Comprehension of Evolution and Creation

[questfortruth]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

If the theory is proven wrong, and this wrong-hood is being hidden from
the eyes of our students. Then the Christian can not support it.
If teachers know that theory is false, but tell the students, that theory is
sure as a fact, then it is satanic sin. The Christian Martyr Kent Hovind has
explained this position in his original series of lectures on YouTube.

SIMPLE FACT:
Your mother gave birth to you.
Your grandmother gave birth to your mother.
Your great-grandmother gave birth to your grandmother,
Your great-great-grandmother gave birth to your great-grandmother...

CREATION-DOGMA:
Creationists and the God of the Bible believe that all of your grandmothers
are ordinary people. All your relatives compose the Human-kind with its own
Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA), the Biblical Adam and Eve. Analogously, all
relatives of monkeys compose the monkey-kind with its own LUCA (which is the
very first pair of monkeys). There are no beings, who belong to both those
kinds.

And there are spider-kind with its own LUCA (the very first pair of spiders).
There are many LUCA-s in the "pseudo-" Science of Creation, compared to only
one LUCA in the Theory of Evolution.

Look for example at your dog.
His kind is dog-kind because his LUCA (Universal LCA) was the dog.
But he has a special breed "german shepherd", this breed is his specialty within his kind.
He is a special dog. Thus, his specie is his breed. Another specie is bulldog.

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans. I am not a racist! Jesus Christ has died for all species of
humankind.

EVOLUTION-IDEOLOGY:
On the other hand, the Theory of Evolution (the founder is the christian
Charles Darwin) says that the lineage of the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana. It is ridiculous in simple wording, and it is science
fact in scientific wording.

Simple wording: "the modern fish is originated from your grandmother Diana."
Scientific wording: "All life on Earth shares a last universal common ancestor (LUCA)" Wikipedia.

Those two wordings are talking the same thing, just two different styles.
Quote: "Hey, my name is LUCA!"

And from grandmother Zina - a line of spiders. From
grandmother Veronica - a line of monkeys.
But since they are very distant ancestors (and the very first grandmother was
the simplest unicellular bacterium: the Universal LCA), grandmother Diana was an ordinary fish,
and grandmother Zina is an ordinary spider. Veronica is a monkey in your genus.

The modern bacterium (named Tomy) was produced by his mother Huna, who was
also a bacterium. The bacterium-grandmother Vika has produced Huna, and so on.
All creatures in Tomy's lineage were bacteria.
Why the evolution into humans does take place with some
bacteria but not with the genus of Tomy? And you don't need to tell me the
parable, that "a factory worker can become a factory director, although other
workers are simply unlucky and they will remain unskilled forever." Nature and
biology are not a factory! And this also means that the Theory of Evolution
includes non-computable randomness. Therefore, it is possible that on the best
planet for living nothing special will happen, except the boring life of a
colony of bacteria.

The modern bacteria Tomy and LUCA look the same. Because the genus of Tomy was not evolution-ing. The explanation for this is the "factory" parable in the thread: namely genus of Tomy was not lucky enough. Thus, the modern fish are looking the same way as their ancestors the time the grandmother Diana (look up the name in the thread) has started their genus lines. Therefore, Diana was ordinary fish.

Do not deny your 10000000000 grandmothers' existence if you believe in them. Be respective to the original grandmother named LUCA. Do not call her the most primitive creature ever existed! Without her, there would be no grandmothers at all. Why? Because we need to feel our blood-relation to each other: we are someone's daughter, we are someone's son.

The C. Darwin has discovered not Evolution, but Adaptation. Surely, he would deserve the Nobel Prize for that. Namely, he rightly has seen the process of the appearance of new species. But within one kind. LUCA has produced this kind. The Creational Science however enlarges his Evolutionary theory in such a way, that introduces several LUCA-s, namely several kinds each with its own LUCA. The LUCA of the Bible is Adam and Eve. And each with its own species. For example, dog-kind. Within this dog-kind, there are many breeds. Each breed is a different specie inside this kind. The development of variants of SARS-CoV-2, or the way cancers become resistant to chemotherapy:
those examples are called Adaptation, which produces new species, but not new kinds.

