Darwin's Illusion

[YoursTrue]

So you are not sure, yet you are sure about evolution.

Beyond what the Bible says, no, neither I nor anyone else can distinctly and positively say what happened. That's right. Only God the Creator can say how life came about in a technical sense, and it is not his purpose to describe that to mankind. And the ToE, particularly that which follows the Darwinian model, does not make sense any more to me, one reason is that I have come to realize it is speculation. Another reason is that like me, nobody has seen a new species evolve. Ever. (And that by "natural selection.")

 

[gnostic]

Beyond what the Bible says, no, neither I nor anyone else can distinctly and positively say what happened. That's right. Only God the Creator can say how life came about in a technical sense, and it is not his purpose to describe that to mankind.

There is nothing “technical” about using the old superstition saying “God did it”.

“God did it”, isn’t an explanation for anything, let alone creating life.

Only fools believe that a human come from dust of the ground, soil, that are brought to life, simply because God blew air into man-shaped dust or soil.

Humans sprouting from the ground, have been recorded in Egyptian and Sumerian, as far back as mid to late 3rd millennium BCE, especially made from clay (soil).

In the Egyptian myth from the cities of Esna and of Elephantine, humans were made from clay and water, shaped by the ram-headed god Khnum on his potter’s wheel. The images of Khnum using a potter wheel appeared in paintings and relief sculptures.

In another Egyptian myth, from Heliopolis, the god Atum or the later sun god Ra, shed some tears that fallen to the ground, humans sprung from them.

There are a number of variations of Sumerian myths, where gods created humans from clay.

In the story of the hoe (Song of the Hoe), Enlil used a farming instrument, the hoe, cutting opening ground, which reveal the heads of humans.

In Enki and Ninmah, the god and goddess compete in creating humans.

There are other stories, perhaps the same one, but started with Enki (in Akkadian-Babylonian, his name was translated to Ea) creating humans with the help of mother goddesses, including Ninhursag (Akkadian-Babylonian Belet-lli). Enki would cut and mold the clay into shapes, while the goddesses brought primeval water of Abzu (Akkadian-Babylonian Aspu).

In the Old Babylonian Epic of Atrahasis, Ea used clay, and the blood of sacrificed god of intelligence, not water, to created humans.

Even the hero Enkidu, a companion of Gilgamesh, was made from clay and water.

These myths predated all known versions of the Abrahamic creation myths (eg Genesis 2, the Qur’an). There is nothing unique about.

What creationists don’t seem to understand, whether it be silt soil or clay soil, soils have something in common, they are made from minerals known as silicate, rock minerals broken and wore down by weathering. The most common types of silicates found in all types of soils are - feldspar, mica and quartz.

The more granular sandy soil, are made from quartz. The less granular silt can either be made from quartz or feldspar. While the more powdery when dry or more plasticity when wet, the mineral origin of clay is mica.

There are no organic matters in soils, unless it is introduced into the soil by the following:

• bacteria,
• or decomposing of dead animals or dead plants,
• or from urine and fece of animals,
• or from shedding of hair, fur or skin of animals.

None of these silicate minerals are found in human body, not even in trace amount.

Plus, humans have always being naturally reproduced and born, they don’t come sprouting out of the ground. Only some with no education in science (like biology) would believe in such myths with “god did it” superstition.

 

[gnostic]

Again -- changes over time do not mean (ok, prove, but I'm using the word as in demonstrate for real) they evolved per the Darwinian model. Viruses remain viruses. No matter. They don't evolve to anything but a virus. Monkeys so far remain monkeys. Etc. And there are some very colorful bugs. But they remain bugs or whatever the scientific name is for them.

Excuse me, YoursTrue.

All living organisms have something in common, they have cells. From unicellular organisms - like species of bacteria and species of archaea - to multicellular organisms, like animals, plants and fungi, they all have cells.

What bacteria and archaea have in common is type of cell that don't have any nucleus and no organelle, and type of cell is called prokaryotic cell, the organisms with these cells, are called prokaryotes.

Cells that have nucleus and at least one organelle inside a single cell, is called eukaryotic cell, so organisms with eukaryotic cells, are known as "eukaryotes".

