Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

[ProdglArchitect]

Here’s the rub… According to atheist, you don’t need no God for evolution to work, so you are just standing on the shoulders of atheist.

According to atheists, God doesn’t exist, so that conclusion from them isn’t surprising. Just because they’re wrong about that doesn’t mean they’re wrong about the specific mechanics by which life developed. The only difference is that they the see chaos, and I see design. I am not bound by their understanding of the process, just as they are not bound by mine.

You are adding criteria to my argument which are not self-evident. That is their personal understanding of the system, but that doesn’t mean that that is the only understanding.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

Here’s the rub… According to atheist, you don’t need no God for evolution to work, so you are just standing on the shoulders of atheist.

According to atheists, God doesn’t exist, so that conclusion from them isn’t surprising. Just because they’re wrong about that doesn’t mean they’re wrong about the specific mechanics by which life developed. The only difference is that they the see chaos, and I see design. I am not bound by their understanding of the process, just as they are not bound by mine.

You are adding criteria to my argument which are not self-evident. That is their personal understanding of the system, but that doesn’t mean that that is the only understanding.

So, Adam and Eve came from soulless animal creatures ?

 

[Aloysium]

I provided you with a reason that involves pre-existing, designed some describe, genetic and epigenetic processes. Different kinds of animals were created along the timeline that is the earth’s history. Before that, God created molecules, which he utilized in forming their material bodies. Atoms came about as he shaped their being from a plasma that was the universe. Before there was light, there was nothing, no time and no space, no fields of any kind.

 

[Aloysium]

I favour a progressive creation model - evidenced by all those gaps in the fossil record - that describes a overall evolution that unfolded over millions-billions of years. But it’s not scientific, as it requires regular divine interventions. In effect, it’s a “God of the gaps” theory, writ large.

There’s that word again, seeming to mean whatever people want it to mean. This does actually make for some wild discussions, leading nowhere of course. I think I know what you mean but you’ll confuse the poor lad you were responding to.

 

[Aloysium]

Why wouldn’t He?

Your argument is equally unprovable.

If God chose to create us instantaneously, great.
If God chose to create us gradually, great.

The ability to create instantly does not instill a requirement to create instantly. It is equally probable that He saw merit in gradual creation as that He saw merit in instantaneous creation. Neither position is demanded by God’s abilities.

Do you believe then that God may have created Adam with all the genetic defects that would have been present in the simian parents that conceived him, had disease been present prior to the original sin? Does it make any sense that there was one first man, or perhaps couple, given that evolution would have it that it was a group of animals that evolved into mankind? While a mystery, I believe that we can know how this has come about; I am very interested in discerning how that happened, and have some very good leads. Few are however, that’s why all the appeal to authority.

 

[edwest]

Adam and Eve were given preternatural gifts from God, including bodily immortality. The following is from Catholic Answers:

"Adam and Eve: Real People

"It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

"In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” ( Humani Generis 37).

“The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).”

 

[LeafByNiggle]

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

ProdglArchitect:

Techno2000:

Here’s the rub… According to atheist, you don’t need no God for evolution to work, so you are just standing on the shoulders of atheist.

According to atheists, God doesn’t exist, so that conclusion from them isn’t surprising. Just because they’re wrong about that doesn’t mean they’re wrong about the specific mechanics by which life developed. The only difference is that they the see chaos, and I see design. I am not bound by their understanding of the process, just as they are not bound by mine.

You are adding criteria to my argument which are not self-evident. That is their personal understanding of the system, but that doesn’t mean that that is the only understanding.

So, Adam and Eve came from soulless animal creatures ?

How is that any less believable than Adam and Eve coming from soulless mud as told in Genesis?

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

ProdglArchitect:

Techno2000:

Here’s the rub… According to atheist, you don’t need no God for evolution to work, so you are just standing on the shoulders of atheist.

According to atheists, God doesn’t exist, so that conclusion from them isn’t surprising. Just because they’re wrong about that doesn’t mean they’re wrong about the specific mechanics by which life developed. The only difference is that they the see chaos, and I see design. I am not bound by their understanding of the process, just as they are not bound by mine.

You are adding criteria to my argument which are not self-evident. That is their personal understanding of the system, but that doesn’t mean that that is the only understanding.

So, Adam and Eve came from soulless animal creatures ?

How is that any less believable than Adam and Eve coming from soulless mud as told in Genesis?

If you don’t believe in the Supernature, then everything is less believable.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

Well, if you are talking about the ultimate fate of all life, that is more of a cosmological and philosophical question. But I thought you were talking about a hypothetical event in the environment and what the consequences might be for evolution. It seemed as if you incorrectly assumed that if evolution were true, every species would have to evolve successfully when subjected to a severe environmental stress. In fact some species would likely evolve and survive, and other species might die out. So the speculation about Piranha and how they argue against evolution is no well founded.

 

[buffalo]

How is that any less believable than Adam and Eve coming from soulless mud as told in Genesis?

What is in clay?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

How is that any less believable than Adam and Eve coming from soulless mud as told in Genesis?

What is in clay?

