• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

Does anyone believe in Evolution anymore?

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
But it is assumed the message sent is what is desired to be received.

No. It's applicable when there's no intent at all. It's even applicable when there's no conscious observer, such as the "noise" in the population genome of those bacteria in a waste pond. The noise just happened to alter an enzyme sufficiently to let the bacteria use nylon oligomer as a food source.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame

Yes. Read the paper.


It is thus clear where the joker is in saying that the received signal has more information. Some of this information is spurious and undesirable and has been introduced via the noise. To get the useful information in the received signal we must subtract out this spurious portion.



Notice how the assumption is that there is an intended message and that to get the useful information, the noise must be removed?

So, yes. Not no.

This has nothing to do with the fact that "information" as defined by Shannon might increase with added noise. It also has nothing to do with the challenge to Darwinism that was issued, which does not even use this definition.

It's applicable when there's no intent at all. It's even applicable when there's no conscious observer, such as the "noise" in the population genome of those bacteria in a waste pond. The noise just happened to alter an enzyme sufficiently to let the bacteria use nylon oligomer as a food source.

You can't get anything right, can you?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Tell me, how could any intelligent and well-educated person believe in young earth creationism and consider Genesis to be an accurate description of how earth and the universe came into being ?

Rather easily, actually, because, as Stripe noted, they look at what your post sorely lacks.

So the earth is only 6,000 years old . Hmmm . . . . .. the ancient Sumerians already had an advanced civilization 6,000 years ago . Genesis must have come as quite surprise to them !

Rather, a more accurate estimate is around 7000 years old. 1000 years for ancient man (who was much smarter than your average college student of today) to build an advanced civilization is plenty of time.

How could dinosaurs have existed at the same time as humans ?

Because God created them on the same day He created man.

Does this even make any sense ?

An argument from incredulity does not a logical argument make.

How could Noah have gotten two of every one of the millions and millions of animal species which existed then ( so many have gone extinct over the ages in the past 6,000 years )

Simple. There weren't "millions of animal species on the ark.

Rather, as the Bible says, there were two or seven of every "KIND" of animal. Not species.

So, instead of needing two german shepherds, two chihuahuas, two poodles, you'd only need one dog kind with of all the genetic material to create all the species we have today.

Easily doable.

and provided the kind of food each species required for 40 days and nights ?

Building on the above, as there was no need for "millions of animal species, likewise, there was no need for food for all those animals.

And in fact, the ark wasn't that full.

At most, only 16,000 animals were needed to ensure the survivability of all the animals God created. Which means less than half of the space was used for animals. The other half had plenty of room for food, fresh water, and even more people (though we know how that turned out).

On an ark made out of wood .

Yes, such a hard thing to believe, boats being made of wood...

:think:

:mock: TheHorn

The only food koalas can eat are the leaves of the eucalyptus tree . how the heck did Noah keep those two poor little koalas from starving to death ?

There's a section on this at this link called, "How did Noah care for all the animals."

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/global/was-there-really-a-noahs-ark-flood/

How the heck did an imaginary human by the name of Noah get animals such as polar bears , koalas, kangaroos, wombats , penguins, Kodiak bears ( they're from Alaska ! ) and so many others on his ark ?

God brought them to him.

( there is absolutely no historical evidence of anyone by this name [JR note: Noah] ever existing )

Excerpted this from above so that I could respond to it directly.

Sure there is.

It's called the Bible.

There's also genetic evidence, called "y-chromosomal Adam," which dates to around the time of Noah's flood, which makes sense due to the genetic bottleneck caused by only Noah and his family surviving.

The authors of Genesis had know way of knowing of the existence of Australia, north and South America existed let aloe knowing of the existence of the animals there .

This is a straw man. Moses, the author of Genesis, didn't need to know about continents to be able to write about what happened in the Flood, because God was an eyewitness to what happened, and could relay directly to Moses what happened.

And was there really a talking snake who got Adam and Eve to taste of "forbidden fruit ?"

Yes.

Why aren't there talking snakes today ? It sure would be fun to talk to them !

I don't recall the Bible saying there was more than one talking snake...

How did Cain find a mate if the first humans were just Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel ?

You're assuming that Adam and Eve's only children were Cain, Abel, and Seth.

Yet Eve, being an (almost) perfect human being, would have had no trouble bearing many more children after Cain and Able, even if their names are not recorded in the Bible.

Why can't people realize that Genesis is nothing but an ancient allegory , not historical fact ?

Because it's not "nothing but an ancient allegory."

Because it is historical fact.

To say otherwise is to deny reality.

There are countless Christians who have absolutely no problem with evolution,

Argumentum ad populum.

including Pope Francis, who is a trained scientist himself .

Appeal to authority.

Evolution and belief in a God are not mutually exclusive at all .

They are, because of the law of non-contradiction.

Evolution is an unguided process. To say that God guided evolution is a contradiction of its terms.

You cannot have a guided unguided process.

I hope I haven't offended any Christians here . No offense meant .

:think:
 
Last edited:

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
They are, because of the law of non-contradiction.

Evolution is an unguided process.

It is a directed process. Darwin's great discovery was that it isn't random. So the question comes down to whether or not God is capable of using a combination of random and non-random processes to get a result according to His will. Since humans are capable of doing that, I have to conclude that God is at least that capable.

To say that God guided evolution is a contradiction of its terms.

He guides every particle of the universe. How else would we have natural laws?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
It is a directed process.


