Creationists -- Please answer David Attenborough for me...

[Hockeycowboy]

So you believe God made the organism in the OP with it's complex life history, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences...all of which allow it to afflict humans in terrible ways. Thanks for clarifying.

Of course that now leads to some obvious issues, namely....what kind of God intentionally designs such horrible things? In any other circumstance we would call such an act "evil", wouldn't we?

Why did you omit the rest of my post? I think I explained it clearly.

 

[Jose Fly]

Why did you omit the rest of my post? I think I explained it clearly.

Dude, first of all you're the last person who should complain about people not including the entire posts when replying. I mean, you just did that yourself.

Second, I don't see how "Now, if they said God made every species, then I don’t agree. I believe Jehovah created the families , equivalent to the Hebrew ‘baramin’, and from within those families, species diversified." adds anything to the question at hand about the specific life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences in the organism in the OP.

As you can see in this thread, a number of folks here are also noting how your statements on that question are kinda all over the place and self-contradictory. So at the very least, you've created a bit of confusion, haven't you? Therefore, in the interest of clarity, how about you clearly state in your reply to me how you think the specific life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences that the organism uses to do what it does came to be? Do you believe God created those things? Do you believe they arose via natural means? Something else?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I objected to this? If so, I must have misread the statement.

Now, if they said God made every species, then I don’t agree. I believe Jehovah created the families , equivalent to the Hebrew ‘baramin’, and from within those families, species diversified.

Families, ey?


Onchocercidae - Wikipedia

That's the family of the worm we are talking about.

This family includes some of the most devastating human parasitic diseases, such as lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, loiasis, and other filariases.

Here's the superfamily (which, according to your creationistic beliefs, is a level ABOVE the one in which your god created all the species)

Filarioidea - Wikipedia

The Filarioidea are a superfamily of highly specialised parasitic nematodes.[2][3]

In other words, species of this on the family level, that you claim were created by your god, and above, are highly specialised parasitic species.


But wait, there's more....
Let's move up yet another level, the order. So now we are TWO tiers above the one you believe was created by your god.

Rhabditida - Wikipedia

Rhabditida is an order of free-living, zooparasitic, and phytoparasitic microbivorous nematodes living in soil.

Oeps. These are still micro-parasites.

Whoepsie, doepsie.


You may commence your dodging, backpeddaling and excuse making now.
Don't forget to just shed out a bunch of assertions and last but not least - make sure to not even attempt to support a single one.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why did you omit the rest of my post? I think I explained it clearly.

You explained it clearly.

So clearly that it really was ridiculously easy to completely dismantle your nonsense as all it took was showing that the family this worm belongs to, consists of all kinds of similar nasty parasitic worms.
And the same goes for the level above that. And the level above that.


Whoops.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yep

Who can argue with that kind of reasoning? Straw man after straw man, beaten to death...did that make you feel better? You answered nothing.

What were the strawmen? Please point them out.

This is not our planet....we are just the tenants and there were rules governing our tenancy

This claim requires evidence. (ps: pointing to the book from which you are parrotting these claims, is not evidence)

Life here was supposed to be enjoyable, peaceful and pleasant, with the human race tending it and keeping things in order.

This claim also requires evidence.

Perhaps you need to watch Michael Moore's documentary on "Capitalism"....you will get a glimpse into how deluded the general public can be.

I saw that documentary and thought it was really good. I always enjoy Moore's docu's. He has a talent of putting his finger in an open wound.

in a world ruled by the devil exploiting their self interest and gullibility

This claim requires evidence.

But you don't believe in him either.....oh well.

Why would I?
You don't believe in Thor. What of it?

You can't fight an enemy that you don't believe exists....

You also can't fight an enemy that you believe exists but really doesn't.
In fact, it will only result in a ghost chase, while the real issues are left unchecked.

There are only two sides in this battle for the hearts and minds of men.....if you have chosen your side, then that is your decision to make.

Now, you're just preaching.