Viruses aren't living organisms, because they don't have cells. Viruses are biological agents and they do have some biological compounds that also exist in living organisms, eg viruses do have proteins and nucleic acid, eg RNA, DNA, but these viruses are not alive, as I reiterate, they don't have cells. They are infecting agents, that infect cells of organisms (hosts), they can even infect bacteria.

As they infect the cells, they can make organisms, like animals sick, develop viral infection or even viral disease. But viruses can also change the cell, acting as catalyst for mutations.

When the virus isn't infecting the host's cell, they are actually called "virion", not virus. They are only called "virus" when they have already the agent have infected the host.

Viruses can undergo mutation, as they have RNA. When the proteins changed, viruses can pass the mutation to different strains of that viruses.

When they do mutate, they develop into different strains. They are referred to as strains, not species.

People often confused viruses with bacteria.

Bacteria have prokaryotic cells. Bacteria are living organisms.

Virions and viruses don't have cells of their own, but they can infect cells of host organisms, including infecting bacteria.

You said you were very good in learning and understanding the theory of Evolution because you did well in high school exam, but if you don't even know what a virus is, then you don't understand biology as well as you believe you do.

 

[LIIA]

Now do I think or believe that God created defects, as, for instance, a baby born without limbs or brain damaged? No. He did not make such things

If you believe in God, then you believe that everything in existence other than God is a creation of God. No exception.

If you believe that things (such as pathogen, parasite, disease, pest, volcano, earthquake, tsunami, hurricanes, tornado, extreme weather, venomous insects/snakes, poisonous plants, etc.) may happen or exist without being created by God, then you have a belief, but you don’t believe in God.

All of this boils down to the typical repeated question “if God is all good, why there is evil”, this can be a separate discussion beyond the subject of this thread.

 

[LIIA]

How do you know that there is a need for an explanation

The principle of causality.

How do you connect your thinking to the absolute one? How do you know that your thinking is correct and not just in you mind?

Every time you repeated “How”, you acknowledged the principle of causality and the need for explanation. Causality is a self-evident logical principle that governs all entities (of all kinds) in our realm. Without it, there wouldn’t be any basis/meaning to our argument now or any other argument of any kind. Causality is a fact/rule. But causality as well as all known laws within our contingent realm breaks down just beyond the BB. Our realm (universe) is a contingent being governed by causality in its entirety, as well as the individual contingent entities within.

The chain of causality (of contingent beings) either breaks/ends at a non-contingent being (first cause) or continues in an infinite regression that moves the question back in time infinitely rather than answering it, hence the question always continues to be in need of an explanation (which will never be provided), once the time stops beyond BB, the logically fallacious infinite regress chain breaks.

Without a non-contingent absolute to give rise to possibilities, there are no possibilities of any kind. Without the absolute existence (the reference), there is no relative existence. Relative entities are not explainable without being grounded in the absolute.

Now connect that I love my wife but no other human in that sense to the absolute one.

You may experience love but you’re not the reference for love. You’re the reference only for your relative experience of love.

Love is a mental state/experience of consciousness that is incompatible with naturalism; material cannot give rise to love or any conscious experience (Qualia) of any kind.

 

[YoursTrue]

If you believe in God, then you believe that everything in existence other than God is a creation of God. No exception.

If you believe that things (such as pathogen, parasite, disease, pest, volcano, earthquake, tsunami, hurricanes, tornado, extreme weather, venomous insects/snakes, poisonous plants, etc.) may happen or exist without being created by God, then you have a belief, but you don’t believe in God.

All of this boils down to the typical repeated question “if God is all good, why there is evil”, this can be a separate discussion beyond the subject of this thread.

Nope, sorry, but God allows things. He doesn't generate everything, meaning He does not cause deformities, but allows genetics imperfect as they are now, to take their toll. There's a difference. He made the first two humans perfect, no flaw. They did not have to die. He allowed Adam and Eve to choose for themselves, He also set the boundaries. While God can see in the future, He can decide what He wants to see and what He chooses not to see insofar as choices, since He is omnipotent, He can choose what He wants to foretell and what He does not. God does not cause rape or murder or birth defects. He allows such things now, but this will not happen forever because there is a new heavens and earth to come. (Revelation 21:1-5) No more sorrow, sickness, or death.

 

[YoursTrue]

If you believe in God, then you believe that everything in existence other than God is a creation of God. No exception.

