Creation AND Evolution?

Creation AND Evolution?

Spirituality

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Better said those that hold to that theory have enough they have stopped looking at it critically.
Which aspect of the theory of evolution hasn't been sufficiently critically evaluated, in your view?

Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
158877
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Which aspect of the theory of evolution hasn't been sufficiently critically evaluated, in your view?
Abiogenesis and the nature of good mutations verses bad ones over time.

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Abiogenesis and the nature of good mutations verses bad ones over time.
Abiogenesis isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution.

"The nature of good mutations verses (sic) bad ones" probably refers to natural selection. Which aspect of natural selection is unclear to you?

Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
158877
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
The evidence in favour of the Big Bang is overwhelmingly strong; I am not aware of any cosmologist rejecting it. It would be like a surgeon denying the existence of the liver.
Really lock step beliefs for every single one of them. I will have to spend a little time validating this.

Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
158877
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Abiogenesis isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution.

"The nature of good mutations verses (sic) bad ones" probably refers to natural selection. Which aspect of natural selection is unclear to you?
If you cannot get out of the starting block the race isn’t even ran. The starting of every process is also vital to understanding it the processes mechanics.

Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
158877
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Abiogenesis isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution.

"The nature of good mutations verses (sic) bad ones" probably refers to natural selection. Which aspect of natural selection is unclear to you?
Natural selection only passes along the improvements to facilitate the changes in DNA. Notice the changes come before they are passed along, which means it doesn’t direct change only filters them. Yet without a guide you believe among all the changes that are randomly taking place, nothing that would kill off life occurs and sticks around, only the good even though more bad happens than good?

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kellyjay
If you cannot get out of the starting block the race isn’t even ran. The starting of every process is also vital to understanding it the processes mechanics.
No, it's not. You don't need to know anything about how Usain Bolt was born to understand how he is winning races. Your statement betrays ignorance about the basics of the theory of evolution. I suggest you start reading a bit about it.

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Natural selection only passes along the improvements to facilitate the changes in DNA. Notice the changes come before they are passed along, which means it doesn’t direct change only filters them. Yet without a guide you believe among all the changes that are randomly taking place, nothing that would kill off life occurs and sticks around, only the good even though more bad happens than good?
Yep. The "guide" is called natural selection. Since this is apparently the first time you hear about, I suggest you read more about it here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection

Without some interaction of the phenotype with the environment, the notion of "good" and "bad" mutations aren't even well-defined.

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
06 Aug 18

Any reasonable person should concede that creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

The Ship's Cat

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28828
06 Aug 18
1 edit

Denying evolution is akin to denying the existence of dinosaurs.

Fossil progressions are a 'no-brainer.'


Edit:

Case Study: Evolution of the Modern Horse.

Highly detailed fossil records have been recovered for sequences in the evolution of modern horses. The fossil record of horses in North America is especially rich and contains transition fossils: fossils that show intermediate stages between earlier and later forms. The fossil record extends back to a dog-like ancestor some 55 million years ago, which gave rise to the first horse-like species 55 to 42 million years ago in the genus Eohippus...

The original sequence of species believed to have evolved into the horse was based on fossils discovered in North America in the 1870s by paleontologist Othniel Charles Marsh. The sequence, from Eohippus to the modern horse (Equus), was popularized by Thomas Huxley and became one of the most widely known examples of a clear evolutionary progression. The sequence of transitional fossils was assembled by the American Museum of Natural History into an exhibit that emphasized the gradual, “straight-line” evolution of the horse.


https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-biology/chapter/evidence-of-evolution/

Walk your Faith

USA

Joined
24 May 04
Moves
158877
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
No, it's not. You don't need to know anything about how Usain Bolt was born to understand how he is winning races. Your statement betrays ignorance about the basics of the theory of evolution. I suggest you start reading a bit about it.
If it is impossible for him to leave the starting block the race doesn’t matter.

E

Joined
12 Jul 08
Moves
13814
06 Aug 18

Not sure why you are arguing with kaz. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If one believes an opinion is truth then what is the use in arguing?

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @kellyjay
If it is impossible for him to leave the starting block the race doesn’t matter.
That's a good point. If humans would have never evolved, we probably wouldn't be wondering about how we evolved.

Joined
01 Oct 04
Moves
12095
06 Aug 18
2 edits

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Denying evolution is akin to denying the existence of dinosaurs.

Fossil progressions are a 'no-brainer.'


Edit:

Case Study: Evolution of the Modern Horse.

Highly detailed fossil records have been recovered for sequences in the evolution of modern horses. The fossil record of horses in North America is especially rich and contains transi ...[text shortened]... e horse.


https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-biology/chapter/evidence-of-evolution/
The horses skeletons could be horses skeletons and the dog like skeletons could be dog skeletons. Finding the bones doesn’t prove the horse used to be a dog. Unless of course you have a vivid imagination.

The actual evolution of the dog that can be observed starts with dogs and ends with different species of dogs. Yes the dogs change but at the end they’re still dogs.

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
06 Aug 18

Originally posted by @dj2becker
The horses skeletons could be horses skeletons and the dog like skeletons could be dog skeletons. Finding the bones doesn’t prove the horse used to be a dog. Unless of course you have a vivid imagination.

The actual evolution of the dog that can be observed starts with dogs and ends with different species of dogs. Yes the dogs change but at the end they’re still dogs.
Have you considered submitting your novel findings about the evolution of dogs and horses to a biology journal?

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.