Why do the God-haters persist?

[Delta4Embassy]

Unless you believe complex lifeforms 'popped' into existence, you must conceed they evolved to their present form. Evolution might not be able to prove every little bit of itself, but it at least offers a more likely scenario than all life presently on Earth always has been.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Not my best analogy, but it's late. But the denial of evolution is like saying computers as we have them now have always been as they are now. And didn't evolve from building sized machines.

 

[Chuckt]

Unless you believe complex lifeforms 'popped' into existence, you must conceed they evolved to their present form. Evolution might not be able to prove every little bit of itself, but it at least offers a more likely scenario than all life presently on Earth always has been.

Wouldn't evolution then be the perfect lie to counter that complex lifeforms were created by God?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Unless you believe complex lifeforms 'popped' into existence, you must conceed they evolved to their present form. Evolution might not be able to prove every little bit of itself, but it at least offers a more likely scenario than all life presently on Earth always has been.

Wouldn't evolution then be the perfect lie to counter that complex lifeforms were created by God?

Couldn't both be true? What if God is just a word we use to describe science or how things really work but without going into details. "Why does the Sun rise in the east? - God." If you allow that God isn't a discrete sentient being but instead is simply the universe itself then gravity, which is merely part of the universe as are all the planets and everything else, then the statement becomes true.

I've found that when people argue the science vs religion thing they're both wrong. It's not science OR religion at all. Where science ends, religion begins, and where religion ends, science resumes.

Since time-space is curved, any direction you travel you wind up back where you started. As with science merging into reliigon, and back again.

 

[Boss]

Unless you believe complex lifeforms 'popped' into existence, you must conceed they evolved to their present form. Evolution might not be able to prove every little bit of itself, but it at least offers a more likely scenario than all life presently on Earth always has been.

Sorry, but no matter what you believe, they did "pop into existence." They do exist, they didn't exist before... no other way for this to be the case without popping into existence. Now... did this happen as a matter of random circumstance or some divine interaction? That is the question.

Evolution is being split into two very different theories here. Macro and Micro... Micro evolution is the slight changes which happen to a species over time, like people growing taller, or bears growing white fur instead of brown. Not many people can refute micro evolution because the evidence is clear this does happen. When you read that most scientists believe in "evolution" this is what they are talking about, micro evolution. Macro evolution, on the other hand, is not supported with scientific evidence other than micro evolution. It's a theory that these little changes over time in micro evolution eventually caused larger change at the genus level. It is a total speculation. We have no evidence to prove this kind of evolution ever happened, other than the fact we have all these various forms of life.

So what is happenining is, those who don't believe in God are running around claiming "you don't believe in proven evolution!" When the fact is, the God believers mostly do believe in microevolution, it is macroevolution they have a problem with. One is proven, one is a speculation. The non-believers will chortle (thinking it is clever) "what, you think it all poofed into existence?" But the fact remains, whether you believe in God or not, it DID poof into existence. Keep in mind, as bizarre as it may sound, things CAN poof into and out of existence in the physical universe, as well as occupying two places at the same time... it happens all the time with electrons.

 

[BillyP]

Unless you believe complex lifeforms 'popped' into existence, you must conceed they evolved to their present form. Evolution might not be able to prove every little bit of itself, but it at least offers a more likely scenario than all life presently on Earth always has been.

Wouldn't evolution then be the perfect lie to counter that complex lifeforms were created by God?

Couldn't both be true? What if God is just a word we use to describe science or how things really work but without going into details. "Why does the Sun rise in the east? - God." If you allow that God isn't a discrete sentient being but instead is simply the universe itself then gravity, which is merely part of the universe as are all the planets and everything else, then the statement becomes true.

I've found that when people argue the science vs religion thing they're both wrong. It's not science OR religion at all. Where science ends, religion begins, and where religion ends, science resumes.

Since time-space is curved, any direction you travel you wind up back where you started. As with science merging into reliigon, and back again.

Then I'd suggest you buy a dictionary because god isn't the universe but the person that created it.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Not my best analogy, but it's late. But the denial of evolution is like saying computers as we have them now have always been as they are now. And didn't evolve from building sized machines.

uh, Delta?.....computers were designed......by intelligent folks.....

 

[BreezeWood]

Unless you believe complex lifeforms 'popped' into existence, you must conceed they evolved to their present form. Evolution might not be able to prove every little bit of itself, but it at least offers a more likely scenario than all life presently on Earth always has been.

Wouldn't evolution then be the perfect lie to counter that complex lifeforms were created by God?

no, evolution is simply an explanation of dated physical content for life's past history -

that can be used when necessary to counter any unsubstantiated literature where such conflicts may arise.

.

 

[BillyP]

Not my best analogy, but it's late. But the denial of evolution is like saying computers as we have them now have always been as they are now. And didn't evolve from building sized machines.

uh, Delta?.....computers were designed......by intelligent folks.....

Computers evolved from typewriters, abaci, calculators, etc... Not thought up out of the blue as something brand new already finished from purely intelligent design.

 

[Steven_R]

Evolution is being split into two very different theories here. Macro and Micro... Micro evolution is the slight changes which happen to a species over time, like people growing taller, or bears growing white fur instead of brown. Not many people can refute micro evolution because the evidence is clear this does happen. When you read that most scientists believe in "evolution" this is what they are talking about, micro evolution. Macro evolution, on the other hand, is not supported with scientific evidence other than micro evolution. It's a theory that these little changes over time in micro evolution eventually caused larger change at the genus level. It is a total speculation. We have no evidence to prove this kind of evolution ever happened, other than the fact we have all these various forms of life.

You're right. Aside from the fossils, genetics, lab experiments on bacteria, and comparing populations in the wild (e.g. ring species), we don't have anything to go on.

Let's say you're right and only microevolution exists. What happens when we expand that timeline to millions of years and hundreds of thousands of generations? If we start with a population of bears and half microevolve to have white hair and the other microevolve to spend more time swimming and develop traits, how long will it be before they can no longer interbreed? And if they no longer can interbreed, then what?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Not my best analogy, but it's late. But the denial of evolution is like saying computers as we have them now have always been as they are now. And didn't evolve from building sized machines.

uh, Delta?.....computers were designed......by intelligent folks.....

Computers evolved from typewriters, abaci, calculators, etc... Not thought up out of the blue as something brand new already finished from purely intelligent design.

/chuckles.....how many baby computers did a pair of typewriters have to have before one survived to puberty......

 

[BillyP]

uh, Delta?.....computers were designed......by intelligent folks.....

Computers evolved from typewriters, abaci, calculators, etc... Not thought up out of the blue as something brand new already finished from purely intelligent design.

/chuckles.....how many baby computers did a pair of typewriters have to have before one survived to puberty......

You can deflect all you want, the simple fact is that computers evolved from earlier machines. See how evolution works?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Computers evolved from typewriters, abaci, calculators, etc... Not thought up out of the blue as something brand new already finished from purely intelligent design.

/chuckles.....how many baby computers did a pair of typewriters have to have before one survived to puberty......

You can deflect all you want, the simple fact is that computers evolved from earlier machines. See how evolution works?

the biology of circuits.....funny....but stupid all the same.......

 

[Boss]

Evolution is being split into two very different theories here. Macro and Micro... Micro evolution is the slight changes which happen to a species over time, like people growing taller, or bears growing white fur instead of brown. Not many people can refute micro evolution because the evidence is clear this does happen. When you read that most scientists believe in "evolution" this is what they are talking about, micro evolution. Macro evolution, on the other hand, is not supported with scientific evidence other than micro evolution. It's a theory that these little changes over time in micro evolution eventually caused larger change at the genus level. It is a total speculation. We have no evidence to prove this kind of evolution ever happened, other than the fact we have all these various forms of life.

You're right. Aside from the fossils, genetics, lab experiments on bacteria, and comparing populations in the wild (e.g. ring species), we don't have anything to go on.

Let's say you're right and only microevolution exists. What happens when we expand that timeline to millions of years and hundreds of thousands of generations? If we start with a population of bears and half microevolve to have white hair and the other microevolve to spend more time swimming and develop traits, how long will it be before they can no longer interbreed? And if they no longer can interbreed, then what?

Not "aside from" but including all fossils, genetics, lab experiments on bacteria and other information. It's not that we don't have anything to go on, it's that we have plenty. Everything just indicates macroevolution doesn't happen. The "oh but it takes millions of years" excuse is equivalent to saying... if you drop a ball millions of times, eventually it won't fall to the ground. There is no evidence of that.

In order for macroevolution to happen, organisms must do something we've never observed them doing and can't prove they are capable of doing. We can speculate all day long but speculations are not proof. And that is the problem here, we have some people who want to claim these speculations are truth that can't be challenged. It's either intellectual dishonesty or scientific illiteracy.

Species within a given genus can change dramatically over time, through generations of reproduction, creating entirely new species of life. But they remain in the same genus. A brown bear and polar bear are in the same genus. They share a common ancestor. The problem is, those who dismiss the possibility of creationism, can't explain the countless different forms of life unless all life ultimately emerged from a single cell organism. So this completely speculative theory of macroevolution becomes the best explanation. It has no basis in science, no evidence to support it, we've never observed it or been able to replicate it in a lab. In fact, it defies everything we know about biological systems.

 

[Boss]

Computers evolved from typewriters, abaci, calculators, etc... Not thought up out of the blue as something brand new already finished from purely intelligent design.

/chuckles.....how many baby computers did a pair of typewriters have to have before one survived to puberty......

You can deflect all you want, the simple fact is that computers evolved from earlier machines. See how evolution works?

Correction: See how intelligent design works?

 

[Steven_R]

You man like when Dr. Lenski observed E. Coli suddenly being able to use the citrate in a solution when they couldn't before?

 

[BreezeWood]

/chuckles.....how many baby computers did a pair of typewriters have to have before one survived to puberty......

You can deflect all you want, the simple fact is that computers evolved from earlier machines. See how evolution works?

Correction: See how intelligent design works?

are you implying God is engineering the changes for the physiological evolutions on Earth -

religionist haven't a clue scripturaly ... is their problem.

.

 

[Boss]

You can deflect all you want, the simple fact is that computers evolved from earlier machines. See how evolution works?

Correction: See how intelligent design works?

are you implying God is engineering the changes for the physiological evolutions on Earth -

religionist haven't a clue scripturaly ... is their problem.

.

I don't know about scripture and religion. But yes.... God IS the Engineer.

 

[Steven_R]

God IS the Engineer.

Given the problems with the human spine, God obviously needs to repeat his Statics course.

 

[sealybobo]

The light socket might be able to make more electricity but the electricity it made 2 seconds ago is gone. No soul. It doesn't live on forever. Nothing does.

Not sure if you understand how electricity works but I'm pretty sure the light socket doesn't make it. According to the laws of thermodynamics, energy can't be created or destroyed, so it must live on forever.

So you don't think you have a soul?

What about a mosquito, frog, fish or cockroach? Do they have souls? What happens to their energy when they die?