If you believe that things (such as pathogen, parasite, disease, pest, volcano, earthquake, tsunami, hurricanes, tornado, extreme weather, venomous insects/snakes, poisonous plants, etc.) may happen or exist without being created by God, then you have a belief, but you don’t believe in God.

All of this boils down to the typical repeated question “if God is all good, why there is evil”, this can be a separate discussion beyond the subject of this thread.

Sorry also, in reference to evolution, God allows disturbed genetics to take place in humans and animals. There's a difference between causing bad things and allowing them. He also allows different religions to exist. He doesn't cause them.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah well -- how about this? File:Reconstruction of Neanderthal woman.jpg - Wikimedia Commons
She must have cut her hair sometimes. Like hair coming out of her "recessed" forehead...lol...what a joke. But they lasted hundreds of thousands of years but couldn't figure to make combs I guess.

 

[LIIA]

Nope, sorry, but God allows things. He doesn't generate everything, meaning He does not cause deformities, but allows genetics imperfect as they are now, to take their toll. There's a difference. He made the first two humans perfect, no flaw. They did not have to die. He allowed Adam and Eve to choose for themselves

I know your view. I know you blame Adam for genetic imperfections, birth defects, a baby born without limbs or brain damaged, etc. That is why I didn’t mention anything related to genetic inheritance in my response #2344. I only mentioned other things that can be also perceived as evil creations, which evidently cause suffering/devastation to mankind without having anything to do with birth defects or imperfect genetic inheritance from Adam (such as earthquake, volcanoes, tornadoes, etc.), yet you totally ignored it and insisted on the imperfect heredity as the cause. Adam didn’t create these things nor heredity has anything to do with it. In your view, who is the creator of these things other than God?

He also set the boundaries. While God can see in the future, He can decide what He wants to see and what He chooses not to see insofar as choices, since He is omnipotent, He can choose what He wants to foretell and what He does not.

Anything other than God is a creation of God. Space and time are no exception. God is beyond spacetime (The creation doesn’t encompass the creator); whatever is considered to be future relative to our place in time, is not future to God.

On what basis would God selectively choose not to see specific things of our future? Is it merely to avoid any responsibility/guilt for not changing it? Is that logical or consistent with your belief in God?

God does not cause rape or murder or birth defects. He allows such things now, but this will not happen forever

Agreed. We were given the freewill. The “freewill" is our test. The test has its time, space and specific fabric. Its fabric is a unique realm designed to allow all options/choices of all kinds to materialize (otherwise the freewill test wouldn’t be possible).

All options/choices are possible and allowed in this realm, whatever we choose is allowed as long as we are still free, but this freedom will come to an end (Death). God will not interfere with our freedom till the end of our test, the test will bring out who we are then all accounts/justice shall be settled (no exception), then our eternal life will be consistent with who we are (who we proved ourselves to be).

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...
All options/choices are possible and allowed in this realm, whatever we choose is allowed as long as we are still free, but this freedom will come to an end (Death). God will not interfere with our freedom till the end of our test, the test will bring out who we are then all accounts/justice shall be settled (no exception), then our eternal life will be consistent with who we are (who we proved ourselves to be).

Do you believe in any version of Hell and can you tell if somebody is going there?

 

[LIIA]

but this will not happen forever because there is a new heavens and earth to come. (Revelation 21:1-5) No more sorrow, sickness, or death.

Comparative theology/religion is beyond the subject of this thread; it’s better discussed in a separate thread, but I’ll share some thoughts with you.

Don’t you believe that salvation is by God’s grace, but salvation also requires faith and righteous actions consistent with that faith? Meaning, making the specific right choices is a condition/necessity for salvation. IOW, It’s the test of “freewill". No matter how you look at it or what is your religious framework but in essence it always boils down to the test of “freewill”.

If two perfect humans who had true knowledge/direct communication with God, got abundance of everything that they may possibly need and had only a single forbidden fruit, yet disobeyed God and failed the test of “freewill", if this was the case with Adam, then how corrupt, ignorant offspring of Adam who are inclined to sin by nature, live in a continuous struggle for survival, have numerous challenges/ forbidden things, don’t have equal knowledge of God like Adam, can possibly be expected to pass their "freewill" test? What if they fail to make the right choice (to have faith and do righteous actions)? What would happen to them? if they fail, whose fault would that be?

