Age of the Earth and Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter sealabeag
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
whatistrue said:
ETA: Speciation also does not necessarily mean loss of function or no new features or information.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm - not being able to reproduce with their siblings is loss of a function once had.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
In the past we thought NS was a creative process and could produce novelty and new function. We now know it is a conservative process, limiting the organism to a limited range of change.
Click to expand...
In the past “we”, whoever they were, were always wrong. Try reading Darwin. He observed variations in living species. Those variations introduced novelty into a species. Natural selection selected the beneficial variations and removed the deleterious variations. Hence, natural selection reduces variation and so is an anti-creative, conservative, process. This has been known since Darwin published in 1859. Your “we” are 160 years behind the times.

Random mutations introduce variation into a population’s genome. Natural selection reduces that variation by eliminating deleterious variations.

Your “we” is grossly misunderstanding evolution.
 
sealabeag said:
Lastly, I would love help in understanding how, if the science says that the world has existed for millions (billions?) of years, and death has existed since the beginning, how does this fit into a Biblical account where Adam was created around 6000 years ago, into a a perfect world free of death and sickness?
Click to expand...
3 Things:

A) “Science” doesn’t speak…

B) It’s well known that “days” in Genesis do not necessary equate to 24 hour days.

C) It’s also well known for any who know more of the Bible than just Genesis…
  • that Genesis does not necessarily whatsover Declare…
    that the world shall be free of Death and Sin in 6000 years.
This FREEING shall occur
WHEN the Messiah of all - Jesus - Returns at a time when we know not.

_
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
Hmmmm - not being able to reproduce with their siblings is loss of a function once had.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter, one because populations go through speciation not individuals. Secondly one of the biggest misconceptions is that evolution is a ladder and everything only goes in one direction, and even though you acknowledged it isn’t you keep promoting the idea that it is.
 
rossum said:
Lineage splitting (aka speciation) is the appearance of a new species derived from an earlier species. That is by definition macroevolution.
Click to expand...
Macro-Evolution? As in Classic Darwinism?
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
Hmmmm - not being able to reproduce with their siblings is loss of a function once had.
Click to expand...
And offspring surviving longer and at a higher rate is a new feature, no? Simply put, what you are arguing against as evolutionary theory is not actual evolutionary theory but something else. I am done.
 
BigRon said:
Whoops, I meant 6000 not 600 years.
Click to expand...
Means a hell of a lot of science must be wrong. Eg the claim Australian aborigines have occupied Australia for 50,000 years. Where did the science go wrong?
 
‘science’ – ?

The totality of opinions of any who label themselves ‘scientists’, etc…
and who’re attempting to Know Everything … even ‘things’ which can be beyond their purview.

This totality noted as being “science”
contains a huge mish-mosh of differing - and even contra-dictory - opinions…

_
 
EndTimes said:
Macro-Evolution? As in Classic Darwinism?
Click to expand...
Classic Darwinism ended between about 1900 and 1920, when it was replaced by the "Modern Synthesis, which included Mendelian genetics into the theory. The theory further changed after the discovery of the structure and function of DNA, and later the ability to sequence it.

Modern evolutionary theory is very different to Darwin’s original.

The definition of macroevolution remains the same: “evolution at or above the species level”. What has changed is the definition of “species” which now includes DNA sequencing and other concepts which Darwin did not have available.
 
buffalo said:
Darwin himself called it a creative process.
Click to expand...
Evolution is a creative process. Natural selection is not. Random mutations create new variations; natural selection narrows the range of variations to exclude the deleterious ones.
 
rossum said:
Modern evolutionary theory is very different to Darwin’s original.

The definition of macroevolution remains the same: “evolution at or above the species level”. What has changed is the definition of “species” which now includes DNA sequencing and other concepts which Darwin did not have available.
Click to expand...
Yeah… I know all that…

Macro-Evolution - as when meaning Life evolved from a Common Ancestor…
is not Accepted as Truth by the Catholic Church…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top