Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-11-2015, 05:17 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(11-11-2015 04:16 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(11-11-2015 09:59 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Exactly. Thank you. I hate text sometimes. Too easy to be misunderstood.

I guess I am what some call a "theistic evolutionist". Basically in layman's terms it means I still believe in God but I believe that evolution is possible and perhaps in some regards I believe that God used evolution as part of his process in creation.

Evolution doesn't require belief or faith, it is a fact, is observable, predictable and provable......unlike god.
Agreed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jason_delisle's post
11-11-2015, 05:49 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
I know it sounded like a rhetorical "throwaway" line, when I said I don't understand what's so hard to grasp about evolution, but I really mean that. It's plainly, blatantly, unquestionably true. Quite literally in the first week of any course on genetics, you learn to mathematically demonstrate that, in any reproducing population, the gene frequency will change with every generation, and that this will result in a "new" gene pool each generation, meaning evolution is (again, literally) mathematically inevitable.

What I think harms people is they only teach genetics in highschool with a brief lesson about Mendel and the Punnet square, which of course involves only two parents producing a group of offspring, which unfortunately gives students the impression that genetics is only about individuals breeding, rather than populations. Once you understand how population genetics functions, I cannot grasp how anyone could argue against it... especially when you get into the specifics of how DNA operates and why we know certain heritable sequences point to common ancestry.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
11-11-2015, 06:03 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(11-11-2015 05:49 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  I know it sounded like a rhetorical "throwaway" line, when I said I don't understand what's so hard to grasp about evolution, but I really mean that. It's plainly, blatantly, unquestionably true.

Or in Huxley's words:

Quote:... [On the Origin of Species] did the immense service of freeing us for ever from the dilemma – Refuse to accept the creation hypothesis, and what have you to propose that can be accepted by any cautious reasoned? In 1857 I had no answer ready, and I do not think that anyone else had. A year later we reproached ourselves with dullness for being perplexed with such an inquiry. My reflection, when I first made myself master of the central idea of the "Origin" was, "How extremely stupid not to have thought of that!"

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Reltzik's post
11-11-2015, 10:35 PM (This post was last modified: 11-11-2015 10:38 PM by Chas.)
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(11-11-2015 09:43 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  The question was basically is it probable that animals can adapt through selective breeding aka natural selection in the same ways that we breed different types of dogs? I believe it is completely possible.

Selective breeding is NOT natural selection. Facepalm

Selective breeding requires intentional selecting toward a goal. That does not happen in nature which is blind and lacks any foresight or goals.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2015, 10:37 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(11-11-2015 09:59 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Exactly. Thank you. I hate text sometimes. Too easy to be misunderstood.

I guess I am what some call a "theistic evolutionist". Basically in layman's terms it means I still believe in God but I believe that evolution is possible and perhaps in some regards I believe that God used evolution as part of his process in creation.

There is no evidence for that idea. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
12-11-2015, 01:56 AM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
.... the past three pages of this thread in pictorial form:

[Image: 20140423.png]

Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2015, 05:20 AM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(11-11-2015 10:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-11-2015 09:59 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Exactly. Thank you. I hate text sometimes. Too easy to be misunderstood.

I guess I am what some call a "theistic evolutionist". Basically in layman's terms it means I still believe in God but I believe that evolution is possible and perhaps in some regards I believe that God used evolution as part of his process in creation.

There is no evidence for that idea. Drinking Beverage
No evidence to support that I believe something?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2015, 06:05 AM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(12-11-2015 05:20 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(11-11-2015 10:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence for that idea. Drinking Beverage
No evidence to support that I believe something?

No evidence that God has interfered with evolution. If evolution is an unguided process then no God is necessary. If it is guided, there should be evidence.

Also why would God choose this ridiculous and complex method of billions of years of fiddling around, if his end goal was to nail a human to a dead remnant of evolved cellular matter in order to appease himself for the alleged misdeeds of other evolved cellular matter?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
12-11-2015, 06:45 AM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(12-11-2015 06:05 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(12-11-2015 05:20 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  No evidence to support that I believe something?

No evidence that God has interfered with evolution. If evolution is an unguided process then no God is necessary. If it is guided, there should be evidence.

Also why would God choose this ridiculous and complex method of billions of years of fiddling around, if his end goal was to nail a human to a dead remnant of evolved cellular matter in order to appease himself for the alleged misdeeds of other evolved cellular matter?
I understand your point. As you probably know already, most theist don't rely too heavily on evidence. Unfortunately I am no exception. TongueSmile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2015, 06:57 AM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(12-11-2015 06:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(12-11-2015 06:05 AM)morondog Wrote:  No evidence that God has interfered with evolution. If evolution is an unguided process then no God is necessary. If it is guided, there should be evidence.

Also why would God choose this ridiculous and complex method of billions of years of fiddling around, if his end goal was to nail a human to a dead remnant of evolved cellular matter in order to appease himself for the alleged misdeeds of other evolved cellular matter?
I understand your point. As you probably know already, most theist don't rely too heavily on evidence. Unfortunately I am no exception. TongueSmile

Unfortunate is right Undecided Your faith is not shaken by these kinds of questions?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: