Creation vs. Evolution

[6days]

Yes Barbarian... we know you will attempt to discredit anyone saying something even remotely supportive of scripture.

Barbarian observes:
Scripture doesn't say anything about the foundations of science. You've just tacked that onto the Bible

You are dishonest. ....


What you often do that is dishonest is misrepresent what others say. Rather than address what someone has said you fabricate something you feel you can beat up on

You knew that there wasn't anything remotely like that in scripture. Rather than address what I said, you fabricated something you felt you could beat up on. Shame on you.

As always...rather than admit a mistake, you double down on your dishonesty.*

 

[6days]

My understanding of genetics in this case, for what it's worth, is that individuals are the result of evolution but have their own unique DNA.

Yes, we all have our own unique DNA. But that is explained both by the common ancestry and the Biblical creation models.

However the close similarity of DNA and physical traits within a species enables sexual reproduction while expressed traits in each new generation are again subject to natural selection.

The close similarity of DNA allowing sexual reproduction is consistent with the Biblical account of created kinds.

More suitable traits may well become more widespread in the new generations and improved on over time and thereby become "fixed" throughout the species.*

Yes...true. For example a breed of dog may develop in the tropics by losing the genetic information for long hair. So, the new breed would all be short haired and better adapted to a hot climate.

In fact evolution rather requires differences to exist within species so that better traits can be selected, become established and perhaps typical of the species.

Yes...extinctions occur if the gene pool becomes too small...too much pre-existing information has been lost. That is consistent with the Biblical creation / fall model.*

 

[alwight]

Yes, we all have our own unique DNA. But that is explained both by the common ancestry and the Biblical creation models.

Do we then agree that unique DNA will produce a unique set of physical traits that will in turn be put to the test by natural selection?

The close similarity of DNA allowing sexual reproduction is consistent with the Biblical account of created kinds.

Darwin knew nothing about DNA as I suspect did the authors of the Bible.

Yes...true. For example a breed of dog may develop in the tropics by losing the genetic information for long hair. So, the new breed would all be short haired and better adapted to a hot climate.

Perhaps, but I would suggest that the coding for length and texture of hair might simply change rather than be lost. Apparently humans still have as many hair follicles as chimpanzees although it doesn't perhaps seem that way.

Yes...extinctions occur if the gene pool becomes too small...too much pre-existing information has been lost. That is consistent with the Biblical creation / fall model.*

Extinctions occur because species are no longer successful for a number of reasons, while some species have returned from the brink.
American buffalo were down to less than 1000 individuals but now number over 500,000.

http://all-that-is-interesting.com/...ear-extinction-of-american-bison-in-the-1800s

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

JD, Barbie Girl!!!

Michael, Six Days, Patrick, and AL!!!

I was denied Marriage, by the Pastor, who now is Pastor of the Church I grew Up In.

I know this is totally Off Subject, but listen.

He Said; "People shouldn't live together, and Not be Married; you two Live together, so I will not marry you".

Really though, that's what he said...

I'm not aware of Any Verse in the Bible that says if two people are living together, they shouldn't be allowed to get married. Did I miss something?

I was just really excited to get hitched in the Church I grew up in, and My Fiance Liked the sound of it; then we got denied.

Are any of you aware of a Verse that says if A Man and a Woman Live together, it is wrong to marry them?

That's what this "Pastor" is telling me; of course this is the same man that talks about football during the Service, and sometimes lets church out a Bit Early to catch a little more of "The Game".

Sad thing is, the pastor that was working there before would have married us.
Oh well, It's not like I go to Church anyway; So, I guess I don't care where I get married when it comes down to it.


=M=

Creationists who "have a firm grasp of science" don't seem to be having much of an impact on the end product Mark.
I wonder how even the more unlikely naturalistic explanations would become more unbelievable than a miraculous creation.

Makes more sense to believe that Everything was Created by Someone Capable of Creating it, than Nobody doing Nothing Creating it.

It makes less sense to believe in a Theory that there is Observable Evidence Against.
Like the fact that Dogs have not Speciated from Wolves in the Time they have been Separated.

I'm sure you Atheists will just overlook that dog detail.

is an oxymoron

Mutation is a Destructive force, and you think it Creates.

