Creation AND Evolution?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Humans have evolved significantly over the last 1-2 million years (from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens).

How does the Adam and Eve narrative possibly fit it into this process? - I am told repeatedly by Christians that I shouldn't cherry pick from the Bible. Sorry Kelly, but the same goes for evolution.

Now trying to prove something occured by suggesting something occurs doesn’t mean squat. You cannot say man evolved over millions of years to prove man evolved over millions of years.

I don’t have any issues with evolution until it is suggested that man came from some other creature. I am okay with natural selection helping to cause creatures to fit into what ever niche they find themselves in, but not changing from one kind into another.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Humans have evolved significantly over the last 1-2 million years (from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens).

How does the Adam and Eve narrative possibly fit it into this process? - I am told repeatedly by Christians that I shouldn't cherry pick from the Bible. Sorry Kelly, but the same goes for evolution.

To be clear I am saying man, rabbits, grass, seagulls, whales, and ants don’t share an common ancestor.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Your lack of knowledge on this topic is noted.

Your gulliblity and lack of critical analysis is also noted.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Humans have evolved significantly over the last 1-2 million years (from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens).

How does the Adam and Eve narrative possibly fit it into this process? - I am told repeatedly by Christians that I shouldn't cherry pick from the Bible. Sorry Kelly, but the same goes for evolution.

Ah yes the ghost of a duke has been around for 2 millions years to witness this.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
To be clear I am saying man, rabbits, grass, seagulls, whales, and ants don’t share an common ancestor.

Unfortunately, you don't appear to be backing up that statement, or explaining what alternative theory you propose that better explains empirical data.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Unfortunately, you don't appear to be backing up that statement, or explaining what alternative theory you propose that better explains empirical data.

Well you cut off discussions by assuming you knew what I believed, so I am sure reasons for what I believe never got voiced.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Well you cut off discussions by assuming you knew what I believed, so I am sure reasons for what I believe never got voiced.

But how can you have legitimate criticism of the theory of evolution when you don't even know what it says and can't be bothered to find out?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Ah yes the ghost of a duke has been around for 2 millions years to witness this.

If all your knowledge is based on things you've witnessed then you have my deepest sympathy.

Most of us stand on the shoulders of giants.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
But how can you have legitimate criticism of the theory of evolution when you don't even know what it says and can't be bothered to find out?

Please, this has been a topic I've been dealing with for years. I'm aware of it, and I have
concerns that are just not addressed, and getting into another web site or another book
is not the same as talking to someone who suggests they are aware of it.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Please, this has been a topic I've been dealing with for years. I'm aware of it, and I have
concerns that are just not addressed, and getting into another web site or another book
is not the same as talking to someone who suggests they are aware of it.

C'mon KJ. The truth is that for years you've repeatedly shown that you don't understand the theory of evolution. For example, on this very thread you've repeatedly shown that you don't understand "natural selection". Evidently you tell yourself that you do, but your responses clearly show that you don't. If you can't be honest with yourself, then you can't be honest with anyone else.

As much as you may hate admitting it to yourself, your reading comprehension is poor at best. You've shown it repeatedly on this forum over the years. It leaves you unable to understand not only the theory of evolution, but what others post and scripture for that matter. If you remain true to form, you'll continue to deny the TRUTH of this. Stop allowing your pride from getting in the way of you getting the help that you need.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
C'mon KJ. The truth is that for years you've repeatedly shown that you don't understand the theory of evolution. For example, on this very thread you've repeatedly shown that you don't understand "natural selection". Evidently you tell yourself that you do, but your responses clearly show that you don't. If you can't be honest with yourself, then you can ...[text shortened]... of this. Stop allowing your pride from getting in the way of you getting the help that you need.

You are unwilling to accept anyone can understand and still disagree. I don’t accept many of the things promoted as true and voicing concern doesn’t mean my understanding is lacking. If you can show me my errors speak up, or will you disappear as you do when you are confronted with questions?

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Now trying to prove something occured by suggesting something occurs doesn’t mean squat. You cannot say man evolved over millions of years to prove man evolved over millions of years.

I don’t have any issues with evolution until it is suggested that man came from some other creature. I am okay with natural selection helping to cause creatures to fit into what ever niche they find themselves in, but not changing from one kind into another.

If you accept small changes in DNA can occur, what’s stopping those same small changes building incrementally one after the other to create bigger changes?

Originally posted by @kellyjay
You are unwilling to accept anyone can understand and still disagree. I don’t accept many of the things promoted as true and voicing concern doesn’t mean my understanding is lacking. If you can show me my errors speak up, or will you disappear as you do when you are confronted with questions?

Okay. I'll prove that you don't understand natural selection.

After KN suggested you read the wiki article and after I found a simple description of the driving force the underlies natural selection, you wrote this:

To be clear, mutations occur, good and bad you get them all. A bad one can harm, or kill...Without direction in how
things change anything can happen, and the number of bad things occurring are far
larger than those good ones.

That you wrote the above proves beyond all doubt that you don't understand natural selection. You don't understand what gives it "direction".

To top it off, you wrote the following after yet another attempt to explain to you what provides the driving force - what gives it direction.

Actually simply correcting yours, there is no magic that gives life only GOOD mutations, you get what you get. So claiming it is so doesn't make it that way.

If you understood the wiki article OR what KN was writing OR the excerpt I cited OR what I was writing, you never would have written what I've quoted from you in this post.

The above clearly shows that you don't understand natural selection. No amount of DENIAL on your part is going to change that.

You need to accept the truth about yourself. From what I gather you're more than old enough to be able to do that. If you didn't allow your pride to get in the way, maybe you would.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Please, this has been a topic I've been dealing with for years. I'm aware of it, and I have
concerns that are just not addressed, and getting into another web site or another book
is not the same as talking to someone who suggests they are aware of it.

No, if you were aware of it you'd know what natural selection is.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Now trying to prove something occured by suggesting something occurs doesn’t mean squat. You cannot say man evolved over millions of years to prove man evolved over millions of years.

I don’t have any issues with evolution until it is suggested that man came from some other creature. I am okay with natural selection helping to cause creatures to fit into what ever niche they find themselves in, but not changing from one kind into another.

With respect Kelly, you have an incorrect understanding of natural selection and have adopted an incomplete evolutionary package. I fear discussion on this is futile while this remains the case.