Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ratio1 said:
One you can test the hypothesis by performing experiments, the other you can’t.
Click to expand...
The theory that whales evolved from a rodent, for example, can be tested by asking evolutionary biologist if it’s true. This is how evolution science works.
 
Techno2000 said:
Ok. so far man has found "2’ transitional fossils :

Archaeopteryx 2.Tadpole… 🤔
Click to expand...
What about butterflies evolving from grubs?

And I have a theory that horses evolved from sea-horses. In fact, I’m preparing a paper on it for my Ph.d in evolutionary biology.
 
Glark said:
40.png
Techno2000:
To support their flippers , just like you need finger bones to support a oven mitt .
Click to expand...
Wait, are you claiming whales have oven mitts?
Click to expand...
No, I meant if you were going to take a hot whale of a oven you would need oven mitts.
 
Yes. Evidence is evidence.

Please remember that my position is a compatibilist one: that there’s plenty of room for God in evolution. I’m not a champion of science as opposed to the God idea. I see learning about the Universe, at least for Christians, as an avid and sincere study of the mind and will of God. Refusing to accept evidence, or the conclusions of the best minds when presented with it, is to me tantamount to blasphemy.

Now, if you actually have good evidence against evolution, then you can present that. If there’s something that better explains the data, then it will be resisted at first, and then eventually accepted. But I don’t think that’s the case-- I think you have an overly limited interpretation of the Bible which causes you to cast around for any remedy or method of ignoring the truth about the Universe.

God is bigger even than the Bible, and than the Church. God is bigger than all the minds, words and ideas of everything that ever lived, here or anywhere. Expecting the truth to conform exactly to a limited and literal interpretation of the Bible is to make God an idea, rather than an existent Creator of All.
 
benjamin1973 said:
God is bigger even than the Bible, and than the Church. God is bigger than all the minds, words and ideas of everything that’s ever lived, here or anywhere
Click to expand...
Exactly…and that why he didnt have to use evolution .
 
Last edited:
He didn’t have to, absolutely. He didn’t have to do anything, so far as we know. But the evidence is that, for whatever reason, that IS how he organized the development of life on Earth.
 
I understand all that but one can still have an opinion about whether something is good science or bad science or not science at all. We may not have all the answers so it’s unfair to ask people just because they don’t have a better scientific evidence then one has to accept poor science.
I mean if I was living in the Middle Ages I think I could be right in going against the mainstream belief that bloodletting cures diseases. This is despite the fact that I can’t produce evidence against this.
 
Absolutely.

If you think there’s something wrong, you must challenge it. Every idea is like a living trial: everyone argues their best, and eventually the strongest ideas will survive and thrive.

However, this process is facilitated by openness and honesty. If you are resisting new knowledge because you feel your world-view is threatened, then you will relegate yourself to the margins of society while the world moves forward. If you really think that there is something wrong with the conclusions drawn by scientists-- not because of your world view but because they are not doing science right, then that’s a different issue entirely.

It’s up to you to decide what the case is and to act on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top