Questions for Evolution-Deniers

[rossum]

Hello, both are mosquito’s, that is not a mutation to a completely new species.

You ignorance of biology is showing again. There are many different species of mosquito - they are classified as a Family, the Culicidae. There are about 1200 known species in the genus Culex alone. We know that Culex pipiens and Culex pipiens molestus are separate species because they cannot interbreed.

God made each after it “own kind”.

Please give an objective scientific definition of “kind”. If you think that all mosquitoes are of the same ‘kind’ then you are saying that the Family Hominidae are all of the same kind, and that includes Chimpanzees, Bonobos, ourselves, Gorillas, Orangutans and various extinct species of Homo and Australopithecus.

Observations confirm that mutations overwhelmingly cause a loss of information, not a net gain, as evolution requires.

Your ignorance of biology does not allow you to see that you are being lied to by your creationist sources. The vast majority of mutations are neutral and have no effect at all - that is why they are neutral. 95% or more of the mutations in a eukaryote genome are neutral; that also applies to humans since we are also eukaryotes. I will allow that the majority of the non-neutral mutations are deleterious.

Remember that we are dealing with a population here. The average human has about 150 mutations, of which all but five are neutral. With a population of six billion, that gives thirty billion non-neutral mutations for evolution to work with. A very few of those mutations are beneficial. Two known examples are HbC - an anti-malaria mutation and Apolipoprotein A-I Milano - an anti-chloresterol mutation. In your terms a beneficial mutation increases information since it represents a better model of the external environment in the DNA of the organism.

Unless of course you believe the ape is better than a human.

Can you climb a tree as fast as a chimpanzee? Are you stronger than an adult orangutan? How do you define “better”?

I guess it have never occurred to you to look a people and compare to anything else in the animal kingdom; we are astronomically off the charts in intelligence compared to the next intelligent animal,

We can see less well than eagles, we can swim less well than dolphins, we can smell less well than dogs. There are many different methods of comparison; some we do well on, others we do less well on.

A more correct version of your table:

          Human         Bonobo       Baboon
          -----         ------       ------
Kingdom:  Animalia      Animalia     Animalia
Phylum:   Chordata      Chordata     Chordata
Class:    Mammalia      Mammalia     Mammalia
Order:    Primates      Primates     Primates
Family:   Hominidae     Hominidae    Cercopithecidae
Genus:    Homo          Pan          Papio
Species:  H. sapiens    P. paniscus  P. ursinus

We are in the same classification as monkeys down Order, we are in a different Family. We are in the same classification as Bonobos down to Family, we are in a different Genus. We are apes, not monkeys.

rossum

 

[StAnastasia]

If you were really a theologian, you would not make such a ridiculous statement. Basic theology 101 says God sends people to hell for the willful rejecting the gospel of Jesus Christ. What does Catholic theology teach?

That sort of a “God” would be a monster. You are welcome to It, and any “hell” it should devise for people who ask questions.

 

[wanstronian]

To Wanstronian -

Rationality, it seems, has been defined to mean only what I can detect with my senses and instrumentation. I know, I know, I heard it over 30 years ago, “Show me God. If you can show me God I might believe in him.”

Pretty much. Why else should I believe in something? I don’t believe in fairies, because there’s no evidence for them either. So, as evidence is clearly something you do not require, do you believe in fairies? In elves and monsters? In the Flying Spaghetti Monster? That there’s a teapot orbiting the earth?

So, why do you post here? To get us to not believe in some invisible being? All that stuff about Jesus Christ was all made up?

Certainly I believe the miracles must have been made up. I’m happy to accept there was a nice bloke walking around 2,000 years or so ago who had a name similar to ‘Jesus Christ,’ and that he was revolutionary enough for people to notice him and write about him. I don’t accept that all that was written is true. I don’t accept that he was the son of God (no evidence).

We should just pack up our Churches and call it quits?

Not at all. If worshipping an iron age deity brings you happiness, succour and fulfilment, fill your boots. I don’t care at all. What I don’t like is when theists pretend they have evidence that their belief is rational. It isn’t, any more than a belief in the Loch Ness Monster.

