Jump to content


Why Evolution Is Clear To Me


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
131 replies to this topic

#21 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 27 June 2009 - 11:57 AM

Actually, everything that is living is a transitional form of something else that will eventually be. Humans just group and classify life based on what we see now, and we only live a short time. I think our perception of time is part of your problem of not being able to understand evolution. A million years is a short time in geological and biological terms when related to the whole of the time that evolution and Earthly environmental processes have been going on. What I am saying is that if you were able to speed up time and view each generation of animals, you would see the full spectrum of transformation among species to subspecies to new species and so forth in a continually branching hierarchical structure.

To answer your questions:
It was something a little different before it was that way. Depends on how long you mean by before. It obviously shares a common ancestor with other marsupials, and they share common ancestors with other animals that came from animals like dogs and cats. Again, humans are the ones who classify things, but it means nothing to nature.

Hope this helps you all get one step closer to understanding.

View Post


Yes, but you can only paint a picture of what you have no evidence for, or no proof of. So there, if you have a transitional, you need to show it, and prove that it is what you say it is.

The observation of one species changing into a completely new species has never been observed, so you may want to show some evidence for this also.

#22 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 27 June 2009 - 02:43 PM

You raise an interesting point here Dave. A question I'd like to pose to the creationists here:

If God created life why isn't He still creating it? Specifically why isn't He creating humans out of dirt? Why don't we just pray for babies and God delivers them? It would remove that unnecessary 9 month waiting period. But instead He invented this reproduction system to do it all. For what purpose?

View Post


A thorough reading of Genesis would answer ALL of those questions for you Archie.

I would pose a more uncomfortable question for the atheistic evolutionists here:

If God didn’t create life, if life did, indeed come from nothing…… Why is there anything?

#23 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 27 June 2009 - 02:47 PM

Just to be clear: evolution is NOT RANDOM. The inherited changes are more or less random, but selection is in no way random.

View Post


Yes, let us be clear. If evolution is not random, and is so selective as not to be random, than what is doing all the selecting? What, or “Who” is doing all of this deliberate selecting?

#24 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 27 June 2009 - 03:30 PM

Well why wouldnt you expect evolution to come up with the same adaptations in the same environments for different species?


I was'nt aware that all masupials in Austrailia evolved a wolf-like skull because of similar enviromental adaptations.Thats a new one.

The Thylacine and Timber Wolf live on completely different continents and live in completely different climates,feeding upon completely different prey.

Surely,your also aware that they do not even share the same common ancestor.The Thylacine is more closely related to a Possum than a Dog.

#25 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 27 June 2009 - 05:28 PM

Actually, everything that is living is a transitional form of something else that will eventually be. Humans just group and classify life based on what we see now, and we only live a short time. I think our perception of time is part of your problem of not being able to understand evolution. A million years is a short time in geological and biological terms when related to the whole of the time that evolution and Earthly environmental processes have been going on. What I am saying is that if you were able to speed up time and view each generation of animals, you would see the full spectrum of transformation among species to subspecies to new species and so forth in a continually branching hierarchical structure.


You base all of this on the assumption that:

1) Evoluton is true and proven (implying an absolute which denies falsifiability).
2) All processes can be observed (many cannot because of the time factor involved).
3) All processes can be repeated in a lab (Same as number 2).
4) That basically, evolution is an implied absolute (which breaks the rules of the scientific method).

Posted Image

Which by the way breaks the rules of what a theory is supposed to be (falsifiable). And that there are no absolutes, so absolutes are not to be assumed by making statements that imply such things

You are to never assume something is true while doing your research. This keeps out the bias. But because evolution is already assumed proven, true, and a implied absolute. It becomes the standard to which all evidence must either conform to, or be rejected. In other words, evidence found either support the implied absolute, or it get rejected and basicallt thrown into the trash.

To answer your questions:
It was something a little different before it was that way. Depends on how long you mean by before. It obviously shares a common ancestor with other marsupials, and they share common ancestors with other animals that came from animals like dogs and cats. Again, humans are the ones who classify things, but it means nothing to nature.

Hope this helps you all get one step closer to understanding.

View Post


Basically you don't know based on the research that Jason777 has posted. I wonder what you would have said if Jason had not have posted what he already did?

#26 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 28 June 2009 - 12:06 AM

That is a real picture and I have seen other transitional animals like that before.

View Post

How do you know it is a transitional animal?

View Post

Actually, everything that is living is a transitional form of something else that will eventually be.

View Post

So it would've been simpler to just claim you'd seen other animals before. Of course there's no propaganda value in that, is there? I doubt very much you intended readers to simply get the impression you'd seen animals. Rare indeed is the person who hasn't.

#27 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 28 June 2009 - 04:13 AM

So it would've been simpler to just claim you'd seen other animals before. Of course there's no propaganda value in that, is there? I doubt very much you intended readers to simply get the impression you'd seen animals. Rare indeed is the person who hasn't.

View Post

It's amazing how we get scoffed at for saying that creation is evidence for God but when an evolutionist says; "Of course evolution is true look at all the animals and here we are." It's okay. :lol: Evolution is a blind faith, a god replacement. Things that attempt to replace God are false gods the last time I looked into it.

