Atheists... how did evolution come into existance?

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
The theory of evolution only explains how we have the diversity of species that we observe. What offense against God is found, there? The only assault I see is from the religious... that somehow God is great, but not quite great enough to "create" evolution. Why not. If God can 'spin any yarn', then why not evolution?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,381
Reaction score
1,056
Points
170
Did someone claim, for example, that life as it exists in earth today could have been predicted? Nope. Actually, the irony is that you claim this. You claim this is all designed, andthat, had we known the design, we could have made the aforementioned prediction. So, as is often the case, it is you who is most guilty of that of which you accuse others.
Darwin did, but we know that he was wrong about most of what he predicted and said -- What Darwin Got Right (and Wrong) About Evolution

The theory of evolution only explains how we have the diversity of species that we observe. What offense against God is found, there? The only assault I see is from the religious... that somehow God is great, but not quite great enough to "create" evolution. Why not. If God can 'spin any yarn', then why not evolution?
Come now. Evolution isn't fact as you have claimed in the past. Why? It fails to explain genetics and its characteristics, it lacks transitional fossil evidence. its ecological systems are biased, its evolutionary trees are more like bushes of life, doesn't follow enzyme properties, and other facts such as genesis shows evolution could not have started by abiogenesis. You used to claim proto organisms, plants, and animals caused it. No such thing and no evidence to back that up. All evolution is claiming today is natural selection and we know God was responsible for that. Now, that can be backed up by the fossil evidence and experiment.

As for macroevolution where natural selection isn't involved, we have nothing of the kind. Darwin's theories could not explain the Cambrian explosion. The basics are he was wrong.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,381
Reaction score
1,056
Points
170
Evolution isn't fact
We know it is. You couldn't stop it if you tried. Species will change over time. Two isolated populations.of one species, given time, will diverge.
I think it's the atheist religion that convinced you of that, but it can't explain the origin of life nor the beginning before the big bang. While the Bible is fact and explains in detail what happened. You can't demonstrate how humans came to be nor birds.

We're still waiting on abiogenesis and I don't expect you to explain quantum entanglement, but not being able to show how spacetime, i.e. fourth dimension and the other three dimensions started, puts a dent in your hypotheses.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,253
Reaction score
4,422
Points
1,130
ToE is biology.
Well of course. It is physical selection acting on lifeforms. Biology is the study of lifeforms. I already covered all this. Please pay attention.
There are five natural selections formulated by Gregor Mendel and physical isn't one of them. C'mon you make up stupid shit on top stupid shit which is circular reasoning. We had the universe first. ToE came later.

What you violate is the atheist science's stupid law of "it's all due to chance." Whenever a professor of ToE writes this on the whiteboard, then leave the class immediately.

We don't know how things are supposed to turn out like the Earth and all the planets revolving around the sun, but somehow it did. This is called "reaching backwards" in time knowledge and the dumb atheist scientists ascribe it to chance. Even your "physical selection" describes this it's all due to chance bullsh*t. If we didn't know how our solar system worked, you would have made up something else. Today, it's DNA and RNA that's ascribed to chance. Instead, what's more likely is there was an intelligence behind the cause.
There is no atheist science's stupid law of "it's all due to chance."

I suspect you saw that on one of the crank creationer ministries and though you would use it on this site. Why would you choose to be an accomplice to promoting such nonsense?
When we discuss origins like the big bang when there was no spacetime, then we get into the chance part. Or how life started, then we get into the random chance part.
When you use the term “we”, you make the mistake of including the perspective of fundamentalist religioners in matters of science.

What the ID’iot creationists don’t understand is that the forces that act upon biological organisms are not random. Genetic variation might be random, but the natural selection that acts on that variation is not. Adaptation is non-random, as it is the result of objective criteria for fitness. Natural selection decides what genetic variation helps fitness, and what genetic variation hinders fitness. The entire population experiences a change in gene frequency as the fit genes become more common over time, and the unfit genes become rarer.

This results in the corresponding physical trait evolving in the direction of greater fitness. Since these traits already have genes coding for them, they are not acquired. They are therefore completely inheritable. Genetic variation is constantly being added to by random point mutations on the DNA molecule. Some of this new variation makes the animals slightly less fit, some makes it slightly more fit, and most makes no difference whatsoever.

As natural selection continues to act on the genes (both old and new) populations can eventually reach a point where all of the old genes for a certain trait have been replaced by the newly evolved genes.
 

PredFan

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
39,926
Reaction score
6,154
Points
1,170
Location
In Liberal minds, rent free.
Be specific.
Once any self-replicating molecules appear, evolution is a given. Things that reproduce better will replace things that don't. That's evolution.