What about 2,000 years of Church history? It doesn’t matter? We were all led to believe something false?

Well, yes, probably. Again, let me point out that there is no evidence that it is otherwise. So by all means, believe in God, whatever that may mean to you. But accept that your belief is no more rational than believing in Santa, and stop trying to suggest otherwise.

 

[wanstronian]

What chance are you taking? If I am right and you are wrong then you will be in hell where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. But if you are right and i am wrong; I have nothing to lose. But you have judged the Word of God without even reading nor studying it to reach your conclusion about the God of the Christian bible.

Then your God, if he exists, is evil, because he will be punishing me for something over which I have no control. For something, in fact, that he created me to be.

In the words of Gene Roddenberry: “We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.”

 

[wanstronian]

How can you conclude that on that which you have never read, much less study. The Bible say the earth turns as the clay to the seal, which means it spins on and axes and hangs on nothing; other religious books say foolish things like the earth rides on the back of elephants or the center is made of butter and cream; the Bible doesn’t say foolish things like that.

No, it says other foolish things instead.

I believe if you just studied the prophecies and then compare that with probability and statistics you would have a change of attitude. All of them that have been predicted long before they were fulfilled, are fulfilled to the letter. Zero have been prophesied and not come to fulfillment as it has been written. there is still more to come; you think man makes havoc on the planet, wait till Jesus comes back, you’ll wish it was just a case of some global warming…LOL

Don’t get me started on prophecies - again, there’s no evidence that they have been fulfilled, just that someone wrote down that they were fulfilled. Or, they are so vaguely worded that they couldn’t help but come true, sooner or later. Tell you what, if you can find a prediction, somewhere in the bible or the DSC or somewhere, that accurately predicts an act that can be independently verified, beyond doubt, as having happened, then you may have something. “I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels” just doesn’t cut it.

I won’t hold my breath waiting for Jesus.

 

[wanstronian]

I worry about Natural Selection. Ok… when I say I worry about it I mean as a system.
If a creature changes gradually by random chance mutations, and if only slightly beneficial mutations survive because they live long enough to reproduce,… and so on and so on.

If I think of mutations as essentially damaged DNA, by forces like radiation, nanoparticles etc., then all mutations are detrimental to the creature. The creature is under attack randomly by forces outside its niche environmental limits, most probably.

If a creature has its DNA damaged and its offspring survive the chance of any mutation being beneficial in any meaningful way must be very very tiny. And if one beneficial mutation occurred out of every 1 million detrimental mutations then the fossil record would somehow show 1 million deformed fossil creatures for every 1 slightly different, but workable, variation in a creature.

As far as I know, which is not far at all, there are not yet any reports of millions of deformed fossil creatures. They all seem to me to be perfectly designed for sometimes very specific niche habitats.

Okay, we’ll take it as read that you don’t understand Natural Selection then.

 

[ricmat]

In the words of Gene Roddenberry: “We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.”

Oh yes. Words of wisdom from one of the great thinkers of all time. His words will be remembered for thousands of years.

 

[wanstronian]

Hello, both are mosquito’s, that is not a mutation to a completely new species.

I guess a mosquito would have to give birth to a camel, for you to be convinced.

Observations confirm that mutations overwhelmingly cause a loss of information, not a net gain, as evolution requires.

Unless of course you believe the ape is better than a human. I guess it have never occurred to you to look a people and compare to anything else in the animal kingdom; we are astronomically off the charts in intelligence compared to the next intelligent animal, maybe because we were made in the image of the God of the Bible, the creator and sustainer of life.

Mutations, when properly understood, are an excellent example of science confirming the Bible.

Odd statement given that you clearly don’t ‘properly’ understand mutations. You’re probably envisioning some sort of comic book mutation? Spiderman, perhaps?

When one sees the devastating effects of mutations, one can’t help but be reminded of the Curse in Genesis 3.