I will side with Creator and abide by his rules....that is my choice.
I look forward to the outcome predicted by the Bible.....what outcome are you anticipating?

The same outcome that's been "predicted" for the last 2000 years by the apocalyptic doomsday people. Nothing at all.

The world at present is in its death throes.....under the burden of fires, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, war, political chaos, economic mismanagement....not to mention rampant crime, drug addiction and violence, to the point where emergency service workers are threatened and attacked every day......don't you just love a world without God....?

Isn't it funny how these things are much much more of an issue in countries that are highly religious / dogmatic?

Secular democracies with low religiosity, tend to have far less crime and violence etc.

There aren't any mass shootings every other day in old europe, for example.



Having said that: congratz, you managed to not address a single point I made in the post you are replying to. In any case, I'm looking forward to you pointing out my supposed strawmen and explaining how they are strawmen + all the evidence for those bare claims you made. Yet, I'm not holding my breath

 

[nPeace]

Creation also means...

I only agree with David Attenborough, on one thing - The worm evolved from other worms.
This has never been an argument against creation.
It's still a worm, and would never become a scorpion, living in the eye.

What I don't agree with, which I find many people tend to misunderstand, is the thought of God creating every species.
Why would anyone think that - especially after reading Genesis 1, which clearly says living things reproduced "according to their kinds"?

Today, we have so many variety of living things. How did they get that way? Many ways. We now know about HGT. Can things go wrong during the process of evolution? Absolutely obvious.

So I think people start off with a misunderstanding, and end with a misunderstanding. They start wrong, and end wrong.

 

[nPeace]

.....lets dig a little deeper.....

The worm that David Attenborough alluded to is "Onchocerca" and is the cause of River Blindness. It is probably an adapted species as he suggests, which infects only the eyes of humans and some primates.

For those of us who are believers in an Intelligent Creator, it seems obvious that this lifeform is not a direct creation of God. Not every creature is, so Mr Attenborough is mistaken there, as are many YEC's. No intelligent designer creates things that destroy his own handiwork. In his original creation setting, no creature was intended to harm another....and there was no fear of man.

The only creatures who ate flesh were the carrion birds, animals and insects...nature's clean-up crew.

How and why do creatures adapt?...a change in environment is often the trigger. When humans were evicted from their paradise home, their environment changed dramatically. Humans themselves became victims of genetic changes as a result of the penalty imposed for their defection. Both may have contributed to the way creatures adapted for their own survival.

In that setting, many species may have been created simply as an adaptive response to changed conditions. Humans chose this route and its consequences.....God did not interfere.

Couple that with the fact that poor countries like Africa and Latin-America, (whose standards of living were not conducive to health and well-being,) were the most affected areas and there we have another reason for widespread infection. Some cultural practices can also be to blame, as we saw in the spread of Ebola.

Malnourishment lowers immunity and low standards of hygiene would also be a contributing factor to the spread of many diseases.
The fact is, that when measures are taken to eliminate the black fly and interfere with its breeding cycle were implemented in South America, many nations have eradicated the problem. Africa, as the continent of the poorest people on earth, are still targets of this disease because they cannot afford the measures to help control the spread of it.
So don't blame God for these problems...blame humans for providing the conditions that keep these diseases from being controlled.

Wealthy pharma companies could help to provide the medicine necessary at no cost...because they can afford to....but they won't.

Wealthy nations could help supply better nourishment for the poor in these nations...but they don't do enough. They actually waste what would feed all those people.
How much governmental spending is also wasted on military weapons and politicians' political campaigns and lifestyles?

Sponsorship programs where a child is given the means to gain an education and to live a better life, do not filter down to all the deserving children affected by poverty and disease. Aid agencies are overwhelmed by the problems.

Humans have caused these problems way more than God ever did. They caused the changed environments that caused these creatures to adapt for their own survival.

The Creator has stepped back to show humans how inept they really are without him. But soon he promises to step in and repair the damage, to eradicate sickness and suffering and eliminate from existence all who think man's ways are superior.