DISCUSSION:
Dogs evolved from wolves?! No, that is the hoax. Please see references to peer-review literature presented by Christian Martyr Kent Hovind in his YouTube lectures.

Good people do miracles, bad people do magic. Police execute the criminals, police never murders criminals. But criminals murder people, and policemen.

Dr. Dawkins has said: "I am atheist because there is no proof for God."
It makes zero sense! It is absurd. The less absurd is to say:
"I am atheist because I want to be atheist. The atheists are simply the coolest and richest humans on Earth! And it feels very good, that all proofs for God (made by theists) became debunked by atheists; however, theists insist on their validity."

I am the best creationist. Is that an example of this "christian humility" you keep hearing about?
I think, it is. Look:
1. Creationism is pseudo-science, a totally bad thing.
2. I am the best creationist.
3. Thus, I am the worst man ever walked on the planet.

 

[Altfish]

Why not build yet another straw man argument?

 

[QuestioningMind]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

SIMPLE FACT:
Your mother gave birth to you.
Your grandmother gave birth to your mother.
Your great-grandmother gave birth to your grandmother,
Your great-great-grandmother gave birth to your great-grandmother...

CREATION-DOGMA:
Creationists and the God of the Bible believe that all of your grandmothers
are ordinary people. All your relatives compose the Human-kind with its own
Last Common Ancestor (LCA), the Biblical Adam and Eve. Analogously, all
relatives of monkeys compose the monkey-kind with its own LCA (which is the
very first pair of monkeys). There are no beings, who belong to both those
kinds.

And there are spider-kind with its own LCA (the very first pair of spiders).
There are many LCA-s in the "pseudo-" Science of Creation, compared to only
one LCA in the Theory of Evolution.

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans. I am not a racist! Jesus Christ has died for all species of
humankind.

EVOLUTION-IDEOLOGY:
On the other hand, the Theory of Evolution (the founder is the christian
Charles Darwin) says that the lineage of the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana. And from grandmother Zina - a line of spiders. From
grandmother Veronica - a line of monkeys.
But since they are very distant ancestors (and the very first grandmother was
the simplest unicellular bacterium: the LCA), grandmother Diana was an ordinary fish,
and grandmother Zina is an ordinary spider. Veronica is a monkey in your genus.

The modern bacterium (named Tomy) was produced by his mother Huna, who was
also a bacterium. The bacterium-grandmother Vika has produced Huna, and so on.
All creatures in Tomy's lineage were bacteria.
Why the evolution into humans does take place with some
bacteria but not with the genus of Tomy? And you don't need to tell me the
parable, that "a factory worker can become a factory director, although other
workers are simply unlucky and they will remain unskilled forever." Nature and
biology are not a factory! And this also means that the Theory of Evolution
includes non-computable randomness. Therefore, it is possible that on the best
planet for living nothing special will happen, except the boring life of a
colony of bacteria.

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans.

Really? Now tell me about how red haired humans and brown haired humans are different SPECIES as well! How about blue eyed and brown eyed humans? Are THEY two DIFFRENT species too? Your level of miscomprehension is simply phenomenal.

 

[Yazata]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

I don't think that I want to accept that.

I'm more an adherent of the idea of Verisimilitude, the idea that some theories contain more truth or are closer to the truth than others, even if none of the theories is perfectly correct in all particulars. (Explaining precisely what 'closer to the truth' means and how it works in scientific practice remains a problem for the philosophy of science, so it's a work in progress.)

Truthlikeness (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

It's like accuracy in measurements. Despite the fact that no measurement can have absolutely perfect accuracy, it's clear that some measurements are more accurate than others. The same kind of idea can be applied to mathematical models, to mechanical explanations, to descriptions and to lots of science.

A problem with your axiom arises with the so-called "Pessimistic Induction". This is the idea that there have been no end of theories in the history of science, and subsequent experience has shown that pretty much all of them have been false to some degree or another. The inductive argument asks why we should believe that our contemporary theories are any different. Why should we believe that contemporary science must be the last word on everything?

So, if we accept your Axiom and accept the Pessimistic Induction, we would seem to have an argument that it's better to have no science than to have imperfect work-in-progress science.

