Evolution and Creationism

  • Thread starter Thread starter DictatorCzar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
o_mlly said:
40.png
Freddy:
Sliding your argument to suggest that Ripperger is talking about complexity and that denies macroevolition is again proved wrong by simply referencing again the paper you linked to which spends a great deal of time giving arguments for why macroevolution exhibits said complexity.
Click to expand...
Would you please try that paragraph again in English. ???
Click to expand...
It’s a reasonably important one because it shows that the papers to which you link believing that they support your argument are papers which themselves put forward arguments directly contradicting what you believe. So let me break it up into manageable chunks the better for you to follow:

Sliding your argument to suggest that Ripperger is talking about complexity and that denies macroevolition is again proved wrong.

(It is wrong) by simply referencing again the paper you linked to.

(The paper) spends a great deal of time giving arguments for why macroevolution exhibits said complexity.

I hope that helps your comprehension. Now…if you could give us the maximum numbers of micro changes allowed within evolution? As I said, you can define micro as you please and feel free to back it up with any evidence you feel is relevant.
 
Last edited:
rossum said:
“Ahead warp factor six, Mr. Sulu.” You are making an assumption about the universe, which my scriptures tells me is wrong.

And maybe that film that the Pentagon just released is an example of what you are asking for…
Click to expand...
Are you now trying to smuggle in aliens? We are talking about earthly animals and humans. Humans are exceptional.
 
Hume said:
Else according to the fossil record, god must have been creating and obliterating species on a near continuous basis.
Click to expand...
Creation was phase 1, Providence is phase 2. After God created the archetypes lineage splitting is a result of the fall. Since then the universe is in a state of decay.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
Hume:
Else according to the fossil record, god must have been creating and obliterating species on a near continuous basis.
Click to expand...
Creation was phase 1, Providence is phase 2. After God created the archetypes lineage splitting is a result of the fall. Since then the universe is in a state of decay.
Click to expand...
Lineage splitting with a loss of function once had? Now that’s called…macro something or other. I remember you posting something about that.

And can you confirm the timelines for this? We understand you to believe that the planet is 6,000 years old. We’ll have to go with that unless you tell us we’re wrong.
 
Last edited:
How do you prove that more recent specimens are “more decayed” than those that preceeded?

How is this measured?

Which species are “the archtypes”?
 
buffalo said:
40.png
Freddy:
And can you confirm the timelines for this? We understand you to believe that the planet is 6,000 years old. We’ll have to go with that unless you tell us we’re wrong.
Click to expand...
Asked and answered,
Click to expand...
Well, to save me searching a gazillion posts, how about you type out a number?
 
Hume said:
40.png
Techno2000:
40.png
Hume:
Loads of intermediate sequences observable.
Click to expand...
Atheist interpretations
Click to expand...
The only one that makes sense. Else according to the fossil record, god must have been creating and obliterating species on a near continuous basis.
Click to expand...
Just because something went extinct doesn’t automatically make it a transition species, plus they are finding new species all the time, that they thought went extinct.
 
Last edited:
Hume said:
  1. God violates the PSR
  2. There are often more than one possible cause for an outcome (think quadratic functions)
  3. The PSR itself is offered as a “Brute Fact”
  4. The PSR offers no clues, in and of itself, as to what the “X” that causes “Y” may be, other than it exists
There are others, but this is just off the top of my head.
Click to expand...
  1. God transcends the PSR.
  2. Has nothing to do with PSR.
  3. If to you self-evident is synonymous with “Brute Fact” then you confirm PSR.
  4. Nor would one expect the PSR to provide such clues. That revelation is in its application.
Next?
Hume said:
Again, evolution has the fossil record as evidence. Loads of intermediate sequences observable. It’s just a case of you not wanting to drink what’s offered.
Click to expand...
How’s that fossil record working out for you? Not good, not good at all. Kool-Aid, anyone?
Hume said:
Go visit one of our fine national and state parks and prepare to be amazed.
Click to expand...
Go visit one of our zoos and let us know who runs them.
Michaelangelo said:
There are several behavioral experiments claiming to show abstract reasoning among other animals. Just a google search away.
Click to expand...
Still waiting for the citation that supports your claim that science is not prescriptive.
rossum said:
No, that is not photosynthesis.
Click to expand...
Yes it is.

Loading…

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
Last edited:
rossum said:
“Ahead warp factor six, Mr. Sulu.” You are making an assumption about the universe, which my scriptures tells me is wrong.
Click to expand...
“Beam me up, Scotty. There’s no intelligent life down here.”

I do not see value in further debate with one who sees the universe subjectively. You have said your scriptures inform you that precise observations are/may be illusory, and your rational process rejects the principle of non-contradiction. So you choose what you wish to be true and choose to reject what you wish to be untrue.
 
Freddy said:
It’s a reasonably important one because it shows that the papers to which you link believing that they support your argument are papers which themselves put forward arguments directly contradicting what you believe. So let me break it up into manageable chunks the better for you to follow:

Sliding your argument to suggest that Ripperger is talking about complexity and that denies macroevolition is again proved wrong .

(It is wrong) by simply referencing again the paper you linked to.

(The paper) spends a great deal of time giving arguments for why macroevolution exhibits said complexity.

I hope that helps your comprehension. Now…if you could give us the maximum numbers of micro changes allowed within evolution? As I said, you can define micro as you please and feel free to back it up with any evidence you feel is relevant.
Click to expand...
And you claimed to be a wordsmith! Gobbledygook.

Try again, Fred. Please correct your misuse of pronouns that lack antecedents and use the active voice instead of the passive voice.
 
It seems like I can learn something from anyone. And, I have seen you all debate and discuss with skills that I don’t have. However, in the end what happens in the end and in the future is more important than what happened “in the beginning” and in the past.

Will there be an afterlife? Will there be a general resurrection and an eternity to follow? Will there be a judgment, a heaven, a hell? Will some receive mercy and some receive severe justice in the judgment?While on earth, was there a God to seek and to serve? Has Almighty God already revealed enough of Himself that we will be without excuse (Romans 1:20)? Will the sufferings of this earthly life be not worthy to be compared with the glories to be enjoyed (by some) in the Presence of God for eternity (Romans 8:18)? Are there spiritual realities in addition to the material realities we perceive? Did Jesus Christ rise from the dead and will He return in glory? Will Almighty God’s character be shown to be righteous and holy?

Like many across the generations of human history, I believe that the answers to these questions is “yes”.
 
Freddy said:
Fred want maximum number micro changes. You give please.
Click to expand...
Well, way back in post #173, I asked tanfan2 and never got a answer. Why don’t you direct your question to another believer in macro.
o_mlly said:
How many microevolutions eventuate in a macroevolution?
Click to expand...
Now, back to the issue of macroevolution violating the PSR. Got anything readable yet?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top