Unguided evolution is part of the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection. It is the idea that evolution is guided by one simple principle — living long enough to reproduce; that neither nature nor the process of evolution and natural selection are partial to what reproduces or how; that there is no ultimate form of life that is the "target" of all this reproduction, mutation, and selection.


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Unguided_evolution

Darwin's great discovery was that it isn't random. So the question comes down to whether or not God is capable of using a combination of random and non-random processes to get a result according to His will. Since humans are capable of doing that, I have to conclude that God is at least that capable.

He guides every particle of the universe. How else would we have natural laws?

You're asserting that God cannot create matter with certain properties and that such matter could behave in definable ways apart from His guidance?
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Barbarian observes:
It is a directed process.


Unguided evolution is part of the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection. It is the idea that evolution is guided by one simple principle — living long enough to reproduce; that neither nature nor the process of evolution and natural selection are partial to what reproduces or how; that there is no ultimate form of life that is the "target" of all this reproduction, mutation, and selection.


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Unguided_evolution

Yes. In the same manner that a market economy is not "guided" by anyone, but almost always ends up with the most efficient allocation of goods and services. It is guided by the fact that self-interest tends to produce the best result.

You're asserting that God cannot create matter with certain properties and that such matter could behave in definable ways apart from His guidance?

No, I'm pointing out that He did create the universe in such a way that things appear as He wills. IDers refer to this behavior of nature to fulfill His will, as "front loading." But it's just the way He does most things in this world.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Barbarian observes:
Yes. In the same manner that a market economy is not "guided" by anyone,

Classic EQUIVOCATION!!!

No, you're very, very wrong about that. Darwin's theory was strongly influenced Malthus and Adam Smith. It turns out that economies aren't a special case; they also work the way God set things up. Darwin's theory so closely followed classic economics that Stalin outlawed Darwinism as a "bourgeois ideology."

The market economy is not guided by a small top-down group... it IS GUIDED by many, many actors making human decisions.

Yep. Pretty much like evolution. You see, Stalin's pal, Lysenko, decided that instead of a market economy, evolution should be like a command economy. But that's not how it works. It's like a market economy.

There is NOTHING random about the market economy!

Actually, there is, in the same sense that there's always some randomness in this world. But a non-random process, plus a random process is a non-random process.

Suppose a company randomly hands out prospects to its salespeople. Do the differences in the number of units sold by each salesperson exist only because some of them got better prospects than others?

Does the survival of a particular bird that has slightly better colors for hiding in grass happen because he was just lucky? What if he was unlucky enough to encounter a slightly better hawk who found him anyway? "Time and chance happen to them all."

But the smart money is on the one with better colors for hiding.

Darwin saw the competition in nature precisely as a market economy, and so wrote his theory. Turns out, he was right.

What Charles Darwin owes Adam Smith
I’ve called my lecture “Adam Darwin” to stress how congruent the philosophies of Adam Smith and Charles Darwin are. The common theme, of course, is emergence — the idea that order and complexity can be bottom-up phenomena; both economies and ecosystems emerge. But my purpose really is to explore not just the history and evolution of this shared idea but its future: to show that in the age of the Internet, Adam-Darwinism is the key to understanding how the world will change.

Darwin’s debt to the political economists is considerable. He spent formative years in Edinburgh among the ghosts of Hume, Hutchinson, Ferguson, and Smith. When he was at Cambridge in 1829, he wrote, “My studies consist in Adam Smith and Locke.” At his grandfather Josiah Wedgwood’s house in Staffordshire, Darwin often met the lawyer and laissez-faire politician Sir James Mackintosh, whose daughter married Charles’s brother-in-law (and had an affair with his brother).

On the Beagle, he read the naturalist Henri Milne-Edwards, who took Adam Smith’s notion of the division of labor and applied it to the organs of the body. After seeing a Brazilian rainforest, Darwin promptly reapplied the same idea to the division of labor among specialized species in an ecosystem: “The advantage of diversification in the inhabitants of the same region is in fact the same as that of the physiological division of labor in the organs of the same individual body — subject so well elucidated by Milne-Edwards.”

https://www.learnliberty.org/blog/what-charles-darwin-owes-adam-smith/

This is an important point that we don't discuss enough. Capitalism rules, not because it's some man's brilliant invention. It rules because it describes how economies actually work. Likewise, Darwin's theory is the only explanation accepted by a huge majority of scientists, not because it was brilliant idea. It's the way nature works.
 
Last edited:

chair

Well-known member
Tell me, how could any intelligent and well-educatied person believe in young earth creationism and consider Genesis to be an accurate description of how earth and the universe came into being ?
...
I hope I haven't offended any Christians here . No offense meant .

Well, the Earth is Flat, so why not?
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Barbarian observes:
Actually, there is, in the same sense that there's always some randomness in this world.

That's just blatant lying right there!.

Let's see what God says...

Ecclesiastes 9:11 I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

I really don't think God is lying. Maybe you should rethink your accusation.

You are a "true believer" in your fairy tale religion.

I believe He is the omnipotent Creator. We'll just have to disagree on that.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Barbarian observes:
Actually, there is, in the same sense that there's always some randomness in this world.

Let's see what God says...

Ecclesiastes 9:11 I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

I really don't think God is lying. Maybe you should rethink your accusation.
MORE EQUIVOCATION!!!

I dub thee the GREAT EQUIVOCATOR!!!
 
Top