Put the blame where it really lies......that is how I would answer David Attenborough.....

I would have thought that would be obvious, since we see it happening before our eyes.
No one thinks diseases arrive here by magicians, or witch doctors... except for those misled by superstitious beliefs.

 

[Jose Fly]

I only agree with David Attenborough, on one thing - The worm evolved from other worms.

Does that include it's complex life history, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences?

 

[nPeace]

Does that include it's complex life history, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences?

Did you read the rest of the post?
I am wondering why you would ask that if you did, and since this is not the first time I have given my views on this, or conversed with you on it.

 

[Jose Fly]

Did you read the rest of the post?

Yes. Nothing in it constitutes a specific explanation for how you believe the complex life history, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences of the organism in the OP arose.

I am wondering why you would ask that if you did, and since this is not the first time I have given my views on this, or conversed with you on it.

And this is not the first time you've been very evasive when asked to clearly state how you believe specific things came to be. You can easily clear this up, by explaining....

1) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the life history traits of the organism in the OP came to be?

2) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the biochemical pathways of the organism in the OP came to be?

3) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the genetic sequences of the organism in the OP came to be?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I only agree with David Attenborough, on one thing - The worm evolved from other worms.
This has never been an argument against creation.
It's still a worm, and would never become a scorpion, living in the eye.

What I don't agree with, which I find many people tend to misunderstand, is the thought of God creating every species.
Why would anyone think that - especially after reading Genesis 1, which clearly says living things reproduced "according to their kinds"?

Today, we have so many variety of living things. How did they get that way? Many ways. We now know about HGT. Can things go wrong during the process of evolution? Absolutely obvious.

So I think people start off with a misunderstanding, and end with a misunderstanding. They start wrong, and end wrong.

The misunderstanding, I'm afraid, is mostly on your part. Or would you care to provide some bona fides about your qualifications in the life sciences, and in particular, biology and evolution?

But where you get it spectacularly wrong -- and I'm truly surprised you wrote it -- is saying, first, that "the worm evolved from other worms...and would never become a scorpion." In this, you deny the possibility of new species arising out of other species. BUT THEN, you go on to say that you don't agree that "God creat[ed] every species." Well then --- where did they come from?

And the fact that you bring up HGT (Horizontal Gene Transfer) is completely irrelevant -- it is merely one of the mechanism by which genetic information gets modified, to be passed on (successfully or not) to offspring. In other words, HGT is just a part of the great splendour of evolution.

 

[Deeje]

For the record, and in spite of how much you think you've learned from the Bible -- neither do you.

We have a complete answer because, nothing comes from nothing......'something' (a demonstrably intelligent power, presently unknown to human science) created all we see.....science hasn't got a clue how anything got here. Their wild speculations and assumptions are based on nothing concrete....its all guesswork. Their ideas are subject to change at any time. If you want to stake your life and future on that, then that is your prerogative.

Most of the ones who reject God have done so because of what YEC "Christians" have blindly asserted. Does it ever occur to any of you that both of these competing camps may well be wrong? There is reasonable middle ground that accommodates both true science (not unprovable theoretical science) and the Bible. It gives us an Intelligent Designer whose work exhibits purpose, and which makes our existence here also purposeful. We as a unique species are the only ones to desire to know our purpose here. We know that we are not accidents of nature because we instinctively know there is a meaning to life. It did not just 'poof' itself in to existence accidently......to assume this, is to demonstrate a total lack of intelligence IMO.

 

[nPeace]

The misunderstanding, I'm afraid, is mostly on your part. Or would you care to provide some bona fides about your qualifications in the life sciences, and in particular, biology and evolution?

But where you get it spectacularly wrong -- and I'm truly surprised you wrote it -- is saying, first, that "the worm of evolved from other worms...and would never become a scorpion." In this, you deny the possibility of new species arising out of other species. BUT THEN, you go on to say that you don't agree that "God creat[ed] every species." Well then --- where did they come from?

