both naturally and spontaneously. Nobody is making anything up, everything evolved naturally and spontaneously as is.

And obviously to answer your question with the obvious answer.....from nothing and then through a serious of meaningless, random, spontaneous events you evolved to ask random, spontaneous, meaningless questions through random spontaneous meaningless complex biochemical processes and receive answers in the same meaningless fashion.

Thanks for your input.

 

[Super Universe]

Try and stick to the topic of the thread. If you want to discuss a different topic, start a different thread. Not that difficult of a concept to understand.


Define "slowly".


On a population scale it most certainly does.

What did I post that was off topic?

I should define slowly? Not quickly.

 

[Sapiens]

I won't argue against that one bit. It is the best way no doubt! But its not possible for everyone.

You see when I was 11 years old I drove around town in a grey 1983 Cutlass Supreme selling dope (mostly pot). It was after all the family business. The local Sheriff was paid off in those days so I done whatever I wanted when I wanted to. The first time I got shot at was 12 years old, double barrel shotgun 3 inches from my head. I lost 50% hearing in my left ear permanently that day.

That life was all I knew. Had someone not helped me I would be dead or in jail now.

Bad choices often limit the opportunities you can make for yourself.

 

[Enoch07]

Bad choices often limit the opportunities you can make for yourself.

Yeup, but sometimes people don't have any other options, or at least if feels that way.

 

[Profound Realization]

Evolution is neither random nor meaningless nor purposeless. It has natural order as well as inherent random variability (just like QM), and while it is not driven by an external purpose or externally imposed meaning.. it has an intrinsic logic and purpose out of which it creates meaning and function within the phenomena it generates.

Now that your strawman is refuted.. what is a kind? Thanks.

To touch base on this once more as to what you said, this is the equivalence to science and religion. It's another way of saying that nature created itself, instilled its purposeful and intrinsic logic/intelligence, self-replicates, and lives vicariously through itself creating meaning and self-awareness. I like, a beautiful way to couple the 2 together.

Now you can understand what I mean when I deny the mundane, spontaneous, random, chance, meaningless, reasonless, aimless, no intent, purposeless gander that the natural selection mechanism science has no choice but to give to it. There is no sense to it. It defies reality, experience, and everyday observation.

Then there is more "religion" to it. The natural order it created that you mentioned....humans are artificially steering away from Nature. Many even call this separation from Nature/"God" and separation from anything natural, and natural laws.

The only difference is that Nature is given all of the properties that others may say "God" does.
Nothing more than a preference of words, yet same meanings.

And of course, there are many religions who see it in a much, less probable, different way.

 

[sayak83]

To touch base on this once more as to what you said, this is the equivalence to science and religion. It's another way of saying that nature created itself, instilled its purposeful and intrinsic logic/intelligence, self-replicates, and lives vicariously through itself creating meaning and self-awareness. I like, a beautiful way to couple the 2 together.

Now you can understand what I mean when I deny the mundane, spontaneous, random, chance, meaningless, reasonless, aimless, no intent, purposeless gander that the natural selection mechanism science has no choice but to give to it. There is no sense to it. It defies reality, experience, and everyday observation.

Then there is more "religion" to it. The natural order it created that you mentioned....humans are artificially steering away from Nature. Many even call this separation from Nature/"God" and separation from anything natural, and natural laws.

The only difference is that Nature is given all of the properties that others may say "God" does.
Nothing more than a preference of words, yet same meanings.

And of course, there are many religions who see it in a much, less probable, different way.

What I am saying is that the science of evolution itself supports what I said in my post. There is a lot of mistaken ideas about evolutionary science among people that are simply false. If