Given their assumed corrupt state/conditions beyond their control, would their test of “freewill" be fair? Is it fair to expect or demand the offspring of Adam to have faith and make the right choices as a condition for salvation?

If God intended perfection for the human race and the universe, can one man change everything from the beginning of creation till now? Can billions of Adam's offspring suffer, die and continue to suffer regardless of God’s intention for them to be perfect and prosperous? Isn’t it a massive failure of God's original plan for the human race? It’s evidently a miserable failure that humans supposedly are paying its price. Is it fair that humans continue to pay the price for that failure till now? Is it justice if billions continue to bear the burden of the wrong action of one man?

Is it logical that God plans/intends something but unexpectedly things turn out to be the total opposite (a massive failure)? Is it because God refuses to see certain future events or be responsible for it?

Is it logical that God design a defected system that immediately goes out of control after Adam and causes billions of innocent offspring to suffer imperfection, corruption and death?

Is it fair or just that billions of humans bear the burden of a single action of one man?

Is it logical that God makes the irresponsible mistake of trusting Adam with the destiny of the entire human race? It’s not a justification to say that God didn’t foresee what would happen. Putting the destiny of the entire mankind in the hands of a single man and allow him to inflect that much misery upon billions of people would be a totally irresponsible wrong action, If God gives Adam that much control over the destiny of the entire human race, WHOSE FAULT IS THAT? ADAM OR GOD?

Every aspect of the “original sin” view is illogical with respect to its implication of false attributes of God.

 

[YoursTrue]

Comparative theology/religion is beyond the subject of this thread; it’s better discussed in a separate thread, but I’ll share some thoughts with you.

Don’t you believe that salvation is by God’s grace, but salvation also requires faith and righteous actions consistent with that faith? Meaning, making the specific right choices is a condition/necessity for salvation. IOW, It’s the test of “freewill". No matter how you look at it or what is your religious framework but in essence it always boils down to the test of “freewill”.

If two perfect humans who had true knowledge/direct communication with God, got abundance of everything that they may possibly need and had only a single forbidden fruit, yet disobeyed God and failed the test of “freewill", if this was the case with Adam, then how corrupt, ignorant offspring of Adam who are inclined to sin by nature, live in a continuous struggle for survival, have numerous challenges/ forbidden things, don’t have equal knowledge of God like Adam, can possibly be expected to pass their "freewill" test? What if they fail to make the right choice (to have faith and do righteous actions)? What would happen to them? if they fail, whose fault would that be?

Given their assumed corrupt state/conditions beyond their control, would their test of “freewill" be fair? Is it fair to expect or demand the offspring of Adam to have faith and make the right choices as a condition for salvation?

If God intended perfection for the human race and the universe, can one man change everything from the beginning of creation till now? Can billions of Adam's offspring suffer, die and continue to suffer regardless of God’s intention for them to be perfect and prosperous? Isn’t it a massive failure of God's original plan for the human race? It’s evidently a miserable failure that humans supposedly are paying its price. Is it fair that humans continue to pay the price for that failure till now? Is it justice if billions continue to bear the burden of the wrong action of one man?

Is it logical that God plans/intends something but unexpectedly things turn out to be the total opposite (a massive failure)? Is it because God refuses to see certain future events or be responsible for it?

Is it logical that God design a defected system that immediately goes out of control after Adam and causes billions of innocent offspring to suffer imperfection, corruption and death?

Is it fair or just that billions of humans bear the burden of a single action of one man?

Is it logical that God makes the irresponsible mistake of trusting Adam with the destiny of the entire human race? It’s not a justification to say that God didn’t foresee what would happen. Putting the destiny of the entire mankind in the hands of a single man and allow him to inflect that much misery upon billions of people would be a totally irresponsible wrong action, If God gives Adam that much control over the destiny of the entire human race, WHOSE FAULT IS THAT? ADAM OR GOD?

Every aspect of the “original sin” view is illogical with respect to its implication of false attributes of God.

1. Do you believe the Biblical account of Adam and Eve?
2. There is a reason God punished Adam and as a result his offspring did not acquire the right to everlasting life as a sheer accident of birth.
3. How many years ago do you think Adam and Eve were created? Approximately, that is.