And the fact that you bring up HGT (Horizontal Gene Transfer) is completely irrelevant -- it is merely one of the mechanism by which genetic information gets modified, to be passed on (successfully or not) to offspring. In other words, HGT is just a part of the great splendour of evolution.

What was your OP about? Responding to Mr. Attenborough. Did I do that?

If you think the misunderstanding is on my part, that is okay.
Right now, you along with @Jose Fly seem not to understand what you read, which tells me, that if those few simple English words are so hard to understand, then it would make no sense me saying anything more.

Anything you want to understand, on this, is found on the thread you abandoned - Evolution My ToE. You had the opportunity there.
I have no desire to repeat myself on a long journey to nowhere.

...you go on to say that you don't agree that "God creat[ed] every species." Well then --- where did they come from?
Duh. Are these threads created for "Let's play that record again"? Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat until the "Big Freeze", or "Big Crunch", or...

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

We have a complete answer because, nothing comes from nothing......'something' (a demonstrably intelligent power, presently unknown to human science) created all we see.....

Hee-hee! Gotta love it! In one breath you say "nothing comes from nothing" and then immediately that "'something' created it all."

If you can't see why that's too funny...

 

[Jose Fly]

If you want to stake your life and future on that, then that is your prerogative.

Wow, talk about a revealing comment! Clearly to Deeje (and likely the other Witnesses here), this entire debate has nothing to do with data, lab experiments, field work, statistical analyses, or any of the other empirical things those of us on the science side see as important and compelling. No, to Deeje and her ilk this is about their eternal future, which is entirely consistent with Jehovah's Witness's teaching....

The Watchtower: Should I Believe in Evolution?

WHY IT MATTERS

If evolution is true, life has no lasting purpose. If creation is true, we can find satisfying answers to questions about life and the future.​

That's it, right there in a nutshell. That's why the debates about science never go anywhere or accomplish much of anything. They don't care about or value the science. It's just something they cite when they think it suits them, but will casually discard when it doesn't. This is about one thing and one thing only....their religious beliefs, and specifically their belief that "if evolution is true, life has no purpose".

Yet for some reason I can't figure out, they'll also go to great lengths to deny this blatantly obvious fact, as if they're ashamed of their religion.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What was your OP about? Responding to Mr. Attenborough. Did I do that?

If you think the misunderstanding is on my part, that is okay.
Right now, you along with @Jose Fly seem not to understand what you read, which tells me, that if those few simple English words are so hard to understand, then it would make no sense me saying anything more.

Anything you want to understand, on this, is found on the thread you abandoned - Evolution My ToE. You had the opportunity there.
I have no desire to repeat myself on a long journey to nowhere.

...you go on to say that you don't agree that "God creat[ed] every species." Well then --- where did they come from?
Duh. Are these threads created for "Let's play that record again"? Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat until the "Big Freeze", or "Big Crunch", or...

Well, you see, you continue to make the same baseless claims -- claims that refute what is known through millions of hours of solid science and research, without ever bothering to show even the remotest bit of (here it comes) EVIDENCE for your claims. And when you do, I simply call you on it.

So why don't you consider providing a single, solitary piece of actual, testable evidence for you claims, instead of just making them and hoping somebody will just accept them?

This is the big trick of evil politicians everywhere, too -- the terrible truth that "if you state something often enough as fact, people will eventually believe it, even when it's false."

Well, I'm not one of those people.

So once again, I tell you that I've read a great deal of the research and science of evolution. And while I am not a scientist, I can understand what it says. And I also tell you that I've read Behe and others, and I've also been able to understand what they've said -- and where they have made claims that they cannot justify scientifically. And at that point, I know I'm safe to flip them off.

So again, bring on the evidence. Though I know you will simply bring on the claims (again and again and again), desperately hoping for belief. You won't get it here.

 

[Jose Fly]

What was your OP about? Responding to Mr. Attenborough. Did I do that?