#28 Guest_Alcatraz_*

Guest_Alcatraz_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 June 2009 - 05:14 AM

Evolution is not a theological belief system intended to replace God. In fact, most practicing Christians I know would consider themselves as Theistic Evolutionists.

Evolution has no deity, and there is no worship involved.

Evolution is a science where one attempts to understand the origin of life. No one claims to have all the answers and there are more gaps than not, but at the end of the proverbial day, is there anything more pure than the study and gaining of knowledge.

Knowledge which could, and has, benefited humanity, and the lives we live today.

For many Theologically inclined scientists who study geology, astronomy, physics, and evoltionary anthropology; perhaps they feel that they are getting closer to God by trying to understand the World and Universe around them.

#29 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 28 June 2009 - 05:32 AM

Evolution is a science where one attempts to understand the origin of life.

View Post

Let me fix this statement for you.

Evolution coupled with philosophical naturalism is a 'science' where one attempts to understand the origin of life, without God.

Knowledge which could, and has, benefited humanity, and the lives we live today.

View Post

I don't think so. Maybe you can explain to us the coincidence that goes along with the death and blood shed that follows countries that advocate evolution as science, not only in the classrooms, but on a mechanistic and national scale. Every socialist and communist country of the 20th century found it's justifications of social experiments on the premise that truth starts and stops with the mighty men that can execute their ideals minus the god that made them.

If Richard Dawkins' book sales are a benefit to humanity then I can see your point. I'm hoping when you discuss and consider benefits it goes beyond the group that enjoys financial gain from convincing others of their paradigm and not necessarily the truth.

The bottom line is that evolution's association with scientific success is the same as Al Gore's association with the success of the internet.

#30 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 28 June 2009 - 05:42 AM

Evolution is not a theological belief system intended to replace God. In fact, most

For many Theologically inclined scientists who study geology, astronomy, physics, and evoltionary anthropology; perhaps they feel that they are getting closer to God by trying to understand the World and Universe around them.

View Post

At the risk of sounding arrogant I feel very confident that the great majority who cram evolution and their faith in God together usually don't think deeply of the implications associated with this decision. Also, most are just convinced that the evidence for evolution is so overwhelming that questioning it is like questioning the sphere of the earth... because they've been told.

This is why ministries like these are so important. Most accept evolution uncritically. It is the most popular origins perspective in colleges today so it must have already been scrutinized carefully. Why should I... Right?

#31 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 28 June 2009 - 07:42 AM

In fact, most practicing Christians I know would consider themselves as Theistic Evolutionists.

View Post


Jesus spoke about this in Matthew 6:24 Traz.

#32 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 28 June 2009 - 09:51 AM

Evolution is a science where one attempts to understand the origin of life.

Let me fix this statement for you.

Evolution coupled with philosophical naturalism is a 'science' where one attempts to understand the origin of life, without God.

View Post

Yes, but try to look at the bright side. Most of 'em deny evolutionism has anything at all to do with the origin of life. This is a step in the direction of honest discussion, at least.

#33 mandel

mandel

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Denmark

Posted 28 June 2009 - 10:42 AM

Yes, let us be clear. If evolution is not random, and is so selective as not to be random, than what is doing all the selecting? What, or “Who” is doing all of this deliberate selecting?

View Post


Is this a serious question? It sounds like you haven't opened a book on evolutionary theory, is that observation true?

#34 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 28 June 2009 - 10:52 AM

Is this a serious question? It sounds like you haven't opened a book on evolutionary theory, is that observation true?

View Post

It sounds like someone doesn't know what an observation is. (And don't blame the "language barrier".)

#35 mandel

mandel

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Denmark

Posted 28 June 2009 - 11:00 AM

Well why wouldnt you expect evolution to come up with the same adaptations in the same environments for different species?


I was'nt aware that all masupials in Austrailia evolved a wolf-like skull because of similar enviromental adaptations.Thats a new one.

The Thylacine and Timber Wolf live on completely different continents and live in completely different climates,feeding upon completely different prey.

Surely,your also aware that they do not even share the same common ancestor.The Thylacine is more closely related to a Possum than a Dog.

View Post


Oh sorry for not being an expert, but you can probably also add that not only similar environments can cause convergent evolution, so can similar ecosystems.

I know next to nothing about the Thylacine and the Timber Wolf, but let me guess what they have in common: same placement in the food chain, same preference for prey, both probably also scavenge.

What I don't get is why is this such a big shock for you? If similar pressures in selection are present, why wouldn't you see similar adaptations take place?

#36 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 28 June 2009 - 12:04 PM

Is this a serious question? It sounds like you haven't opened a book on evolutionary theory, is that observation true?

View Post


It is absolutely a serious question. So my next question is: can you seriously answer it?

#37 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 28 June 2009 - 12:05 PM

It sounds like someone doesn't know what an observation is. (And don't blame the "language barrier".)