 

[YoursTrue]

I know your view. I know you blame Adam for genetic imperfections, birth defects, a baby born without limbs or brain damaged, etc. That is why I didn’t mention anything related to genetic inheritance in my response #2344. I only mentioned other things that can be also perceived as evil creations, which evidently cause suffering/devastation to mankind without having anything to do with birth defects or imperfect genetic inheritance from Adam (such as earthquake, volcanoes, tornadoes, etc.), yet you totally ignored it and insisted on the imperfect heredity as the cause. Adam didn’t create these things nor heredity has anything to do with it. In your view, who is the creator of these things other than God?



Anything other than God is a creation of God. Space and time are no exception. God is beyond spacetime (The creation doesn’t encompass the creator); whatever is considered to be future relative to our place in time, is not future to God.

On what basis would God selectively choose not to see specific things of our future? Is it merely to avoid any responsibility/guilt for not changing it? Is that logical or consistent with your belief in God?



Agreed. We were given the freewill. The “freewill" is our test. The test has its time, space and specific fabric. Its fabric is a unique realm designed to allow all options/choices of all kinds to materialize (otherwise the freewill test wouldn’t be possible).

All options/choices are possible and allowed in this realm, whatever we choose is allowed as long as we are still free, but this freedom will come to an end (Death). God will not interfere with our freedom till the end of our test, the test will bring out who we are then all accounts/justice shall be settled (no exception), then our eternal life will be consistent with who we are (who we proved ourselves to be).

Jesus answered part of the question you raise. Here is what he said, and I believe it:

Luke chapter 13 -- "At that time some who were present reported to him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 In reply he said to them: “Do you think that those Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans because they have suffered these things? 3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise be destroyed. 4 Or those 18 on whom the tower in Siloam fell, killing them—do you think that they had greater guilt than all other men who live in Jerusalem? 5 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all be destroyed, as they were.”

Jesus did not say their fate was sealed from the beginning -- he told them to repent. How do you feel about that?

 

[LIIA]

Do you believe in any version of Hell

Yes, the outcome of the test will define the nature of our eternal live.

In a nutshell, the “free will" test will bring out who we are, the test will be followed by a judgment. The ultimate outcome is either success or failure. The final judgment dictates the nature of our eternal life to follow. Who we are does not change; there are no second chances. Justice entails that the nature of our eternal life to be consistent with who we are. Heaven is a domain that is consistent with the nature of those who passed the test. Hell is a domain that is consistent with the nature of those who failed the test.

Heaven and Hell are absolute contrasting eternal settlements. Both are supernatural realms. Meaning, the governing laws, characteristics, scale, magnitude and all defining aspects are not comparable or can be understood/imagined through any known physical experience. Simply Haven is the best absolute eternal settlement. Hell is the worst absolute eternal settlement.

can you tell if somebody is going there?

No, the final judgment is beyond the ability/authority of anyone other than God.

With respect to the “right conduct”, the governing criteria/reference for the acceptable righteous pass were defined and conveyed to us. In a nutshell, the righteous pass requires that we first have faith and then act in a righteous manner consistent with that faith in all aspects of our life and to our best ability.

Ultimately God is the only judge. The final judgment must settle all accounts, no exception. If God wants, trespasses to his right may be forgiven but if the wrongs relate to the right of other humans, then just reparation must be made to those who have been wronged. No one can make the judgment other than God and God is just and merciful.

 

[LIIA]

1. Do you believe the Biblical account of Adam and Eve?

I do but I don’t believe the “original sin”. It’s a doctrine that was introduced/added to the Christian faith in the 3rd century. Also it was not included in the teachings of previous messengers or older scriptures.

The story of the fall of Adam in the Hebrew Scriptures says nothing about the transmission of hereditary sin to the entire human race.

original sin | Definition, Consequences, & Facts | Britannica

Early Christianity had no specific doctrine of original sin prior to the 4th century.

Original sin - Wikipedia

I don’t believe the “original sin” not only because it’s an inserted alteration to the original Christian faith but also because the doctrine includes numerous unacceptable logical errors as partially explained in #2349 and #2351

2. There is a reason God punished Adam and as a result his offspring did not acquire the right to everlasting life as a sheer accident of birth.

