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

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Beyond_Reason said:
“Not a shred of evidence!” followed by evidence provided and dismissed because we don’t have like a video tape of a hundred million year long process.
Click to expand...
Right, you have 5 pieces of a 1,000 piece puzzle and you think you know what the puzzle picture looks like.
 
Aloysium said:
we assume that all organisms are connected genetically
Click to expand...
And if we all share genetic similarities we can reasonably infer that genetic connection isn’t just a coincidence and that at some point in time all creatures have the same biological ancestor.

Is there any evidence to counter that inference.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
isn’t just a coincidence and that at some point in time all creatures have the same biological ancestor.
Click to expand...
It isn’t a coincidence; it is an assumption, an inference as you go on to say.
IWantGod said:
Is there any evidence to counter that inference.
Click to expand...
Is there any evidence that the sun does not rise in the east? It is an illusion constructed, arising from a frame of reference and the concepts that are utilized in constructing an overview of how the world works. There is a more reasonable perspective, that which places God at the Centre of all creation, from whom all things, all time and space and all life spring. From that perspective, our progenitors are not a kind of primate but rather one human being, whom we call Adam. And, before him, there is God.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
It is an illusion constructed,
Click to expand...
An inference is not a baseless assumption, not necessarily anyway.

What grounds do you have for saying that our genetic connections are just an illusion of relation?
 
Last edited:
Beyond_Reason said:
You say you’re not a biologist though. Why do you think you have a better understanding of biology than biologists?
Click to expand...
This is off topic and I’m not sure what difference it would make to the reader. We are discussing an argument and what I write either makes sense or it doesn’t. The status of my credentials and ego aren’t the issue.

By the way, with the theory of evolution we see biological science appropriating fields of knowledge that are outside its realm of study. It is actually what is said of ID, pseudoscience, an incorporation of scientific fact into a modern secular story of creation, one which is grounded in materialism and utilitarianism.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
40.png
Aloysium:
It is an illusion constructed,
Click to expand...
An inference is not a baseless assumption, not necessarily anyway.

What grounds do you have for saying that our genetic connections are just an illusion of relation?
Click to expand...
I have written a lot on the matter. I don’t feel it necessary to repeat myself in a lengthy post which no one will take the time to consider. Some replies, still inadequate, have been over three consecutive postings of about 3k characters each. And for the moment, I don’t need the exercise to clarify what I think to myself. Sorry.
 
Aloysium said:
I have written a lot on the matter. I don’t feel it necessary to repeat myself in a lengthy post which no one will take the time to consider. Some replies, still inadequate, have been over three consecutive postings of about 3k characters each. And for the moment, I don’t need the exercise to clarify what I think to myself. Sorry.
Click to expand...
In other words you don’t have any justification at all.
 
IWantGod said:
40.png
Aloysium:
I have written a lot on the matter. I don’t feel it necessary to repeat myself in a lengthy post which no one will take the time to consider. Some replies, still inadequate, have been over three consecutive postings of about 3k characters each. And for the moment, I don’t need the exercise to clarify what I think to myself. Sorry.
Click to expand...
In other words you don’t have any justification at all.
Click to expand...
It is sad that you would respond in this fashion, but I will go on the assumption that it is what you conclude from what I have been writing over the years, in which case I’m glad I spared myself the time and effort.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
And if we all share genetic similarities we can reasonably infer that genetic connection isn’t just a coincidence and that at some point in time all creatures have the same biological ancestor.

Is there any evidence to counter that inference.
Click to expand...
We all are designed with common building blocks.
 
What you’re saying doesn’t make sense in light of the evidence available. Your metaphysics need to follow from the evidence, not the other way around.
 
Aloysium said:
It is sad that you would respond in this fashion, but I will go on the assumption that it is what you understand of what I have been writing over the years, in which case I’m glad I spared myself the time and effort.
Click to expand...
All you ever do is poetically state what you prefer to believe. Sometimes it’s a pleasant read despite the fact that i disagree. But the fact of the matter is you don’t have any justification beyond your bias to think that our genetic relation to other creatures is an illusion. You cannot refute the idea that we all share in a genetic tree of life, and every attempt you have made is just an attempt to excuse yourself from taking the evidence seriously. You haven’t provided a counter argument or any evidence to the contrary.
 
It’s more than just common building blocks. There are also genetic markers, and convoluted organ structures which would not exist if they were perfectly designed as they are.
 
buffalo said:
Their are written historical records. Big difference.
Click to expand...
There are written historical records of the Sumerian kings. King En-men-lu-ana reigned for 43,200 years, so you written record in Genesis is obviously wrong since it does not allow enough time…

There are written historical records of the goddess Amaterasu in the Nihon-gi, so the Christian claim that there is only one deity is obviously false.

rossum
 
Beyond_Reason said:
It’s more than just common building blocks. There are also genetic markers, and convoluted organ structures which would not exist if they were perfectly designed as they are.
Click to expand...
I see that as an argument for devolution. Thanks.
 
Is that actually necessarily true? It might be, and of course I believe it to be so, but I’d be interested in seeing a proof of that.
 
Usually they align with an increase in fitness, but from a direction that would only make sense if they were coming from an existing structure. And the genetic markers I’m talking about aren’t negative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top