View Post

That's ok, I speak english :)

#38 Guest_Keith C_*

Guest_Keith C_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 June 2009 - 01:25 PM

How do you know it is a transitional animal?

1) Can you tell me what it was before it got this way?
2) Can you tell me what it was trying to change into?

And why do transitional animals always die out?

The most interesting feature of most creationist posts is the way in which they mis-represent evolution.

In this case 'what it was trying to change into' suggests the Lamarkian idea that a species or a lineage changes because it wants to change or because it is trying to become better in some way.
If, as you claim, you really have studied evolution, then you must know that this is contrary to Darwin's theory and to our current understanding.
Can you explain why you misrepresent evolution in this way - or is it that it is only by setting up a straw man caricature of evolution that you can convince your disciples that evolution is obviously false?

#39 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 28 June 2009 - 01:34 PM

Can you explain why you misrepresent evolution in this way - or is it that it is only by setting up a straw man caricature of evolution that you can convince your disciples that evolution is obviously false?

View Post


There’s a great difference between misrepresentation and pointing out flaws and making logical and scientific clarifications to the error that is evolution pseudo-science Keith. Besides, I’m still awaiting your evidence for macro-evolution.

#40 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 28 June 2009 - 02:22 PM

Evolution is not a theological belief system intended to replace God. In fact, most practicing Christians I know would consider themselves as Theistic Evolutionists.

Evolution has no deity, and there is no worship involved.


Then what is evolution doing in our churches?

Attached File  evolution_sunday.jpg   29.2KB   12 downloads

What are evolutionists doing going to religious forums trying to evangelize trying to make theistic evolution sound okay, when the ends of it 95% of the time end in total loss of faith? Losing one because of a conflict of another means they are in competition for the same thing. Which proves that evolution is religious.

If not, then explain why no one loses their faith because the believe gravity or electricity while a Christian? You cannot because to do so means you would have to ponder the truth.

What is the deity of evolution. Just look at the end result of the highest evolved life form.

Posted Image

Man himself is the deity, this is why the battle is between men and their beliefs, and not just ideas. In order for man to deity himself, he must find things wrong with others of his own kind and expose any flaws he determines he can use as a weakness. Even to the point of being untruthful, because after all, it's the survival of the fittest.

To exalt himself and his society of equals. He must categorize and stereotype his own kind so that his own kind becomes separated into groups and can become managed. This can be done by race, education, belief, etc... For as long as the person who is doing this can weed out the undesirables, he can look down upon them and make them look up to him.

Evolution is a science where one attempts to understand the origin of life. No one claims to have all the answers and there are more gaps than not, but at the end of the proverbial day, is there anything more pure than the study and gaining of knowledge.

Knowledge which could, and has, benefited humanity, and the lives we live today.


Denying the history of what evolution has done in the past, only ensures that history will repeat itself. Hitler experimented with breeding of a superior race. Today what is now on the horizon for parents to do, if they have enough money to do it? Select s@x, traits, and possible IQs of their babies. A Hitler idea.

Darwin's Nephew started the eugenics movement. What they did here was unspeakable crimes against all of humanity. Dawkins wants to restart that process.

When we don't learn from history,we will repeat it.

For many Theologically inclined scientists who study geology, astronomy, physics, and evoltionary anthropology; perhaps they feel that they are getting closer to God by trying to understand the World and Universe around them.

View Post


If science and God were so compatible since the introduction of evolution. Why are you here fighting the very base core belief?

If evolution were meant to be used as a religious means of how God created, why is the drawing force unto salvation not present?

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The drawing power unto the Son of God, is controlled by Father God. So whatever is not approved of by God, has zero drawing power. If you do not believe that God exists, explain why evolution cannot be used to bring people unto salvation? After all, it is you and your peers that say the evolution and God are so compatible, right?

Where are the:

1) Salvation through evolution tracts?
2) Evolution crusades for Christ?
3) Evolution street preachers for Christ?

They don't exist because:

1) God does not allow it.
2) Because God did not create that way.

And there is also other reasons:

1) What is the exact opposite of good is evil.
2) What is born of Satan can never be used for Good.

mt 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

mk 3:26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

This is why all things from Satan have to be exactly the opposite of God. Doing this means that in no way could it ever be used for God. What is the evidence of this?

What God's word says................................. What evolution theory says.
1) Earth before sun..................................... 1) Sun before earth.
2) Oceans before land................................. 2) Land before oceans.
3) Light before sun...................................... 3) Sun before light.
4) Land plants first...................................... 4) Marine life first.
5) Fruit tree before fish................................ 5) Fish before fruit tree.
6) Fish before insects................................... 6) Insects before fish.
7) Plants before sun..................................... 7) Sun before plants.
8) Man was created from solid matter............ 8) Man evolved from liquid.
9) Bird before reptiles.................................. 9) Reptiles before birds.
10) Man brought death in the world............... 10) Death brought man into the world.
11) All life forms reproduce after their kind......11) All life forms breed, through evolution process, outside their kind.

Exact opposite of God = not usable by God.

In fact, I have a challenge for you. Name one process order of the evolution process that is the same as creation as written in Genesis 1.

mt 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users