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.
God the creator and sustainer makes sense on an existential level. God the builder, however, does not make sense considering that God created a naturally developing physical reality. It seems to me that a naturally developing reality was God’s intent.

I don’t think God is a builder. Whats the point when you can create a reality that can build itself. Why create dna just to have natural variation in eye color when you can have natural variation in species.

I think that some Christians what to be able to point to something and say God built that. But God is a creator not a builder.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
God the creator and sustainer makes sense on an existential level. God the builder, however, does not make sense considering that God created a naturally developing physical reality. It seems to me that a naturally developing reality was God’s intent.
Click to expand...
If you were living 500 years ago would that be your position?
 
In my view, “natural” means “no God required.” I don’t think God wound up a toy called natural-evolution and let it go to just bump into things without guidance. Creation is guided by an intelligence. Intelligent Design makes sense.
 
edwest211 said:
In my view, “natural” means “no God required.”
Click to expand...
God the builder is not required.

You want to say God built that, but i think that’s a very simplistic shortsighted view of God’s creative act. I have no problem with the idea of a naturally developing reality, and everything that science has revealed suggests to me that is actually the case. Neither do i think that such an idea being true precludes the fact that God created it.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know what i would have thought 500 years ago. There was a time when people thought the world was flat. Right now the evidence suggests that we are living in a naturally developing universe, and God the builder is not required.
 
IWantGod said:
There was a time when people thought the world was flat. Right now the evidence suggests that we are living in a naturally developing universe, and God the builder is not required.
Click to expand...
Not really. This was a myth by Washington Irving.
 
edwest211 said:
In my view, “natural” means “no God required.” I don’t think God wound up a toy called natural-evolution and let it go to just bump into things without guidance. Creation is guided by an intelligence. Intelligent Design makes sense.
Click to expand...
In my view, “natural” mean exactly the opposite. It means “only God required”
I don’t think God wound up a toy called natural-evolution and let it go to just bump into things without guidance.
Click to expand...
Nor me. I think he created an orderly, rational pattern called natural-evolution and carefully shapes every atom of his creation at every moment in time so that it all follows that pattern.
Creation is guided by an intelligence.
Click to expand...
Quite true.
Intelligent Design makes sense.
Click to expand...
No. Intelligent design is a clumsy muddling in an disordered, irrational universe.
 
Hugh_Farey said:
or me. I think he created an orderly, rational pattern called natural-evolution and carefully shapes every atom of his creation at every moment in time so that it all follows that pattern.
Click to expand...
Did God know what Adam would look like?
 
Last edited:
Precision, complexity, organization, heavy duty, astounding , react rapidly to alterations in their environment - all through BUC. Belief in the god of BUC is blind faith. No matter how complex and precise, BUC didit!

The more we learn the harder it is for evo proponents to advocate with a straight face. It looks designed but we know it isn’t. 😀

Study reveals the inner workings of a molecular motor that packs and unpacks DNA

Moreover, the entire DNA must be replicated before cell division and DNA damage needs to be repaired.

This is when chromatin remodelers come into play. Chromatin remodelers have an essential role as they are molecular machines: they unpick and unpack segments of the DNA by sliding nucleosome spools back and forth, replacing individual histones, freeing up the DNA for transcription, and finally compacting it again, when the job is done. Since all of this happens in a highly dynamic fashion, chromatin remodelers enable cells to react rapidly to alterations in their environment – and this holds for brewer’s yeast as well as for human cells. In mediating gene accessibility, chromatin remodelers are vital for development and cell differentiation; cell types are defined by the sets of genes they express, remodelers help to determine cell identity.

From a biochemical point of view, remodelers are responsible for heavy-duty reorganizational tasks. To perform these tasks, they must execute “large-scale conformational changes, which are carried out with astounding precision,”

Loading…

phys.org
 
Last edited:
And the security system evo produced:

The clouds of spaghetti that keep DNA data safe

Cells can avoid “data breaches” when letting signaling proteins into their nuclei thanks to a quirky biophysical mechanism involving a blur of spaghetti-like proteins, researchers from the Rockefeller University and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine have shown. Their study appears in the March 23 issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry.

In every human cell, all of the body’s blueprints and instructions are stored in the form of DNA inside the nucleus. Molecules that need to travel in and out of the nucleus – to turn genes on or off or retrieve information – do so through passageways called nuclear pore complexes (NPCs). Traffic through these NPCs must be tightly controlled in order to prevent DNA hijacking by viruses or faulty functioning as in cancer.

"How on Earth do you have the kind of specificity that we see in protein-protein interactions like antibodies, and yet have the kind of speed that we see with water off a Teflon pan?"

"I can’t think of any analogy in normal life that does what this does," Rout said. "You’ve got this blur of (amino acids) coming on and off (the transport factor) with extraordinary speed."

www.sciencedaily.com

The clouds of spaghetti that keep DNA data safe

Cells can avoid 'data breaches' when letting signaling proteins into their nuclei thanks to a quirky biophysical mechanism involving a blur of spaghetti-like proteins, researchers have shown.
www.sciencedaily.com
 
Last edited:
The disordered, irrational universe would be that pictured by Darwinism, where order is purely on a physical level, with all the diversity and beauty that we see about us is merely the random activity of atoms. By happenstance we have birds and lions and trees and frogs and we ourselves, the vagaries of the four fundamental interactions of nature. And, of the mind and the spirit, the emanations of matter signifying nothing. Absurdity in the extreme. But, that is the consequence of indoctination within a school system that teaches people what to think rather than how to think.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
40.png
edwest211:
In my view, “natural” means “no God required.”
Click to expand...
God the builder is not required.

