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

[Techno2000]

Bradskii:

started off when people I knew well kept insisting that almost all of what’s in the bible is actually true. They had a fundamental view of scripture even though it wasn’t required in the Anglican church. They accepted it without thinking. They didn’t have the benefit of a decent education and I did.

So it started off as an either/or view of God. You either believed scripture was true and God existed or you didn’t and He didn’t either. Which I later decided was not the case. But a realisation that what they told me was not true led me to question more and more. Eventually…

Hello Bradskii, you imply that your decent education helped you to see past the folly of less educated blokes that believe (like Jesus did) that every jot and tittle of Sacred Scripture is true. I’m thankful for the decent eduction I had. My education in science and law hasn’t negatively impacted my belief that everything written in the original manuscripts* of the Scripture is true. Despite having to (figuratively) roll my eyes at the unfounded pontifications of some of my Marxist-loving, Christ-hating professors, I’ve found that my education (and the mentally demanding work that I do every day as a result of my education) has only strengthened my faith in God and His Word.

*[Aside: The original contents of Scripture are preserved excellently in thousands of manuscripts, Church Father quotes, etc.–far beyond the evidence that we have for the original contents of virtually any other ancient text].

The ultimate nature of things (including origins) is a matter of faith. Consequently, the question of origins itself is not ultimately one of faith vs. science (although science attests far better to the supernatural origins of the universe)–it is a faith vs. faith question. In other words, we’re all tin-foil hat wingnuts–and it appears that the Neo-Darwinian tin-foil hat is particularly useful for deflecting electromagnetic radiation.

I say this knowing that I might be hounded as a result of such statements by the true believers in “science”*–who know deep in their heart that there are really big mountains of evidence that support “science” and prove the Bible is a pack of lies written by lying liars/ignorant goat herders.

*[“science”–aka that wondrous make-believe, flying sphaggeti monster, pseudo-scientific mythology that sea sponges or comb jellies turn into people if you wait long enough].

Well, I’ll have to leave my continued teasing of my evo brethren for a (much) latter time–this is an anniversary weekend and work is crazy right now. Have a good weekend (and month) everyone.

I don’t know why, but I always believed in the Supernatural, even before I believed in God, if that makes sense. If you don’t believe in the Supernatural, then it will be impossible to believe the things in the Bible.

 

[rinnie]

Bottom line all creation had a creator is and always will be God:: God always was is and will be!! Just because a person chooses to reject a truth in not way changes truth. That is why no one can prove the word of God false that God created all things.

 

[rinnie]

It is what it usually seems to lead to.

 

[William_Scott]

I don’t know why, but I always believed in the Supernatural, even before I believed in God, if that makes sense. If you don’t believe in the Supernatural, then it will be impossible to believe the things in the Bible.

I think your belief in the supernatural makes perfect sense. Belief in the supernatural is our God-given default. The supernatural-free, self-creating universe is a figment of the God-denying imagination (On that note–atheists have great imaginations–and their mountain moving faith and evangelical zeal to promote their silly mythologies puts my feeble efforts for Christ to shame).

I hope I can follow up (if this thread still lives) in a few weeks. Have a great weekend!

 

[edwest]

This thread will exist forever. As in, forever. Or just branch off into another, whichever comes first.

 

[Techno2000]

This thread will exist forever. As in, forever. Or just branch off into another, whichever comes first.

Yes…especially now, since I ordered that book you give a link to… Heretic.

 

[William_Scott]

p.p.s. The anniversary isn’t until Sunday, and my wife has granted me the momentary freedom to post…

Edgar said:
“Every organ of the body relies on the brain for its proper function - cut off a chook’s head and it will run around for a few seconds, but it isn’t behaving like a chook anymore.”
:-
And you are not even right on this matter. You need to remove a chickens brain stem (which controls the heart rate - not the brain) as well as its head (and brain). Otherwise it will live as long as you keep feeding food down its neck. Look it up.