I don't personally want to go there. So your argument lost me at the first line. I'll address the rest of your post in a subsequent post as this is getting long.

 

[Revoltingest]

Clearly, you've not watched my family's home movies.
Uncle Bob....

 

[Polymath257]

A very good example of NOT comprehending evolution.

 

[QuestioningMind]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

SIMPLE FACT:
Your mother gave birth to you.
Your grandmother gave birth to your mother.
Your great-grandmother gave birth to your grandmother,
Your great-great-grandmother gave birth to your great-grandmother...

CREATION-DOGMA:
Creationists and the God of the Bible believe that all of your grandmothers
are ordinary people. All your relatives compose the Human-kind with its own
Last Common Ancestor (LCA), the Biblical Adam and Eve. Analogously, all
relatives of monkeys compose the monkey-kind with its own LCA (which is the
very first pair of monkeys). There are no beings, who belong to both those
kinds.

And there are spider-kind with its own LCA (the very first pair of spiders).
There are many LCA-s in the "pseudo-" Science of Creation, compared to only
one LCA in the Theory of Evolution.

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans.

Oh, I got another one! Are humans with innie belly buttons a different species that humans with outie belly buttons?

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans. I am not a racist! Jesus Christ has died for all species of
humankind.

EVOLUTION-IDEOLOGY:
On the other hand, the Theory of Evolution (the founder is the christian
Charles Darwin) says that the lineage of the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana. And from grandmother Zina - a line of spiders. From
grandmother Veronica - a line of monkeys.
But since they are very distant ancestors (and the very first grandmother was
the simplest unicellular bacterium: the LCA), grandmother Diana was an ordinary fish,
and grandmother Zina is an ordinary spider. Veronica is a monkey in your genus.

The modern bacterium (named Tomy) was produced by his mother Huna, who was
also a bacterium. The bacterium-grandmother Vika has produced Huna, and so on.
All creatures in Tomy's lineage were bacteria.
Why the evolution into humans does take place with some
bacteria but not with the genus of Tomy? And you don't need to tell me the
parable, that "a factory worker can become a factory director, although other
workers are simply unlucky and they will remain unskilled forever." Nature and
biology are not a factory! And this also means that the Theory of Evolution
includes non-computable randomness. Therefore, it is possible that on the best
planet for living nothing special will happen, except the boring life of a
colony of bacteria.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

SIMPLE FACT:
Your mother gave birth to you.
Your grandmother gave birth to your mother.
Your great-grandmother gave birth to your grandmother,
Your great-great-grandmother gave birth to your great-grandmother...

CREATION-DOGMA:
Creationists and the God of the Bible believe that all of your grandmothers
are ordinary people. All your relatives compose the Human-kind with its own
Last Common Ancestor (LCA), the Biblical Adam and Eve. Analogously, all
relatives of monkeys compose the monkey-kind with its own LCA (which is the
very first pair of monkeys). There are no beings, who belong to both those
kinds.

And there are spider-kind with its own LCA (the very first pair of spiders).
There are many LCA-s in the "pseudo-" Science of Creation, compared to only
one LCA in the Theory of Evolution.

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans. I am not a racist! Jesus Christ has died for all species of
humankind.

EVOLUTION-IDEOLOGY:
On the other hand, the Theory of Evolution (the founder is the christian
Charles Darwin) says that the lineage of the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana. And from grandmother Zina - a line of spiders. From
grandmother Veronica - a line of monkeys.
But since they are very distant ancestors (and the very first grandmother was
the simplest unicellular bacterium: the LCA), grandmother Diana was an ordinary fish,
and grandmother Zina is an ordinary spider. Veronica is a monkey in your genus.

The modern bacterium (named Tomy) was produced by his mother Huna, who was
also a bacterium. The bacterium-grandmother Vika has produced Huna, and so on.
All creatures in Tomy's lineage were bacteria.
Why the evolution into humans does take place with some
bacteria but not with the genus of Tomy? And you don't need to tell me the
parable, that "a factory worker can become a factory director, although other
workers are simply unlucky and they will remain unskilled forever." Nature and
biology are not a factory! And this also means that the Theory of Evolution
includes non-computable randomness. Therefore, it is possible that on the best
planet for living nothing special will happen, except the boring life of a
colony of bacteria.