Ah no, you’re clearly thinking “The Toxic Avenger.”

You may have evolved from an ape, but I did not.

Oh yes, you most certainly did, whether you like it or not.

Class:Mammalia (Ape) Mammalia (Monkey)
Orderrimates Primates
Suborder:Haplorrhini Haplorrhini
About: Animal that belongs to the family of Primates (Ape) Animal that belongs to the family of Primates (Monkey)
Kingdom: Animalia Animalia
Phylum: Chordata Chordata

You have no legs to stand on perhaps you can swing from your tail bone; a little cosmetic surgery. You are giving micro-evolution; we want evidence of macro-evolution; should be easily observable given the hundreds of millions of years and each “evolving over time” - Mutations are generally defects in the genetic code, not improvements in most cases, which accounts for the Biblical record that we are not getting better, we are getting more defective.

Some are improvements, many are degradations, most are benign.

You really don’t understand what you are talking about - you are clearly posturing from a position of ignorance and arrogance.

 

[wanstronian]

Catholic teaching is that a willful rejection of God and his mercy, to the end, will land you in Hell.

So basically: “You can ask questions all you like, as long as you ultimately come to the conclusion we tell you to. Otherwise it’s Hell for you, my friend.”

Nice.

What about those of us who understand that there is no evidence of God? We’re doomed to hell just because we’re rational? Why should we abandon our rationality for God, but not for any other hypothesis? Should we just pretend to believe in God, just to make sure? Will God not see through that? I thought he was omniscient?

 

[wanstronian]

Oh yes. Words of wisdom from one of the great thinkers of all time. His words will be remembered for thousands of years.

If you weren’t so blinded by arrogance, you would recognise that insights and observations do not need to come from the Einsteins of this world, to have resonance and truth.

Rodenberry hits the nail squarely on the head - just because he was a screenwriter not a philosopher, that doesn’t make his opinion valueless.

Do you believe that God made us all, individually? If so, you presumably believe that he made me the way I am, unable to believe in him. So he deliberately made me with a destination - Hell - in mind. What sort of rational being does that? An evil one, from what I can see - he made me specifically so he can punish me.

 

[ricmat]

So basically: “You can ask questions all you like, as long as you ultimately come to the conclusion we tell you to. Otherwise it’s Hell for you, my friend.”

God doesn’t tell us the conclusion. God gives everyone a chance during their lifetimes (even at the point of death) to get to know him & accept him. Some people, even given the chance to see heaven and hell will prefer hell.

A good book about this is “The Great Divorce” by CS Lewis. It is short and an easy, even fun, read.

 

[ricmat]

If you weren’t so blinded by arrogance, you would recognise that insights and observations do not need to come from the Einsteins of this world, to have resonance and truth.

Actually, I agree with that. That’s why I make fun of PhD’s so much here. So lets wait a few thousand years and see if the Book of Roddenberry is still being read. That’s the real proof, isn’t it?

Do you believe that God made us all, individually? If so, you presumably believe that he made me the way I am, unable to believe in him.

Love is not something that “happens” (as in “I fell in love, I couldn’t help myself…”) Love is a choice. We choose to love. And in this case, we choose to love God. Exactly how does that work out? It’s different for different people, but it starts out by acknowledging God’s majesty, beauty, and power. When one marries, one chooses to love the other person despite not knowing everything about that person. It’s the same with God.

So the issue is not that you are unable to believe in God. You choose not to believe in God or to love God.

 

[wanstronian]

God doesn’t tell us the conclusion. God gives everyone a chance during their lifetimes (even at the point of death) to get to know him & accept him. Some people, even given the chance to see heaven and hell will prefer hell.

I wasn’t talking about God, I was talking about ‘Catholic Teaching’ as per your previous post.

 

[buffalo]

So basically: “You can ask questions all you like, as long as you ultimately come to the conclusion we tell you to. Otherwise it’s Hell for you, my friend.”

Nice.