Yes, there is a reason God punished Adam, but the disobedience of Adam was not something unexpected that took God by surprise and ruined all of God’s original plans for the human race, not at all. Nothing is beyond God’s knowledge, and nothing can make the slightest change to God’s plans.

Adam’s punishment was intended as an example and a lesson for the entire human race to learn from, it was not the end for Adam, not at all, it was only the beginning of a journey, not only Adam’s journey but also the journey of the entire human race through the test of “free will” that is specifically intended/designed to make all choices of all kind possible and allowable till the very end of the test (Death). Death is neither our end nor a punishment for Adam or any other human; it’s merely an end to the test of “free will” and a transition from one phase to another along our journey. The real punishment is not death, it’s an eternal life that is consistent with what we proved ourselves to be during our test.

3. How many years ago do you think Adam and Eve were created? Approximately, that is.

It’s an irrelevant question but No, I don’t believe it’s 6000 years ago.

That said, you didn’t address any of my questions/comments in my post #2351. None.

 

[LIIA]

Jesus did not say their fate was sealed from the beginning -- he told them to repent. How do you feel about that?

Jesus said you cannot judge others, be concerned about your own sin, do the right thing and repent, your righteous repentance shall make the difference, it shall save you.

Yes, salvation requires faith and righteous actions consistent with that faith. Faith is a choice, righteous actions is a choice, repentance is a choice. Your salvation is conditioned on YOU making the right choice, only you, not the choice of Adam, not the choice of Jesus, not the choice of anyone else other than you, no soul shall bear the burden of a choice/action made by another.

That said, you again ignored every single question I asked in #2351 & #2349. You don’t have answers. The truth is clear, and falsehood is clear (for those who have the will to see it). You know that what I’m saying is true, why do you ignore it/deny it?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

LOL, I like that. Although I must disagree with you in that I think you DO exist.

You don't seem to recognize the analogy and how denial using your logic would mean the gaps in our ancestry resulting from a lack of evidence mean those gaps are real. By your logic, some of our ancestors didn't exist because we cannot find direct evidence of them. Are you claiming that some of your ancestors sprung into existence fully formed without ancestors of their own?

I have two parents that each had two parents that in turn had two parents of their own and on and on and on back into time past. Not being able to identify some or all of them or where two particular family lines intersected does not mean that those people did not exist or that there is no connection between my family and another. This is what you are saying. If we cannot establish an exact common ancestor than common ancestry falls apart. Not only illogical, but it does nothing to address or nullify other evidence of shared ancestry.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

LOL, I like that. Although I must disagree with you in that I think you DO exist.

Analogies seem to be a weakness among those defending some version of creationism over the evidence and explanations of that evidence using science.

If a person is photographed daily from birth to death, how do you know which photos express the full and clear transition from infant, toddler, pre-teen, teen, young adult, mature adult and old adult? You are claiming cutoffs that are clearly demarcated, when reality and the evidence do not provide such information in any way that a person could know that. Yet the photos looked at as a whole show a clear change over time. They can be roughly grouped to show periods of age with fuzzy borders demarcating those periods.

Even if such transitional periods were obvious, the photo may have been taken at the wrong time of day to capture it. That doesn't mean that a transition didn't occur. Perhaps the more logical view would be that the transition took place over more than just a day or a part of a day. Just as the transition between our ancestors took place over generational periods of time and not just a single birth.

Claiming that common ancestry fails because some individual ancestor that is clearly the common ancestor cannot be found is a ridiculous and illogical basis to deny a valid conclusion of the evidence.

 

[YoursTrue]

Analogies seem to be a weakness among those defending some version of creationism over the evidence and explanations of that evidence using science.

If a person is photographed daily from birth to death, how do you know which photos express the full and clear transition from infant, toddler, pre-teen, teen, young adult, mature adult and old adult? You are claiming cutoffs that are clearly demarcated, when reality and the evidence do not provide such information in any way that a person could know that. Yet the photos looked at as a whole show a clear change over time. They can be roughly grouped to show periods of age with fuzzy borders demarcating those periods.

Even if such transitional periods were obvious, the photo may have been taken at the wrong time of day to capture it. That doesn't mean that a transition didn't occur. Perhaps the more logical view would be that the transition took place over more than just a day or a part of a day. Just as the transition between our ancestors took place over generational periods of time and not just a single birth.