 

[The Barbarian]

As always...rather than admit a mistake, you double down on your dishonesty.*

I see you deleted your statement on which I commented. For reasons everyone can understand. If you run out of arguments, it is a strong temptation to accuse others of dishonesty. But it's always a mistake. It might feel good for a bit, but now you'll have to live with it.

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Barbie!!!

You're Here just in time to tell me about How Much You "Believe" in Evolution, again.

: P

=M=

Hey, Where did you go?

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbie!!!

You're Here just in time to tell me about How Much You "Believe" in Evolution, again.

Speaking of liars... you were going to show me that I thought giraffes evolved from a hippo-like animal, as you claimed. But now, I've called you out on it several times, and you're still running away from that lie. While you're at it, you can show where I said I "believe" in evolution. Does pot make you lose your sense of right and wrong?

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

LOL!!!

Sounds like another of your pot-induced hallucinations. Show us. Prediction: Another dodge.

Barbarian observes:
For example, giraffes have changed greatly in the past few million years.

Titanotheres developed horns and became huge.

But then I was Like;

Barbie, or other Evols;

If Evolution is True;

Why did they find a Supposedly 15 Million year old Fossil of This Animal Above, (Okapia)?

I mean, Okapia has Probably Reproduced Several Times during the Time It has Existed on this Planet. Why Hasn't Evolution Taken Place?

=M=

If that Giraffe Horse Deer Zebra Looking animal, is known to have not Changed for over 15 Million Years; Why do you believe that a Person Evolved from a Chimp-Like Ancestor in less than 3 Million Years?

Evolutionary theory doesn't say that simple forms have to become complex.

The Theory of Evolution holds the Idea that Inorganic Materials became a Single Celled Organism, which turned into a Multi-Cellular Organism, which then after Lots of Reproduction and Time became a Person.

Sounds like a Theory that works from Simple to Complex to me.

For example, giraffes have changed greatly in the past few million years.

Nikos Solounias has been describing the nearly-complete neck of a fossil giraffe called Bohlinia, a genus closely related to -- if not ancestral to -- the first members of the genus Giraffa.

Bohlinia;

I think it's pretty safe to assume that the Modern Giraffe Descended from the Bohlinia...
In fact, it looks like the Bohlinia is a Giraffe...

Almost like Evolution doesn't even take Place.

Well, that's what Giraffes looked like, long ago; But before that, barbie thinks that they looked like This;

Sorry Barbie, if the Giraffe, looked just like a Giraffe 12 Million years ago; It's a bit hard for me to imagine that it looked like anything but a Giraffe 35 Million Years ago; It Certainly Did not Look Like a Hippo with a Horn.

==================================

Now for the Sivatherium;

Let's go back a little further:

I don't know what you mean by saying that it's older than the Bohlinia, see here;

Sivatherium ('Shiva's beast)' is an extinct genus of giraffid that ranged throughout Africa to the Indian Subcontinent. The African species, S. maurusium, was once placed within the genus "Libytherium." It may have become extinct as recently as 8,000 years ago, as depictions that greatly resemble it are known from ancient rock paintings in the Sahara desert.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivatherium

If the Bohlinia looked just like a Giraffe, and is older than Sivatherium; then it is more likely that the Modern Giraffe descended from Bohlinia and not Sivatherium. Just using Reason and All.

As you learned, (but forgot again) even most creationists now admit the fact of speciation.

Evolutionists believe in Speciation, not Creationists. Creationists believe that God Created all the Life on this planet, in their full Adult Form, not that Speciation lead to the Various Species that we Share the Planet With.

Besides; I'm an Old Earth, Young Life Creationist, Silly old Girl.


==================================

MUSIC!!!

Strange - Built to Spill

Did I mention that the History Channel has a New Series about Giants, and the First Premier Episode, had a Quote from Genesis 6 in the Very Beginning?

Also, in the Second Episode, it mentions the Piltdown Man, and how Evolutionists had built up a theory about human origins which was Eventually found out to be a Fraud. Interesting Stuff History Channel.

Needless to say; I'm exited to see where this New Series Goes.