I think it is clear to all that logic, biology and the theory of evolution are things you do not comprehend. But thank you for this excellent example supporting that case.

 

[ChristineM]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

SIMPLE FACT:
Your mother gave birth to you.
Your grandmother gave birth to your mother.
Your great-grandmother gave birth to your grandmother,
Your great-great-grandmother gave birth to your great-grandmother...

CREATION-DOGMA:
Creationists and the God of the Bible believe that all of your grandmothers
are ordinary people. All your relatives compose the Human-kind with its own
Last Common Ancestor (LCA), the Biblical Adam and Eve. Analogously, all
relatives of monkeys compose the monkey-kind with its own LCA (which is the
very first pair of monkeys). There are no beings, who belong to both those
kinds.

And there are spider-kind with its own LCA (the very first pair of spiders).
There are many LCA-s in the "pseudo-" Science of Creation, compared to only
one LCA in the Theory of Evolution.

There are many species within each Biblical kind, for example, yellow-skin and
white-skin humans. I am not a racist! Jesus Christ has died for all species of
humankind.

EVOLUTION-IDEOLOGY:
On the other hand, the Theory of Evolution (the founder is the christian
Charles Darwin) says that the lineage of the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana. And from grandmother Zina - a line of spiders. From
grandmother Veronica - a line of monkeys.
But since they are very distant ancestors (and the very first grandmother was
the simplest unicellular bacterium: the LCA), grandmother Diana was an ordinary fish,
and grandmother Zina is an ordinary spider. Veronica is a monkey in your genus.

The modern bacterium (named Tomy) was produced by his mother Huna, who was
also a bacterium. The bacterium-grandmother Vika has produced Huna, and so on.
All creatures in Tomy's lineage were bacteria.
Why the evolution into humans does take place with some
bacteria but not with the genus of Tomy? And you don't need to tell me the
parable, that "a factory worker can become a factory director, although other
workers are simply unlucky and they will remain unskilled forever." Nature and
biology are not a factory! And this also means that the Theory of Evolution
includes non-computable randomness. Therefore, it is possible that on the best
planet for living nothing special will happen, except the boring life of a
colony of bacteria.

And again

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Clearly, you've not watched my family's home movies.
Uncle Bob....

What is sad is that Uncle Bob here probably wasn't duped into thinking that Reno 911 video was real.

 

[questfortruth]

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one.

I don't think that I want to accept that.

I am rewriting:

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one. Hereby to know that theory is certainly false, and to know what is false with it and what place in the theory is false, but to pretend that it is not false.

 

[viole]

SIMPLE FACT:
Your mother gave birth to you.
Your grandmother gave birth to your mother.
Your great-grandmother gave birth to your grandmother,
Your great-great-grandmother gave birth to your great-grandmother...

Simple fact.

- Nobody can say, between two pictures of you taken 2 seconds apart, which one is the older you
- Same for all pictures taken every two seconds after your birth
- Ergo, nobody can say the difference between you today and when you were born

And the theory that we grow up is utter nonsense,

Ciao

- viole

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I am rewriting:

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one. Hereby to know that theory is certainly false, and to know what is false with it and what place in the theory is false, but to pretend that it is not false.

Is it really? Newton's theory on gravity is incomplete (false in a sense), but it got us very far and is still useful.

Looks like your logic fails again.

 

[Revoltingest]

What is sad is that Uncle Bob here probably wasn't duped into thinking that Reno 911 video was real.

Bob is woke.
Nuthin gets past'm.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I am rewriting:

AXIOM: It is better to have no theory than to have a false one. Hereby to know that theory is certainly false, and to know what is false with it and what place in the theory is false, but to pretend that it is not false.

On top of that, you have failed in every attempt to show that the theory you hate based on ideological reasons and ignorance is false.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Bob is woke.
Nuthin gets past'm.

He is another Matt LeBlanc.

 

[questfortruth]

the theory you hate based on ideological reasons

This "ideology" is not ideology, but my religion -- Christianity.

 

[Yazata]

I'll accept your "Christian-Dogma" section as an accurate account of Biblical "kinds".

