Another irrefutable proof that God created all things using mathematical induction. And a proof that The Bible is the word of God.

[TrueBeliever37]

yes, it does.
Please keep in mind I am talking about the actual theory of evolution.
Not any of your strawman claims of evolution.

Now as for your "evidence" the Bible...

So you believe it EXPLAINS why a tree is so diverse from a giraffe, which is so diverse from a man, which is so diverse from gold, which is so diverse from oil, which is so diverse from cotton? What egg does it try to teach, brought a tree into existence?​

Because God created things differently to begin with.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Assuming that you are 110% absolutely correct with the above statement...
It does not mean your "GodDidIt" wins anything by default.

You beat me to it.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

You made the claim.
It is on you to support your claim.

That you can not support your claim is on you.
Not me.

You haven't supported your claim. And that is on you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Because God created things differently to begin with.

That is a statement of belief and in a particular interpretation and not a statement of fact that you or anyone else can or has ever been able to demonstrate.

 

[McBell]

You haven't supported your claim. And that is on you.

What does my claim have to do with you being completely unable to support your claim?
Absolutely nothing.

Care to try again?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You haven't supported your claim. And that is on you.

Your claims are on you and waiting for support. Still waiting.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Your claims are on you and waiting for support. Still waiting.

And I'm still waiting on you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And I'm still waiting on you.

You've been getting mine. My arguments have gone to the gaps in your knowledge and pointing out logical flaws in your arguments. I've held up my end.

So the ball to support your claims in clearly in your court. I have to admit that you have given me no confidence that you will support them. But to be fair, I didn't expect it.

 

[McBell]

Because God created things differently to begin with.

Is "GodDidIt" your only answer?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

That is a statement of belief and in a particular interpretation and not a statement of fact that you or anyone else can or has ever been able to demonstrate.

How many times do I have to tell you the same thing? I already told you - since you don't believe the scriptures I can't prove it to you. But you can't prove your beliefs to me either.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Is "GodDidIt" your only answer?

It's a much better answer than saying: You got an egg first, that hatched into an animal that was required to exist before you could get the egg to begin with.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How many times do I have to tell you the same thing? I already told you - since you don't believe the scriptures I can't prove it to you.

That is your claim that I do not believe them. It is nothing I have said. And further, you are requesting a circular argument of one has to believe in order to believe.

But you can't prove your beliefs to me either.

My beliefs are in Christianity. This is not the subject of the discussion.

My knowledge is of the science of biology based on the evidence. I can support my arguments, but you don't appear to be able support yours and seem to be getting itchy about it too.

You've made claims. You support them with logic, reason and evidence or admit you cannot and that your denial of science is based on an unsupported ideological view.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's a much better answer than saying: You got an egg first, that hatched into an animal that was required to exist before you could get the egg to begin with.

No one is saying that.

What the evidence demonstrates is that life and eggs originated before chickens. The argument of which came first is answered in that evidence. Certainly no literalist has ever come up with an sound answer that thwarts that conclusion.

 

[McBell]

It's a much better answer than saying: You got an egg first, that hatched into an animal that was required to exist before you could get the egg to begin with.

Your gross ignorance of evolution and flat out refusal to learn about it aside, prove it.

Oh wait.
"GodDidIt" right?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

That is your claim that I do not believe them. It is nothing I have said. And further, you are requesting a circular argument of one has to believe in order to believe.

My beliefs are in Christianity. This is not the subject of the discussion.

My knowledge is of the science of biology based on the evidence. I can support my arguments, but you don't appear to be able support yours and seem to be getting itchy about it too.

You've made claims. You support them with logic, reason and evidence or admit you cannot and that your denial of science is based on an unsupported ideological view.

Your biology understanding is faulty then. Because you can't have an egg without the animal to lay it. And if that animal came from an egg, then you have a problem. How can someone so intelligent not be able to understand that?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's a much better answer than saying: You got an egg first, that hatched into an animal that was required to exist before you could get the egg to begin with.

There is an origin of life on Earth. This is admitted even in the attempts of the Bible.

The evidence shows that this life was very simple and single-celled for a very long time. No chickens. No eggs.

Then the evidence indicates that life evolved to be more complex and with cellular co-operation and specialization evolving. Once these new forms evolved, selection of the environment drove the specialization of the evolution of cells to take on the roll of germ cells in the creation of future living things. These germ cells followed the further differentiation and evolution of living things through invertebrates and into vertebrates where the egg evolved to be what we understand as eggs today. Eventually, chickens evolved in a lineage we call Aves or birds with eggs as the means of procreation already established. Eggs came first.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

No one is saying that.

What the evidence demonstrates is that life and eggs originated before chickens. The argument of which came first is answered in that evidence. Certainly no literalist has ever come up with an sound answer that thwarts that conclusion.

I'm refuting it right now with common sense.

1. An animal only lays an egg that will produce another animal of that same type.
2. If an animal comes from an egg, then an egg is required and has to be there before the animal can come to be.
3. If an animal is required to lay the egg, then the animal has to be there before the egg can be laid.

Summary: We have a problem with your so called evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Your biology understanding is faulty then.

You would have to do more than claim it. You'll have to demonstrate that. I can't say I have much hope for you achieving that feat.

Because you can't have an egg without the animal to lay it.

Sure you can have eggs predate modern animals that lay them. I just explained it as simply as I can.

And if that animal came from an egg, then you have a problem.

The problem is your lack of knowledge and entirely your own.

How can someone so intelligent not be able to understand that?

I do understand it much to your chagrin.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

There is an origin of life on Earth. This is admitted even in the attempts of the Bible.

The evidence shows that this life was very simple and single-celled for a very long time. No chickens. No eggs.

Then the evidence indicates that life evolved to be more complex and with cellular co-operation and specialization evolving. Once these new forms evolved, selection of the environment drove the specialization of the evolution of cells to take on the roll of germ cells in the creation of future living things. These germ cells followed the further differentiation and evolution of living things through invertebrates and into vertebrates where the egg evolved to be what we understand as eggs today. Eventually, chickens evolved in a lineage we call Aves or birds with eggs as the means of procreation already established. Eggs came first.

And where in the name of common sense did that first egg come from? Something had to lay that egg and fertilize it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'm refuting it right now with common sense.

1. An animal only lays an egg that will produce another animal of that same type.

No one claims this, so you are refuting what you think others claim. It does no good in support of your argument.

2. If an animal comes from an egg, then an egg is required and has to be there before the animal can come to be.

Another claim that is not a real claim. Nothing in the theory of evolution claims chicken eggs will hatch pigs or anything like that.

Have you ever studied what is known about eggs or did you just accept that poor argument as rock solid and are only now discovering how flawed it is?

3. If an animal is required to lay the egg, then the animal has to be there before the egg can be.

For those animals sure. But that doesn't mean that eggs did not evolve first.

Summary: We have a problem with your so called evidence.

Again, the problem is not mine or those that accept the theory of evolution. I understand that you generally view living things as some static state that has always been and never changes, while that the same time admitting that they sort of change--whatever that means. Even the evidence of your own lifetime and observation cannot sustain this static existence. It only shows how limited that lifetime of observation is. Even in my lifetime, living things have been shown to have changed. But the evolution of eggs took many more steps and much more time than we have been blessed with in these single lifetimes.