Claiming that common ancestry fails because some individual ancestor that is clearly the common ancestor cannot be found is a ridiculous and illogical basis to deny a valid conclusion of the evidence.

You're talking about creationism, and frankly I'm not sure what you mean by that. Let me put it this way to you -- I believe that God created the heavens and the earth. Does that mean He made deformities? No. It means that "In the beginning," God created the heavens and the earth. He started the perfect mechanism for life to continue. But things changed and yes, He allowed that. Does that mean God created the Devil? No. And that's the rub for so many. It does require a more detailed explanation, but perhaps we can discuss that another time.
Do I KNOW how all the different bugs came about? No, you guessed it, I don't know. I don't know because they're there -- unless you know that bugs are evolving NOW, please do help. Unless of course, the fittest are content with not changing.

 

[rational experiences]

Men are egotists.

You live in a man's human artificial God city...civilisation. and all sciences are based on the lifestyle Man in civilisation status only.

Is the you're just a human first teaching and not any god.

Reason men said and no man is God. Was to his human egotist brothers who pretended they spoke by words claiming I speak on behalf of a God.

Hence a God had created everything as I say so. As a man..a thinker...a word user first the scientist.

Double thinking lying as the the ist...ist meaning had not honoured the natural list seen first.

Okay.

You say a base substance created everything...yet everything in law exists separated?

Yes...I lie. Known consciously by men. I lie for civilisation status. The reason.

Why the man's cities of God destroy life...a teaching.

Why?

Human man's behaviour.

So if I said why don't you just shut up!! As it's a response to feel the way I do.

Don't think don't talk.

But gave you food drink.

Wouldn't you be living as the same human being human?

Yes.

It's why they put Galileo in gaol.

As they knew man's behaviour is our lifes destroyer

As you SEE everything first in each body separately. Was the exact reason no man speaks for a God nor is any God.

So Mr egotist says. I look at a bird species. I see the same bird species yet it's variant. It was selected to exist the same but a variant.

Oh that's intelligent...not really. As you see it's not the same bird also.

You formed an idea just as a man.

So men said let me choose to apply that thought to a human.

In life a monkey is a destroyed attacked removed human factually.

The man does not apply his thought by that status.

Instead he says old human bones of dead humans were deformed.

As human is used as a quote the whole time. In the thesis.

You can today pretend youre a future scientist who digs up dead bones of mutated humans now. You'd say some inane reason once again.

Men know fresh water biology lives in water.
Men know salt water biology lives in water.
Men know nature's ground biology lives in water too...stretched voided ground held atmospheric voided water.

Fixed held by heavens.

So there was not ever a thesis life was removed from water.

You only pretended it had...based on man's self driven egotism. To believe you knew everything.

Is a behaviour.

So bible teaching said as a deceased humans body not living is still present at death. It's thin king consciousness that stops. In biology. Yet biology by term microbial level first still lives.

The dead bio body as a themed thesis said the bio dead body proves human thinking lies.

As a dead body preceded Consciousness. As microbial was still alive.

The healer medical biological teacher. Stated beyond any doubt. A monkey is bio living and conscious but is in fact compared to a deceased human body.

By factors of the humans non existence as the monkeys biology or conscious expression.

Which proved it owned no human condition link whatsoever.

And only separated life existed not joined.

As that theory had to be stated when bio life began chemical leeching conversions in human or animal cells blood letting. As stigmata...when nuclear science was practiced above ground.

Seeing nuclear mineral chemicals aren't ours. Nor are the burning gases above burning ours.

We lived in the middle position holy heavens as biology type only.

Now we all use adult pre past memory. Although born microbial sperm ovary first.

Past life humans witnessed our human life biology leaving water in upper atmospheric terms salted nuclear gases falling.

And our holy ground water lifting off in huge water sheets.

Memory hadn't lied. The interpretation of human memory the theist however lied.

As it wasn't a theory why human bones were mutated....humans caused it.

Hence no man is God also said...no looking back theorising is allowed.

As mother maths lots wife gave us by science maths lots the pillar of salt attack. In upper heavens. Clouds converted into not being clouds. No SATAN...which equals living man's coded answer as we live NASA.

Happens when you live to witness its return.

And it became an argued war as to who then would win...naturals life reclaimed human rights or the destroyer science community.