If you think the misunderstanding is on my part, that is okay.
Right now, you along with @Jose Fly seem not to understand what you read, which tells me, that if those few simple English words are so hard to understand, then it would make no sense me saying anything more.

Anything you want to understand, on this, is found on the thread you abandoned - Evolution My ToE. You had the opportunity there.
I have no desire to repeat myself on a long journey to nowhere.

...you go on to say that you don't agree that "God creat[ed] every species." Well then --- where did they come from?
Duh. Are these threads created for "Let's play that record again"? Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat until the "Big Freeze", or "Big Crunch", or...

More evasiveness and dodging. If you were truly interested in clarity and helping people understand your POV, you wouldn't act this way and would instead explain....

1) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the life history traits of the organism in the OP came to be?

2) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the biochemical pathways of the organism in the OP came to be?

3) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the genetic sequences of the organism in the OP came to be?​

That you go out of your way to avoid answering clearly indicates that for whatever reason, you don't want to. You've done this so consistently and repeatedly, the only question now is....why? IMO, it's because on some level you understand the conundrum you're in. You can't say God made those things, because that would make God evil. But you can't say completely natural evolutionary mechanisms were responsible either, because that would negate ID creationism's primary argument (evolution can't generate those sorts of complex things).

So all you have left is to dodge and equivocate until the thread gets long enough, at which point you'll claim "I already answered" but (again) won't show where or re-state the answers. I suppose that's the sort of thing advocacy of creationism forces you to do.

 

[nPeace]

Well, you see, you continue to make the same baseless claims -- claims that refute what is known through millions of hours of solid science and research, without ever bothering to show even the remotest bit of (here it comes) EVIDENCE for your claims. And when you do, I simply call you on it.

So why don't you consider providing a single, solitary piece of actual, testable evidence for you claims, instead of just making them and hoping somebody will just accept them?

This is the big trick of evil politicians everywhere, too -- the terrible truth that "if you state something often enough as fact, people will eventually believe it, even when it's false."

Well, I'm not one of those people.

So once again, I tell you that I've read a great deal of the research and science of evolution. And while I am not a scientist, I can understand what it says. And I also tell you that I've read Behe and others, and I've also been able to understand what they've said -- and where they have made claims that they cannot justify scientifically. And at that point, I know I'm safe to flip them off.

So again, bring on the evidence. Though I know you will simply bring on the claims (again and again and again), desperately hoping for belief. You won't get it here.

Everything you said here are baseless claims, except for a portion of the second last paragraph.

 

[nPeace]

More evasiveness and dodging. If you were truly interested in clarity and helping people understand your POV, you wouldn't act this way and would instead explain....

1) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the life history traits of the organism in the OP came to be?

2) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the biochemical pathways of the organism in the OP came to be?

3) By what specific mechanisms and processes do you believe the genetic sequences of the organism in the OP came to be?​

That you go out of your way to avoid answering clearly indicates that for whatever reason, you don't want to. You've done this so consistently and repeatedly, the only question now is....why? IMO, it's because on some level you understand the conundrum you're in. You can't say God made those things, because that would make God evil. But you can't say completely natural evolutionary mechanisms were responsible either, because that would negate ID creationism's primary argument (evolution can't generate those sorts of complex things).

So all you have left is to dodge and equivocate until the thread gets long enough, at which point you'll claim "I already answered" but (again) won't show where or re-state the answers. I suppose that's the sort of thing advocacy of creationism forces you to do.

Wow. You just clarified that talking to you about this. .. I may as well shut down my computer, and go talk to a tree outside.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Dude, first of all you're the last person who should complain about people not including the entire posts when replying. I mean, you just did that yourself.

I will when you misconstrue my meaning. Did I misunderstand your meaning?

I don’t think so (there’s the difference). If I did, I’m sorry.

As you can see in this thread, a number of folks here are also noting how your statements on that question are kinda all over the place and self-contradictory.

What? 2 people?

(Others seem to understand.)

Where am I contradictory? Please, point it out.