 

[The Barbarian]

Bill Lumbergh is the classic creationist, isn't he?

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

I've always thought of him as the Perfect Evolutionist.

If you could stop thinking, and just believe that Speciation happens, although it's never been Observed; That would be Great.

=M=

 

[6days]

I see you deleted your statement on which I commented.

More dishonesty.... Nothing has been deleted.

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Barbie;

You cannot win Evolution Debates, like that.

=M=

Oh, Better;

Barbie;

You cannot win Evolution Debates.

Given there is no Proof of Evolution being the "Origin of Species".

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

I'm going to settle this Debate, once and for all Atheists. : D

There is Proof of God, it's called a Fine-Tuned Universe wherein Thought and Life can Exist.

Yep, "fine-tuned", and it takes an Supreme Creator God to set up the Various Constants of the Universe, and Fine-Tune it.

Atheism Disproved.

Now, for Evolution.

Did you know there is Proof against the Theory of Evolution?

Just go and see if Dogs and Wolves are the Same Species, or if the Evolutionists have been Lying to you your Whole Life.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Are...la:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

Oh, What do you know!!!

Speciation doesn't happen, and Darwin was Wrong; so are all of you other Evols.

=M=

Now, why do you believe in Evolution; if you still do, of Course?

Speaking of liars... you were going to show me that I thought giraffes evolved from a hippo-like animal, as you claimed. But now, I've called you out on it several times, and you're still running away from that lie. While you're at it, you can show where I said I "believe" in evolution. Does pot make you lose your sense of right and wrong?

No really Barbie; ask me to show you one more time.
It will be even easier to find this time.

More like a Hippo-Rhino. Or a Hino, or a Rhippo.

 

[The Barbarian]

Speaking of liars... you were going to show me that I thought giraffes evolved from a hippo-like animal, as you claimed. But now, I've called you out on it several times, and you're still running away from that lie. While you're at it, you can show where I said I "believe" in evolution. Does pot make you lose your sense of right and wrong?

No really Barbie; ask me to show you one more time.

You posted nothing that shows that I think giraffes evolved from hippo-like creatures. I showed you two examples of transitionals, and you pretended I said they were related.

At first I thought you were only confused. But it's clear that you were attempting to be deceptive.

And I notice you didn't support your claim that I said I "believe" in evolution. You lied about that.

Do you think you're fooling anyone?

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Wait Barbie;

I notice you didn't support your claim that I said I "believe" in evolution. You lied about that.

Are you saying that you don't believe in Evolution?

Let me See If I Understand what you are Saying, you think there are transitional fossils, Today?

What about yesterday?

You remember, when Dave got you to admit that there are no Transitional Fossils.

=M=

No barbie, I don't believe that the Giraffe Ever Descended out of a Rhino Hippo Creature.

Sorry, that's just too unbelievable, given you also believe that the Giraffe Looked Just like a Giraffe 12 Million years ago, but you also clam that the the Giraffe looked like a Rhino Hippo in just double the Time.

But Barbie;

If there is no Proof that Speciation ever has Occurred; How can you be Sure that Evolution is the Origin of the Various Species that we share the Planet With?

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Let's Try it this Way;
To see if I get the Same Result.

Barbie; What do you think the Ancestor of the Giraffe looked like 30 Million Years Ago?

=M=

=======================================

I'll Put this Up here, in order to save an Extra Post Below; but to go along with what Everready Said Below; In Dick Dawkin's Book, "The God Delusion", He Says;

 

[everready]

This thread is taking on the appearance of Militant Atheism..

Cosmologist Steven Weinberg was first to address the question, “Should science do away with religion?” He responded with an unequivocal “yes,” saying: “The world needs to wake up from the long nightmare of religion.... Anything we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization” (p. 9, emp. added). Since scientists at the symposium used the terms “religion” and “God” interchangeably, Weinberg in essence was saying that ridding God from the world would be one of science’s greatest achievements.

He seemed so certain that scientists could achieve this goal that he actually admitted he would “miss it once it was gone” (p. 9). How were Weinberg’s comments received, you might ask? According to attendee Michael Brooks, he received “a rapturous response” (p. 9), before being heavily criticized by some, such as Richard Dawkins, surprisingly enough, “for not being tough enough on religion” (p. 9).

