Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We might assume that God has designed a series of outcomes. But certainly, the super-complex events that happen in the world between living things and their environment isn’t obvious TO US.
 
That’s fine. The playing out part is evolution, and the providence and sustenance are his Will.

But remember just because things look like chance to us doesn’t mean they aren’t planned. . . we just can’t see it, right?
 
A million years is a surprisingly long time. Think how much can happen in a human lifetime.
 
I think there are two possible evolutionary processes:
  1. A single species just adapts, but doesn’t branch because the entire species lives in one geographic region.
  2. Sub-populations of a species get separated by geographic features and move forward independently.
We know from fossil records that some dinosaurs had feathers, but maybe not that many. So the adaptations to feathers probably started long before anything bird-like evolved.

Remember that birds aren’t a distinct thing. You’d get dinosaurs that are more and more birdlike, until you eventually arrive at what we now call birds. There’s no aha! moment where a non-bird suddenly becomes a full-fledged bird.
 
Last edited:
Geographic or food-chain niches allow new species to develop. To be honest, I’m tempted to say that birds ARE dinosaurs-- those smaller species which managed to survive.
 
Absolutely. We are born into this world with all this stuff in place. For all I know, everything I see is a kind of dream hand-crafted for me by God to test my faith.

But even if you’re in the Mind of God, or the Matrix, or a dream, I’d say this: so long as there are things to observe, we will try to find patterns among those things we observe. And I believe that observation of fossils and living things makes evolution the best answer to the question “How did the collection of species end up as it is?”
 
Hugh_Farey said:
Yes he did. The fact that I wash my clothes is evidence enough for that - unless you think such an action is entirely coincidental.

I concede though that God designed evolution to do other things, specifically to progress life along evolutionary pathways, without any intervention of spontaneous creation.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm - humans represent what % of living things. And when we first started we didn’t wear clothes. And right after the fall it was leaves.

If you think ID posits spontaneous intervention, then you do not know that ID is about. (however, if God wills He can intervene especially if human behavior directs events at the quantum level)

To direct life along “evo pathways” is know as intelligent design.
 
Yeah, atheists talk about the “God in the gaps,” but IMO quantum mechanics is a God-sized hole, so. . .
 
benjamin1973 said:
We might assume that God has designed a series of outcomes. But certainly, the super-complex events that happen in the world between living things and their environment isn’t obvious TO US.
Click to expand...
God designed a boardgame with mutiple paths to the same outcome?
 
buffalo said:
If you think ID posits spontaneous intervention, then you do not know that ID is about.
Click to expand...
Well, knock me down with a feather. I must have been misinformed. I have thought that ID posits the spontaneous creation of a number of different kinds of organisms. Dogs and cats, for example. Evolution posits that they both descend from a common ancestor, whereas I have always thought that ID posits that each was created separately. Have I been wrong all this time? Please explain…
 
benjamin1973 said:
That’s fine. The playing out part is evolution, and the providence and sustenance are his Will.

But remember just because things look like chance to us doesn’t mean they aren’t planned. . . we just can’t see it, right?
Click to expand...
Interesting… not sure how you are using the word chance though.

Consider the quantum effects on the observer on the universe as a whole. Entanglement is really interesting. How far will God permit the effects of human consciousness and free will choices to negatively effect the universe before He has to step in to bring it back in line?
 
Series means A, then B then C. So we would assume that even if evolution is true, God meant for there to be dinosaurs, and birds, and people.
 
benjamin1973 said:
I think there are two possible evolutionary processes:

A single species just adapts, but doesn’t branch because the entire species lives in one geographic region.
Sub-populations of a species get separated by geographic features and move forward independently.

We know from fossil records that some dinosaurs had feathers, but maybe not that many. So the adaptations to feathers probably started long before anything bird-like evolved.

Remember that birds aren’t a distinct thing. You’d get dinosaurs that are more and more birdlike, until you eventually arrive at what we now call birds. There’s no aha! moment where a non-bird suddenly becomes a full-fledged bird.
Click to expand...
  1. The limited genetic variation almost guarantee their extinction.
HGT can just as well account for feathers on a dino. It could be a defect like a nose growing on a forehead. Or extra non functional wings on a fruitfly.
 
Look up “quantum eraser” and then ask if this is not science opening the door wide open for God. Not only is there an observer effect, it propagates back through time, which indicates that the Universe has some kind of omniscience and is time-omnipotent in a sense.

Material is not normally considered omniscient, but God is. Now keep in mind I’m not Catholic or even really Christian, but. . .
 
Last edited:
benjamin1973 said:
Absolutely. We are born into this world with all this stuff in place. For all I know, everything I see is a kind of dream hand-crafted for me by God to test my faith.

But even if you’re in the Mind of God, or the Matrix, or a dream, I’d say this: so long as there are things to observe, we will try to find patterns among those things we observe. And I believe that observation of fossils and living things makes evolution the best answer to the question “How did the collection of species end up as it is?”
Click to expand...
Do the stars exist without an observer to view them?

I disagree. Intelligent design is a much much better explanation. We observe design, science (even Dawkins) admits it, but yet we fight against it.
 
I’m not against ID. I’m against looking at fossils which are related, and minimizing that relationship to “Goddidit.” Let’s take that for granted, and ask HOW God did it. ID doesn’t really provide a mechanism for it, but evolution does. So in my view, evolution is a more robust theory than ID, and is rightfully the current favored position.
 
Yep, the point of QM is it’s supposed to be truly random. But in every single cubic centimeter, there’s a little Universe of possibility: a nuclear explosion, a new life, anything you can imagine. I’d say that’s sufficient room for the expectation of the unexpected.
 
Hugh_Farey said:
Well, knock me down with a feather. I must have been misinformed. I have thought that ID posits the spontaneous creation of a number of different kinds of organisms. Dogs and cats, for example. Evolution posits that they both descend from a common ancestor, whereas I have always thought that ID posits that each was created separately. Have I been wrong all this time? Please explain…
Click to expand...
Critics of ID have an issue with God having to correct His creation, afterwards.

Creation posits the instantaneous creation (or expression of the mind of God) different basic kinds with superb adaptive capabilities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top