I’ll start by stating a crazy idea that explosions do not result in complex order.
What does that have to do with evolution? If you're going to debate the topic, you should learn the basics of it first.
Which law of physics says chaos naturally evolves into order?
Evolution is not order. It’s random and chaotic.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
10,664
Reaction score
2,833
Points
195
Why couldn't trillions upon trillions upon trillions of random events over the course of billions of years resulted in life?
The better question is: why wouldn't it? Life being "selected for" is inevitable, because of the nature of the concept of life. It persists. It consists of the forms that are more fit to persist in their environment. Something meeting the basic definitions of life will try to form in any environment. Talking about what CAUSES life is a silly approach. That question is already answered. The better question is, "What prevents it from persisting?" Yes, we are saying almost the same thing.
I don't think anything was selected. the beginning of life was a random thing so it could not have been selected. Once in existence we can extrapolate that the better configurations led to longer survival and that led to more complexity etc
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,381
Reaction score
1,056
Points
170
Right. Selection is precisely the opposite of randomness. A massive object isn't a spheroid "by chance".
That's not what the other poster said, "Evolution is not order. It’s random and chaotic."

You have no evidence nor anything to show what you are talking about.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
I don't think anything was selected. the beginning of life was a random thing so it could not have been selected.
The selection for persistent forms that were the precursors to life was not random. The reason one complex protein persisted and another did not was not a random event. The same rules applied everywhere and the same complex proteins kept forming and persisting. That's nonrandom selection operating.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
That's not what the other poster said, "Evolution is not order. It’s random and chaotic."
Which is not correct. Evolution follows a clear progression. Single cell. Multi cell. Vertebrates. Tetrapods. Nothing out of order. That's neither random nor chaotic. We aren't finding rabbit fossils in the Jurassic period, nor will we ever. We don't have a "random chance" of finding a bird fossil in a 2 billion year old rock. The chance is zero.
 

PredFan

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
39,926
Reaction score
6,154
Points
1,170
Location
In Liberal minds, rent free.
That's not what the other poster said, "Evolution is not order. It’s random and chaotic."
Which is not correct. Evolution follows a clear progression. Single cell. Multi cell. Vertebrates. Tetrapods. Nothing out of order. That's neither random nor chaotic. We aren't finding rabbit fossils in the Jurassic period, nor will we ever. We don't have a "random chance" of finding a bird fossil in a 2 billion year old rock. The chance is zero.
That isn’t what I meant by random. The mutations are random and sometimes chaotic. Whether they lead to a creature better suited to its environment or to a creature that can’t survive even one day depends on the environment. That part isn’t random.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
That's not what the other poster said, "Evolution is not order. It’s random and chaotic."
Which is not correct. Evolution follows a clear progression. Single cell. Multi cell. Vertebrates. Tetrapods. Nothing out of order. That's neither random nor chaotic. We aren't finding rabbit fossils in the Jurassic period, nor will we ever. We don't have a "random chance" of finding a bird fossil in a 2 billion year old rock. The chance is zero.
That isn’t what I meant by random. The mutations are random and sometimes chaotic. Whether they lead to a creature better suited to its environment or to a creature that can’t survive even one day depends on the environment. That part isn’t random.
Genetic drift is inherently random. But the pressures that operate on the resulting populations are not. Two isolated populations may undergo some changes due to random genetic drift. The pressures that decide which forms persist and then dominate are not random. So yes, i think we are on the same page.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
I didn't say that species will not change over time
And eventually enough changes will occur that the contemporary individual is a different species than its ancestors. And when two populations of one species are isolated for enough time, they will diverge and become two, distinct species. It's all the exact, same thing. You have already admitted the the truth of evolution, while denying it. This is what iron age magical hooha has done to your brain.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
The "mechanisms" of evolution (there are basically 5) are all explanations for how selection acts upon lifeforms, and the inherent properties of lifeforms that cause opportunities for selection to operate. Mutations and genetic drift, for example... these are inherent properties of lifeforms on Earth. They are colloquially called "mechanisms of evolution", but really, the "mechanism" of evolution is physical selection acting upon the lifeforms that have these inherent properties.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
44,996
Reaction score
5,673
Points
1,870
Evolution "came into existence" because abiogenesis occurred. Before abiogenesis, there were no lifeforms on which physical selection could act. Abiogenesis is a fact and a foregone conclusion: once there was no life, then there was life. You can say God did it or not, it is still abiogenesis. You can also say that stars form by magic, not deterministic, physical processes. Buut you would get laughed out of a 10th grade astronomy class.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top