Your sources might be lying to you Bradskii (just kidding–sorry Rossum, I couldn’t help using your witty line against one of your own ). Unless I’m mistaken, the brain stem is generally deemed part of the brain–not a truly separate organ as you imply in your post. The extended survival of a few lucky(?) “headless” chickens is contingent on a failure to entirely remove the brain (i.e. the brain stem part) in the beheading process.

You imagine? Is that how you discuss matters such as biology and evolution?

Funny enough, evolutionism is all about using your imagination–so Edgar’s use of a the term “imagine” was quite appropriate in this thread. In fact, with the possible exception of Sesame Street, Richard Dawkins is the greatest proponent I know for using your “imagination” (his imagination is so strong that he has elevated it to the level of infallible truth–now that’s an active imagination).

That said, I wouldn’t put too much stock by my opinion–after all, I’m just the son of brainless sea-sponges. In fact, every time I see this thread I thank my lucky stars that 'ol grandpappy sponge and his kin got just the right zaps of cosmic rays (not to mention those all important DNA/RNA copying errors, etc.) needed to create a brain capable of slightly rational thought and fingers capable of typing poorly written posts on this endless thread.

Now you may fancy yourself to be the son of comb jellies–I hear they have a lot more going for them than sponges (including a wee bit more in the brain department).

Now my wife’s on to me, so I’ll have to split for the foreseeable future…I’m sure there will be all kinds of fun replies to review when I check in again in a month or so.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

started off when people I knew well kept insisting that almost all of what’s in the bible is actually true. They had a fundamental view of scripture even though it wasn’t required in the Anglican church. They accepted it without thinking. They didn’t have the benefit of a decent education and I did.

So it started off as an either/or view of God. You either believed scripture was true and God existed or you didn’t and He didn’t either. Which I later decided was not the case. But a realisation that what they told me was not true led me to question more and more. Eventually…

Hello Bradskii, you imply that your decent education helped you to see past the folly of less educated blokes that believe (like Jesus did) that every jot and tittle of Sacred Scripture is true.

Another hail-fellow-well-met flyby post, William?

But yes. You are exactly right. A decent education will disavow you of, for example, the chances of it being true that anyone built a boat to keep animals safe in a world wide flood. Objections made, even at a very young age, that surely this is not meant to be taken literally, were often met with a pat on the head and a wan smile. They were the sort of people who were quite intelligent, but if they ever were likely to write the word ‘science’ they would put it in scare quotes. I mean, why would anyone do that…

The result, as I inferred earlier, was that a young mind started thinking that if my elders could not be trusted on these matters, what else could they not be trusted on.

I have a feeling that this next comment will fall on deaf ears, but you might be taken more seriously if you dropped the faux-friendly banter and tried formulating an argument rather than posting opinion.

 

[Bradskii]

I prefer the “every jot or tittle” approach of Christ

We call that a fundamentaist viewpoint.

 

[rossum]

I prefer the “every jot or tittle” approach of Christ

That is not a very sensible approach to the Bible, unless you are a member of the species Ovis aries. As Jesus said: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24).

On the other hand , is you are prepared to avoid the woodenly literal interpretation of the Bible you will find a lot more truth.

“In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth.” Science studies the work of God: the heavens and the earth. It studies the originals, not translations of copies of copies of the originals.

 

[Aloysium]

I prefer the “every jot or tittle” approach of Christ

All literally true, and consisting of multiple levels of meaning, each phrase signifies some aspect of the eternal relationship between mankind and our Creator. It tells us who we are, how we got here and why, simply, utilizing concepts that everyone can understand, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, through whom it originated. Clearly then, unless one is seeking God, it all sounds farfetched, as the words miss their mark.

The ToE is not the best science can do, because it isn’t science. It is a story utilizing science, by those who believe that all rests on its foundations; that is, what we have learned through the manipulation of matter. Reality is something greater, and if we don’t include that Truth, the outcome is illusion. Christ, the incarnate Word of God, is the Light, Himself, illuminating all that is now in darkness.

 

[Techno2000]

But yes. You are exactly right. A decent education will disavow you of, for example, the chances of it being true that anyone built a boat to keep animals safe in a world wide flood. Objections made, even at a very young age, that surely this is not meant to be taken literally, were often met with a pat on the head and a wan smile.