Are you asking about souls? I don’t think clay in general has a soul. Now it may very well be that as God created Adam from clay, he miraculously imbued the clay with a soul that become Adam’s soul. But if we allow the possibility of that, we could just as well allow the possibility that God imbued a certain ape fetus with a soul and that fetus developed into Adam. Recall that I was responding to the rhetorical question:

So, Adam and Eve came from soulless animal creatures ?

as if “soulless” was somehow a serious problem for the origin material for man.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

Well, if you are talking about the ultimate fate of all life, that is more of a cosmological and philosophical question. But I thought you were talking about a hypothetical event in the environment and what the consequences might be for evolution. It seemed as if you incorrectly assumed that if evolution were true, every species would have to evolve successfully when subjected to a severe environmental stress. In fact some species would likely evolve and survive, and other species might die out. So the speculation about Piranha and how they argue against evolution is no well founded.

No, I was talking about a whole Jungle ecosystem morphing into a Arctic ecosystem, the Piranha is just one small component .

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

Well, if you are talking about the ultimate fate of all life, that is more of a cosmological and philosophical question. But I thought you were talking about a hypothetical event in the environment and what the consequences might be for evolution. It seemed as if you incorrectly assumed that if evolution were true, every species would have to evolve successfully when subjected to a severe environmental stress. In fact some species would likely evolve and survive, and other species might die out. So the speculation about Piranha and how they argue against evolution is no well founded.

No, I was talking about a whole Jungle ecosystem morphing into a Arctic ecosystem, the Piranha is just one small component .

Well, why would you even think that would happen?

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

Well, if you are talking about the ultimate fate of all life, that is more of a cosmological and philosophical question. But I thought you were talking about a hypothetical event in the environment and what the consequences might be for evolution. It seemed as if you incorrectly assumed that if evolution were true, every species would have to evolve successfully when subjected to a severe environmental stress. In fact some species would likely evolve and survive, and other species might die out. So the speculation about Piranha and how they argue against evolution is no well founded.

No, I was talking about a whole Jungle ecosystem morphing into a Arctic ecosystem, the Piranha is just one small component .

Well, why would you even think that would happen?

Due to environmental changes, which is the catalyst for evolution, and isn’t something like this the way so-called evolution happen for the polar bear ?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

Well, if you are talking about the ultimate fate of all life, that is more of a cosmological and philosophical question. But I thought you were talking about a hypothetical event in the environment and what the consequences might be for evolution. It seemed as if you incorrectly assumed that if evolution were true, every species would have to evolve successfully when subjected to a severe environmental stress. In fact some species would likely evolve and survive, and other species might die out. So the speculation about Piranha and how they argue against evolution is no well founded.

No, I was talking about a whole Jungle ecosystem morphing into a Arctic ecosystem, the Piranha is just one small component .

Well, why would you even think that would happen?

Due to environmental changes, which is the catalyst for evolution, and isn’t something like this the way so-called evolution happen for the polar bear ?

No. There never was a theory that the whole ecosystem evolved simultaneously to the new state.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

LeafByNiggle:

Techno2000:

So, the Piranha would gradually morph into something like the Arctic char.And also the Piranha needs to eat, so all its food would have be transformed into cold water species,and they have eat too,so the entire food chain from top to bottom would have undergo a complete metamorphosis along with all the plants.

Not necessarily. It might happen that all of the Piranha just die off. In fact the environmental change you describe is very likely to result in the death of many species.

Everything would die… evolution would fail right before your eyes, if you could live long enough to see it.

Well, if you are talking about the ultimate fate of all life, that is more of a cosmological and philosophical question. But I thought you were talking about a hypothetical event in the environment and what the consequences might be for evolution. It seemed as if you incorrectly assumed that if evolution were true, every species would have to evolve successfully when subjected to a severe environmental stress. In fact some species would likely evolve and survive, and other species might die out. So the speculation about Piranha and how they argue against evolution is no well founded.

No, I was talking about a whole Jungle ecosystem morphing into a Arctic ecosystem, the Piranha is just one small component .

Well, why would you even think that would happen?

Due to environmental changes, which is the catalyst for evolution, and isn’t something like this the way so-called evolution happen for the polar bear ?

No. There never was a theory that the whole ecosystem evolved simultaneously to the new state.

Right, that’s my point… the idea of evolution is too simplified.The cold environment change would not only affect the brown bear, but would also affect whole environment that the brown bear is connected to.

 

[Edgar]

According to atheists, God doesn’t exist, so that conclusion from them isn’t surprising. Just because they’re wrong about that doesn’t mean they’re wrong about the specific mechanics by which life developed. The only difference is that they the see chaos, and I see design

Well said, but if God was responsible for the history of life (and I believe He was), then there are supernatural forces involved, not just natural ones. Therefore I would imagine it impossible for science to ever discover the “specific mechanism” that produced this history. Science may be able to provide us with a broad overview of what happened, but as for providing an explanation for how it happened, I very much doubt it.

 

[Edgar]

Yes, “evolution” is a loaded word and I would prefer to avoid using it to describe my interpretation of the history of life. But if the first life-forms God created were microbes and later He added various creatures until He got to man, this could be described as an “evolution” of some sort.