What about those of us who understand that there is no evidence of God? We’re doomed to hell just because we’re rational? Why should we abandon our rationality for God, but not for any other hypothesis? Should we just pretend to believe in God, just to make sure? Will God not see through that? I thought he was omniscient?

A rational person would not paint themselves in a corner claiming that natural philosophy is all there is.

There is clear historical evidence for Jesus. No one doubts that. He claimed to be the Son of God. Either He is or He is a liar. If He is a liar He cannot be a nice bloke. So we should believe all the good things He taught and then stop short of believing He is who He claimed to be. In this case throw it all out.

And then we have the Resurrection. But of course you know all this history, you choose not to believe it. There is much evidence for Jesus and evidence for God too. All one has to do is open their heart and mind to Him. It is really not that hard.

 

[Thing]

Okay, we’ll take it as read that you don’t understand Natural Selection then.

If what I’ve written is not natural selection, argue against what I’ve written. Its not worth you posting something just telling me I don’t understand it. Where is your wonderful scientific brain. Use it to argue against me, to enlighten me. Put some effort into it. Off you go now and research your argument against me.

 

[buffalo]

So basically: “You can ask questions all you like, as long as you ultimately come to the conclusion we tell you to. Otherwise it’s Hell for you, my friend.”

Nice.

What about those of us who understand that there is no evidence of God? We’re doomed to hell just because we’re rational? Why should we abandon our rationality for God, but not for any other hypothesis? Should we just pretend to believe in God, just to make sure? Will God not see through that? I thought he was omniscient?

Ask away, with sincerity. St Paul encourages it. You do not have to choose to face Him. But when you turn you back on a friend exactly what do you expect of that relationship?

 

[ricmat]

I wasn’t talking about God, I was talking about ‘Catholic Teaching’ as per your previous post.

No one is doomed to hell for asking questions. But it does make sense to ask the right questions, and to listen for the answers.

Hell is defined as the absence of God. If you spend all your life, to the end, rejecting God, isn’t it reasonable that you have decided that you don’t want God? In the end, God gives us what we want.

If you want to be with God instead of “not with God”, then you need to start wanting God in this life. If you decide you want God, and “information” is leading you away from God, then perhaps the information is faulty. God wants us to be with him and to choose him.

 

[Mystic_Banana]

You ignorance of biology is showing again. There are many different species of mosquito - they are classified as a Family, the Culicidae. There are about 1200 known species in the genus Culex alone. We know that Culex pipiens and Culex pipiens molestus are separate species because they cannot interbreed.

Please give an objective scientific definition of “kind”. If you think that all mosquitoes are of the same ‘kind’ then you are saying that the Family Hominidae are all of the same kind, and that includes Chimpanzees, Bonobos, ourselves, Gorillas, Orangutans and various extinct species of Homo and Australopithecus.

Your ignorance of biology does not allow you to see that you are being lied to by your creationist sources. The vast majority of mutations are neutral and have no effect at all - that is why they are neutral. 95% or more of the mutations in a eukaryote genome are neutral; that also applies to humans since we are also eukaryotes. I will allow that the majority of the non-neutral mutations are deleterious.

Remember that we are dealing with a population here. The average human has about 150 mutations, of which all but five are neutral. With a population of six billion, that gives thirty billion non-neutral mutations for evolution to work with. A very few of those mutations are beneficial. Two known examples are HbC - an anti-malaria mutation and Apolipoprotein A-I Milano - an anti-chloresterol mutation. In your terms a beneficial mutation increases information since it represents a better model of the external environment in the DNA of the organism.

Can you climb a tree as fast as a chimpanzee? Are you stronger than an adult orangutan? How do you define “better”?

We can see less well than eagles, we can swim less well than dolphins, we can smell less well than dogs. There are many different methods of comparison; some we do well on, others we do less well on.

