Reconciling Humani Generis with the human genetic data showing that there never were just two first parents

  • Thread starter Thread starter Allyson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dovekin said:
t is also the problem with your position. It may be true that organized information can only come from an intelligent source , but we do not know if it is factual.
Click to expand...
Since science is provisional it is not ruled out. Since science is provisional the demise of evolution is not ruled out. We don’t know if macro-evolution is factual.
 
o_mlly said:
The former affirms ignorance on the issue while the latter claims a state of nature with no evidence in support.
Click to expand...
Again. not quite. But I do agree that the latter is unscientific. That’s why I said that scientists would prefer the former.
o_mlly said:
as no one has done
Click to expand...
Several people have done, but are told that their definitions of 'organised information" and/or “intelligent source” do not fit your criteria. I think you’ll have to be much more precise in what you mean for there to be a fair chance for it to be refuted.
 
buffalo said:
We don’t know if macro-evolution is factual.
Click to expand...
We do. It has been observed, as I have shown you many times before. Why do you continue to put out incorrect information?

Macro-evolution has been observed. The first observed example I am aware of dated from 1905. You are over 100 years behind the times, buffalo.
 
Allyson said:
The genetic data are the facts from which estimates have been extrapolated.
Click to expand...
estimates…

Humani Generis Remains Standing.

It appears that no one has bought into your argument -
  • Which has been going on for how long now? 😃
 
buffalo said:
And now we have more updated info since encode. Science does not rule out Adam and Eve because of the diversity issue.
Click to expand...
Did someone post data in the last month? I am working from discussions of the most recent data. Yes, there is always new information, but if you have that new information, please post a link to the scientific study.

I am not denying that there was and Adam and an Eve.
 
Last edited:
rossum said:
Macro-evolution has been observed. The first observed example I am aware of dated from 1905. You are over 100 years behind the times, buffalo.
Click to expand...
Here we go again. Micro is observed. Speciation is lineage splitting with loss of function once had. The arrow is devolution and breaking and blunting genes, not creating new and novel features. Even if there is one example of a temporary benefit conferred the organism loses over time.

In a thousand years we see the bones of this creature we might call this a tranistional.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
buffalo said:
Here we go again. Micro is observed. Speciation is lineage splitting with loss of function once had. The arrow is devolution and breaking and blunting genes, not creating new and novel features.
Click to expand...
Exactly… It’s micro-devolution . the loss in Genomic Info…
 
gama232 said:
No one has written anything convincing against a literal Adam and Eve.
Click to expand...
Exactly…

It’s sort of like sad comic relief - viewing the futile efforts of those trying to make Adam and Eve - and Original Sin - and the need for the Redeemer - Jesus, Son of God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top