You want to say God built that, but i think that’s a very simplistic shortsighted view of God’s creative act. I have no problem with the idea of a naturally developing reality, and everything that science has revealed suggests to me that is actually the case. Neither do i think that such an idea being true precludes the fact that God created it.
Click to expand...
God the builder is the view that God himself gives us through his word in the sacred books of the Bible beginning with Genesis 1-2 and throughout.

Yet you, LORD, are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hands (Isaiah 64:8).

Is a builder required to build a house? Suppose a builder gathers all the materials to build a house on a plot of land and then sits and waits to see if these materials will somehow gather themselves together into the form and shape of a house with all the materials in the right place and order. Perhaps you may think, given enough time, perhaps billions of years, the materials will eventually gather and form themselves into the house with everything in proper order by natural processes of nature. I personally don’t see this happening nor has a house ever been found on the face of the earth or in the universe not built by human beings. And if we haven’t found or observed a house not built by human beings in the billions of years presumed age of the earth or universe, then we may well wonder and reasonably conclude that, indeed, a house requires a human builder. Now, you may think that the proposition ‘a house requires a human builder’ is a very simplistic shortsighted view of the natural processes of nature. However, the evidence or facts say otherwise. By analogy, the whole universe is as an artifact of God made by his own hands.

Further, since there is no evidence that the blind and mindless forces and processes of nature can construct a house, one may well wonder how those same mindless forces and processes of nature can construct the extremely complex human body. How is it that according to the evolutionary view mindless and inanimate nature can construct and organize itself into the highly complex human body but not into a simple house or even an axe? Can you explain that?
 
Evolution’s Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries (New 2017)

While most people might be able to name one or two, few are aware of the sheer number of embarrassing deceptions used to prop up evolutionary theory. This book highlights multiple examples that have misled generations. Some, like the famous Piltdown Man fraud, took many decades to uncover while leading evolutionists kept singing its praises to an increasingly indoctrinated public. How many of us know about how a misidentification of the chemical reaction between alcohol and the calcium carbonate in seawater, something chemists at the time were certainly aware of, led leading evolutionists to breathlessly proclaim incipient life covered the ocean floor? Who knows that genera and species were invented to support the fact of evolution? The countless fakes and mistakes are not mild aberrations in a self-correcting march to truth. In fact, evolutionary theory itself comes under severe pressure from the evidence in this book. For instance, diagrams of developing embryos, from a supposedly expert academic, were so useful in persuading people that evolution was unquestionably true that their exposure as fraudulent was ignored. It took over 100 years for this fraud to be re-exposed, and textbook publishers have still been very reluctant to drop it. More recently, National Geographic triumphantly proclaimed a hybrid fossil as an ideal intermediate between birds and dinosaurs. Their forced retraction of this glued-together monstrosity was barely noticeable. Disturbingly, the author also highlights secular work showing that, especially in the life sciences, we are presently in the grip of an unprecedented epidemic of scientific fraud. This eye-opening work should cause many to question their belief in evolution as scientific fact and encourage everyone to critically examine all future evolutionary claims.

amazon.com

Evolution’s Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries

While most people might be able to name one or two, few are aware of the sheer number of embarrassing deceptions used to prop up evolutionary theory. This book highlights multiple examples that have m …

5.0 out of 5 stars, ISBN: 978-1942773597, Creation Book Publishers, December 1, 2017
 
Last edited:
You’re a laugh a minute Buffalo. Never cease to amaze with the nonsense you post.

If the term species was invented to support evolution then what was Linnaes writing about when he wrote the Philosphia Botanica in 1751 and the Species Plantarum in 1753? The abbreviation of his name is actually used to denote that he was the original authority for a species name.

I’m calling you out. At the very least you are posting things that you don’t understand. At worst, you are deliberately posting things that you know to be untrue.

You are fooling no-one. You are simply preaching to a small choir who have not the knowledge or the desire to seek the knowledge they need to refute the garbage you post. This is shameful and even as an atheist I am embarressed for the Catholic faith by your actions.
 
Bradskii said:
At worst, you are deliberately posting things that you know to be untrue.

You are fooling no-one. You are simply preaching to a small choir who have not the knowledge or the desire to seek the knowledge they need to refute the garbage you post.
Click to expand...
We have discussed this book before.
He is indeed posting things he knows to be untrue. He is a classic Creationist, and uses all the classic Creationist tactics of: asking questions to which he does not wish to know the answers, posting slabs of Creationist quotebomb in the hope that their very bulk will somehow be convincing, posting carefully selected extracts from Evolutionist literature which appear to show that Evolutionists don’t believe in Evolution, and so on and so on.
This is shameful and even as an atheist I am embarressed for the Catholic faith by your actions.
Click to expand...
Thank you. It is shameful and all good Catholics like me are embarrassed for our faith too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top