A more correct version of your table:

          Human         Bonobo       Baboon
          -----         ------       ------
Kingdom:  Animalia      Animalia     Animalia
Phylum:   Chordata      Chordata     Chordata
Class:    Mammalia      Mammalia     Mammalia
Order:    Primates      Primates     Primates
Family:   Hominidae     Hominidae    Cercopithecidae
Genus:    Homo          Pan          Papio
Species:  H. sapiens    P. paniscus  P. ursinus

We are in the same classification as monkeys down Order, we are in a different Family. We are in the same classification as Bonobos down to Family, we are in a different Genus. We are apes, not monkeys.

rossum

But the nature of relation is one of the things creationism refutes - does similar mean related? You can assume it does, but…

 

[buffalo]

But the nature of relation is one of the things creationism refutes - does similar mean related? You can assume it does, but…

Similarity does not necessarily mean common descent, it can mean common design.

 

[Timothy_Piper]

You ignorance of biology is showing again. There are many different species of mosquito - they are classified as a Family, the Culicidae. There are about 1200 known species in the genus Culex alone. We know that Culex pipiens and Culex pipiens molestus are separate species because they cannot interbreed.

Please give an objective scientific definition of “kind”. If you think that all mosquitoes are of the same ‘kind’ then you are saying that the Family Hominidae are all of the same kind, and that includes Chimpanzees, Bonobos, ourselves, Gorillas, Orangutans and various extinct species of Homo and Australopithecus.

Your ignorance of biology does not allow you to see that you are being lied to by your creationist sources. The vast majority of mutations are neutral and have no effect at all - that is why they are neutral. 95% or more of the mutations in a eukaryote genome are neutral; that also applies to humans since we are also eukaryotes. I will allow that the majority of the non-neutral mutations are deleterious.

Remember that we are dealing with a population here. The average human has about 150 mutations, of which all but five are neutral. With a population of six billion, that gives thirty billion non-neutral mutations for evolution to work with. A very few of those mutations are beneficial. Two known examples are HbC - an anti-malaria mutation and Apolipoprotein A-I Milano - an anti-chloresterol mutation. In your terms a beneficial mutation increases information since it represents a better model of the external environment in the DNA of the organism.

Can you climb a tree as fast as a chimpanzee? Are you stronger than an adult orangutan? How do you define “better”?

We can see less well than eagles, we can swim less well than dolphins, we can smell less well than dogs. There are many different methods of comparison; some we do well on, others we do less well on.

A more correct version of your table:

          Human         Bonobo       Baboon
          -----         ------       ------
Kingdom:  Animalia      Animalia     Animalia
Phylum:   Chordata      Chordata     Chordata
Class:    Mammalia      Mammalia     Mammalia
Order:    Primates      Primates     Primates
Family:   Hominidae     Hominidae    Cercopithecidae
Genus:    Homo          Pan          Papio
Species:  H. sapiens    P. paniscus  P. ursinus

We are in the same classification as monkeys down Order, we are in a different Family. We are in the same classification as Bonobos down to Family, we are in a different Genus. We are apes, not monkeys.

rossum

Let me put it in layman’s terms. You won’t get a cat from a dog or a pig from a tree or a man from an ape.

**kind **Hebrew “miyn” - from an unused root meaning to portion out, Defined: sometimes a species (usually of animals) ++++ Groups of living organisms belong in the same created “kind” if they have descended from the same ancestral gene pool. This does not preclude new species because this represents a partitioning of the original gene pool. Information is lost or conserved not gained. A new species could arise when a population is isolated and inbreeding occurs. ***By this definition a new species is not a new “kind” but a further partitioning of an existing “kind”. ***

As an example in biblical terms:
Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, {and} fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a third day.

Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.

If we had the original dog that God created, we would find the DNA of all the different breeds we see today, but if you took any breed we have today, you could never get the original dog because generally things are degenerating not improving.

God has something to say about the whole of creation is suffering do to the stain of sin.
Romans 8 -

For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.

You know heaven is the place where there is no sin or effects of sin, such as lying, stealing, cheating, hating, you need no sleep, no sun because the glory of God will shine forth, no darkness - only joy…only joy. Wouldn’t everyone want to be in a place like that; yet God has given mankind His Son just for that reason, but one must take the free gift.