Sorry, Bradskii… Jesus Christ says Noah and the flood was true.

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Matthew 24:37-39

 

[Aloysium]

once you get to a lab and begin your work, you won’t be thinking about evolution. You’ll be thinking things like ‘how does this molecular switch work?’ What role does it play in cellular processes? Does it lead to disease if it malfunctions? What else does it do?’

In line with your imagined dialogue, I wanted to provide an example where such a meeting might take place. Duke university, a leading force in epigenetic research, provides a course on the subject of how the environment affects the expression of the genome and can result in alteration of the genes that are transmitted to the next generation. Nowhere is the ToE mentioned, because the idea is an irrelevant, after the fact, erroneous as far as I’m concerned, concept having no practical scientific value.

Molecular Genetics and Microbiology 222FS — Genetics and Epigenetics: The codes that control our genomes (NS)​

Beth Sullivan, Associate Professor in Molecular Genetics and Microbiology

Many inherited cellular and physiological traits in humans are not due to changes in DNA sequence, but instead are shaped by factors such as age, diet, or environment. This course will examine sequence-independent regulation of the human genome, non-genetic diseases, environmental factors that influence or control the epigenome, and multi-generational inheritance of epigenetic information (i.e. how grandparental experiences shape descendants’ genomes). It will also cover genome engineering and genome editing for therapy and disease correction. This course involves extensive reading of the primary literature (historical and current) and will be anchored on human genetics, although model systems (mouse, roundworm, fruit fly) will also be discussed. Open to students in the FOCUS program only.

Environment 148FS/Biology 148FS/Genome 148FS — Genomics of host-microbe interactions: The symbiotic web (NS, R, STS)​

Jennifer Wernegreen, Associate Professor, Duke Center for Genomic and Computational Biology and the Nicholas School of the Environment

Genomic approaches have uncovered a microbial world of astonishing diversity, including numerous microbes that interact with hosts. Our own bodies contain 10 times more bacterial cells than human cells and 150 times more bacterial genes than human genes. A deeper appreciation of microbial interactions is revolutionizing our understanding of life’s history, ecology, and human health. This course will explore how hosts and microbes affect each other’s genomes, trajectories of parasitism and mutualism, ecological significance of microbial symbionts of plants, fungi, and animals, as well as molecular and cellular mechanisms of homeostasis. Open only to students in the FOCUS program.

 

[buffalo]

Sorry, Bradskii… Jesus Christ says Noah and the flood was true.

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Matthew 24:37-39

He should know.

 

[rossum]

Sorry, Bradskii… Jesus Christ says Noah and the flood was true.

Was there a flood? Yes. Was it a very large flood? Yes. Was it worldwide? No. Genetic evidence from almost all land tetrapods shows that they have not had a simultaneous narrow genetic bottleneck, as would be required by the Flood story, since the origin of man.

By all means draw what moral you want from the story, but the evidence shows that the flood was not worldwide.

 

[edwest]

Please don’t count me among the we.

 

[edwest]

Yes, He would know.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

But yes. You are exactly right. A decent education will disavow you of, for example, the chances of it being true that anyone built a boat to keep animals safe in a world wide flood. Objections made, even at a very young age, that surely this is not meant to be taken literally, were often met with a pat on the head and a wan smile.

Sorry, Bradskii… Jesus Christ says Noah and the flood was true.

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Matthew 24:37-39

You have just posted something written by an anonymous author, attributed to Matthew, written many years after the purported death of Jesus. Reckon it’s verbatim? You have quoted it as such.

 

[edwest]

This is science. The bias will remain in their heads, but researchers will just ignore it. The newer devices for investigation, along with mapping the DNA of other organisms, will give them actual information they can use.

 

[buffalo]

You have just posted something written by an anonymous author,

St Matthew wrote it

Before 37AD Matthew was written in Hebrew and Greek

Of course we all understand the first Gospels were conveyed orally before writing. Matthew’s Gospel was in India by 54AD.

Luke wrote his before 41AD.