EVOLUTION-IDEOLOGY:
On the other hand, the Theory of Evolution (the founder is the christian
Charles Darwin) says that the lineage of the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana.

That's ridiculous on its face. But I'll accept the underlying idea that biological evolutionary thought does think that if we trace back the phylogeny of both fish and humans, we will indeed arrive at a common ancestor. (Or perhaps a single ancestral population.)

Since early fish seem to have been the ancestors of land tetrapods, the common ancestor of both would seem to have been a very early chordate of some kind.

And from grandmother Zina - a line of spiders.

You would have to go back a lot farther to find a common ancestor of chordates and arthropods. Probably back to the early "Cambrian explosion"

But since they are very distant ancestors (and the very first grandmother was
the simplest unicellular bacterium: the LCA)

Yes, the current idea is that all life on Earth is descended from LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor. It needn't be a particular cell, it probably was a population of very similar cells. I have no good reason to doubt this account and think that it explains the similarity of all Earth life down at the cellular level.

The modern bacterium (named Tomy) was produced by his mother Huna, who was
also a bacterium. The bacterium-grandmother Vika has produced Huna, and so on.
All creatures in Tomy's lineage were bacteria.

LUCA might not have been a bacterium. It might have been something simpler. It's presumably what both the bacterial and archaean lines diverged from at some unknown early date.

Why the evolution into humans does take place with some
bacteria but not with the genus of Tomy? And you don't need to tell me the
parable, that "a factory worker can become a factory director, although other
workers are simply unlucky and they will remain unskilled forever." Nature and
biology are not a factory!

Yes, that's a very good question. If life has evolved tremendously since the appearance of bacteria, and if evolution selects for evolutionary fitness, why do bacteria still exist? All of the later developments would presumably have superior fitness, right?

My reply would be to observe that there has been lots of evolution in the bacterial lines. We still call them "bacteria" largely because they all share the same simple prokaryotic cellular anatomy. But bacterial evolution hasn't been a matter of acquiring an ever more sophisticated anatomy -- teeth, claws, feathers or brains. Bacteral evolution has been biochemical evolution.

Bacterial cells are far more diverse than our eukaryotic cells in the kind of biochemistry that they can undertake. So that bacteria can occupy all sorts of ecological niches that are impossible for other organisms.

There are even bacteria living deep inside tiny voids in the rocks of the Earth almost as deep as the Earth's crust goes. Some of them may have been isolated down there for most of the history of life on Earth. They survive because they don't require the kind of conditions that life like us requires and they have the ability to metabolize the minerals that surround them.

Mysterious Microbes Found Deep in Earth's Crust | Live Science

Here on Earth's surface, bacteria have survived almost everywhere, largely because of their metabolic efficiency and adaptability. And that's almost certainly the result of evolution. Admittedly evolution will be hard to trace in bacteria. For one thing they all look alike, more or less. It's only the last few decades that microbiologists have been able to examine them at the genomic level. Even at that "molecular bar-code" level, there are complicating factors like horizontal gene transfer. But even if it's difficult or even impossible to trace clear phylogenies/family-trees among bacteria, we can be reasonably sure that they have been evolving over the last 3.5 billion years.

And this also means that the Theory of Evolution
includes non-computable randomness.

Yes, I think that's almost certainly true. If we reran the history of life on Earth, from the origin of life to today, the result would probably be totally different the second time. There's probably a chaotic aspect to it.

Therefore, it is possible that on the best planet for living nothing special will happen, except the boring life of a colony of bacteria.

Again I agree. I suspect that the initial appearance of life might have been a fortuitious event. Life might be very rare out there in the universe. (Biologists still need a good definition of what the word 'life' means before exobiologists can hope to even recognize hypothetical alien varieties.)

Then we can't just assume that evolutionary history on planets with life will lead to beings like us. There's lots of directions that evolution can go, a huge possibility space.

That's why it's my guess that intelligent life is very rare out in the universe and why I believe that alien extraterrestrial life might be far more alien than we expect.

 

[questfortruth]

Newton's theory on gravity is incomplete (false in a sense)

but to pretend that it is not false

 

[questfortruth]

the modern fish is originated from
your grandmother Diana

That's ridiculous on its face.

It is ridiculous in simple wording, and it is science fact in scientific wording.