Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. The soul is the animating principle. Human have immortal souls, plants and animals do not.
 
Most do make that claim (scientism) and most Americans believe it. Evolutionism is a direct attack on God. It has claimed many victims.
 
Design has purpose and foresight.

Neo Darwinism has neither.

How can you argue for evolution then?
 
buffalo said:
Natural selection is now known to be a conservative process not a creative one. This leaves random mutations which result in loss of function and information.
Click to expand...
You mean it is “now claimed” by pseudo-scientists that natural selection always results in loss of function. Real scientists do not know that (for some reason.)
 
buffalo said:
Our bodies return to dust upon our earthly death. We get glorified bodies at the final judgement.
Click to expand...
Dust is an ambiguous term.

It is made of soil, dust lifted by weather, volcanic eruptions, and pollution. It can also be plant pollen, human and animal hairs, textile fibers, paper fibers, minerals from outdoor soil, human skin cells, burnt meteorite particles, and many other materials which may be found in the local environment

🙂 We obviously know bodies simply decompose, and so “dust” is figurative.
 
buffalo said:
Design has purpose and foresight.

Neo Darwinism has neither.

How can you argue for evolution then?
Click to expand...
Because the “purpose and foresight” you refer to is in the philosophical and religious sense. They are not scientific concepts. So it is entirely appropriate that any scientific theory leave them out.
 
buffalo said:
Natural selection is now known to be a conservative process not a creative one.
Click to expand...
Mostly agreed. If the environment is changing then natural selection will shift genomes towards adaptation to the changed environment.
buffalo said:
This leaves random mutations which result in loss of function and information.
Click to expand...
This leaves random mutations which may result in loss, no change or gain in information. The great majority result in no change in useful information. For example, a mutation from GTG to GTC has no impact because GTG and GTC both match to Valine.

Similarly function may decrease, remain unchanged or increase, as with the lactase persistence mutation.

rossum
 
There is no evidence of that. It is pure conjecture. Among the gifts given to Adam By God was immortality. Original Sin is dogma and had spiritual and physical ramifications.
 
edwest211 said:
There is no evidence of that. It is pure conjecture. Among the gifts given to Adam By God was immortality. Original Sin is dogma and had spiritual and physical ramifications.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned it was just my own conjecture. I didn’t say I had evidence of that.

Though true that it is dogma, original sin has nothing to do with the creation of Adam and Eve, it happened after they were created, so irrelevant to my point.
 
The original language is: aphar (Strong’s #6083): clay, earth, mud, ashes, earth, ground, mortar, powder, rubbish.
 
Evolutionism is philosophy. It is not empirical, that is observable, repeatable and predictable.
 
rossum said:
Mostly agreed. If the environment is changing then natural selection will shift genomes towards adaptation to the changed environment.
Click to expand...
Here we differ - I rewrite your statement as: If the environment is changing then
natural selection
programmed adaptation will shift genomes towards adaptation to the changed environment.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
If I design a machine with purpose science is out of it?
Click to expand...
Your purpose is to patent the machine and make money selling it. The purpose of the purchaser is to use the machine to perform some task. The purpose does not attach to the machine, but varies with the person.

An artist may incorporate your machine into some sculpture for the purpose of art.

There are many possible purposes for you machine. Landfill maybe, or sunk in the sea as a base for a new coral reef.

It is generally an error to say “purpose” as opposed to “purposes” in this context.

rossum
 
We already went over lactase persistence. It is a loss of an ability humans once enjoyed, that is the ability to digest mild sugar. Some no longer can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top