Dawkins, who is perhaps the most celebrated evolutionist alive today, was one of the most militant atheists at the conference. He stated: “I am utterly fed up with the respect we have been brainwashed into bestowing upon religion,” i.e., God (p. 9; cf. Ecclesiastes 12:12-13). Passive atheism apparently should not be tolerated. Dawkins is “ready to mobilize” his “big...enthusiastic choir” of evolutionary colleagues (p. 11).

He said: “There’s a certain sort of negativity you get from people who say ‘I don’t like religion but you can’t do anything about it.’ That’s a real counsel of defeatism. We should roll our sleeves up and get on with it” (p. 11, emp. added). Dawkins even compared evolutionary scientists’ position in the 21st century to that of homosexuals in the late 1960s: everyone needs to be “willing to stand up and be counted,” so that “they could change things” (p. 11).

http://atheismexposed.tripod.com/what_is_militant_atheism.htm

everready

The irony of this militant attitude toward religion is that evolutionists sometimes downplay such aggressive tactics in an attempt to lull the religious populace into thinking that no battle is taking place. Niles Eldredge, the Curator in the Department of Invertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum of Natural History, wrote a book titled The Triumph of Evolution and the Failure of Creationism. In that book, he said:

“Creationists have spuriously convinced many citizens that huge hunks of science are antithetical to their religious beliefs” (2001, p. 174). One would not have to read past the first page of Brook’s New Scientist article to understand that the evolutionists themselves openly admit that their atheistic, evolutionary beliefs are antithetical to religion. To add further irony to Eldredge’s statement, the back of his book quotes Booklist as saying that Eldredge’s book is “a clarion call rallying evolutionist [sic] to battle.”

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
I notice you didn't support your claim that I said I "believe" in evolution. You lied about that.

Are you saying that you don't believe in Evolution?

I'm pointing out that you lied when you claimed I said I "believe in" evolution. And everyone can see you trying to weasel your way out of it. Not going to happen. You lied. You got caught. Learn from it.

Let me See If I Understand what you are Saying

Sure. I'm saying that you lied when you claimed I said I "believe in" evolution. You're a liar. I can get away with saying that to you, because I know you won't find that statement from me. It probably seemed like a clever idea at the time, but not any more, um?

You remember, when Dave got you to admit that there are no Transitional Fossils.

In for a goat, in for a sheep, um? What's one more lie when everyone already sees the others?

But if you'd like to show me where Dave was able to give me those two major groups without a transitional, you might be able to save yourself. Not going to happen, is it?

No barbie, I don't believe that the Giraffe Ever Descended out of a Rhino Hippo Creature.

And you lied when I said it did. That's what you do, when you get frustrated. You aren't nearly clever enough to pull off something like that.

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

You lied about that.

Listen Barb;

I didn't even know about that Rhino Hippo Animal Fossil, until you claimed that it was the Ancestor of the Giraffe!!!

I'm pointing out that you lied when you claimed I said I "believe in" evolution.

So, you don't believe in Evolution?


The More I speak to you, the less sense you make; How is that even Possible?

:rotfl:

In for a goat, in for a sheep, um?

Do you see what I'm Saying, Here?
What is this nonsense?

And you lied when I said it did. That's what you do, when you get frustrated.

No, but I've got to admit writing to you isn't the least frustrating Activity I could be Partaking In, at the Moment.

Did you just admit, that you believe that the Giraffe descended from that Hippo Rhino?

=M=

What ever happened to you Explaining how you believe that Trees Existed before Animals, but you don't think there are Transitional Fossils between Trees and any Animals?

 

[The Barbarian]

Listen Barb;

I didn't even know about that Rhino Hippo Animal Fossil, until you claimed that it was the Ancestor of the Giraffe!!!

I've asked you repeatedly where I said it was, and each time you declined to show us. You think no one noticed?

Barbarian observes:
I'm pointing out that you lied when you claimed I said I "believe in" evolution.

So, you don't believe in Evolution?

I believe in God. I accept evolution, because it's directly observed.

The More I speak to you, the less sense you make; How is that even Possible?

Probably because of this: