Deniars of Evolution:

[Father Heathen]

I know.

We can make that agreement, but I just understand that people are perfectly capable of this sort of persistent, stubborn misunderstanding because of whatever reason, perhaps some kind of learning disorder.

I think the "misunderstanding" is due to willful ignorance and pride, as people tend to heavily invest their emotions, ego, and identify into their faith. Thus even the most solid of evidence and sound of logic bounces off their stance.

 

[johnhanks]

Comfort can not have debated evolution for 30 years and not have a pretty sound idea of what biologists take it to mean. I have seen a dozen different debaters carefully explain to him what evolution is - and yet at every new debate he pretends not to know and feigns ignorance. I can accept that a person can cling stubbornly to a belief - but he can not honestly claim not to know what scientists think evolution is.

True, but as with CotW it would be tactically disastrous for him to admit the realities of evolutionary biology into the debate: as soon as he (or Call) does that he will have to argue against those realities, and neither has that capability. Far easier to keep insisting that evolution is about dogs giving birth to non-dogs, and argue against that.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

So, dogs produce dogs? Okay!

Our household pets are

FAMILY: Canidae (Dogs, Wolves, Coyotes and Foxes)

GENUS: CANIS (Dogs, wolves and Coyotes, but no Foxes).

SPECIES: Canis Familiaris.

So, "each after their own kind" and dogs give birth to dogs, so therefore, "Kind" must mean "Family".

Let's apply this to humans, okay?

SPECIES: Sapiens; Got it!

GENUS: Homo (Hey! We're All Homos! JK; okay, includes Modern and Archaic humans ... Uh, well, wait ... Evolution deniers don't like that, even though it's fine for dogs ... Interesting ...)

FAMILY: Hominodea (Great! Hominodea includes Humans and Apes and Gibbons!)

So therefore, "Each after his own kind" includes Humans, Chimpanzees, Orangutans, Gorillas and Bonobos!

But wait, no, because these are not of the same "kind" even though they fall under the same taxonomic scale as "Dogs" where we defined "Kind" as "Family" but suddenly it doesn't work for Humans ...

This is how worthless "Kinds" is in discussing this issue. "Kinds", in the context of Evolution discussions, can mean anything we want it to mean. It creates a nonargument where the one side can move the goalpost wherever they want to move the goalpost and the other side is left trying to get the goalpost to sit still a minute while chasing a greased pig. This is how worthless "dogs came from nondogs" arguments are, as in this context, the definitions of the words within the argument are nonspecific.

 

[Looncall]

So why only allow certain apes and parrots to talk I wonder? This evolution is clever but it took it billions of years to learn. Not intelligently either but through trial and error with learning capability.

There is an interesting theme in your post, with words such as "allow" and "clever" and "learn". Are you supposing that evolution is guided by an intelligence? It rather sounds like it.

If all this is just a metaphor, ok, but metaphors can mislead.

Personally, I like to say that evolution just happens. That emphasizes the contingencies involved. If one lineage develops a certain trait, it does not follow that another will. That other may not receive the same fortunate mutation.

 

[Thief]

So why only allow certain apes and parrots to talk I wonder? This evolution is clever but it took it billions of years to learn. Not intelligently either but through trial and error with learning capability.

Mocking is not unusual.
Some species do it to disguise what they are.
Some do it to lure others closer.

That some creatures are able to sound as we do is not amazing.

And we humans make sound as if we are intelligent?
You have been reading the posts made here at the forum?

 

[idav]

There is an interesting theme in your post, with words such as "allow" and "clever" and "learn". Are you supposing that evolution is guided by an intelligence? It rather sounds like it.

If all this is just a metaphor, ok, but metaphors can mislead.

Personally, I like to say that evolution just happens. That emphasizes the contingencies involved. If one lineage develops a certain trait, it does not follow that another will. That other may not receive the same fortunate mutation.

Well it is a response to an assertion that evolution is guided by god, and my response is what sort of god is that. An unintelligent one for starters. Yes we learn, life learns which means matter fell into a nitch where learning could happen. That would be where intelligence comes from, billions of years of nature learning from itself. Matter is able to learn because there is a potential for intelligence else there would be no way. IOW it is "guiding" itself. I can't get away from that idea especially seeing biologically how life got to what it is today, or even the very idea that some ooze on some planet could start showing signs of volition. I don't believe just basic interactions can do it either, the potential comes from the micro level, from within.

 

[idav]

Mocking is not unusual.
Some species do it to disguise what they are.
Some do it to lure others closer.

That some creatures are able to sound as we do is not amazing.

And we humans make sound as if we are intelligent?
You have been reading the posts made here at the forum?

You ignore the point well. Looncall got it.

 

[Thief]

There is an interesting theme in your post, with words such as "allow" and "clever" and "learn". Are you supposing that evolution is guided by an intelligence? It rather sounds like it.

If all this is just a metaphor, ok, but metaphors can mislead.

Personally, I like to say that evolution just happens. That emphasizes the contingencies involved. If one lineage develops a certain trait, it does not follow that another will. That other may not receive the same fortunate mutation.

Fortunate in relation to the environment?

So it would seem.

One large meteor and everything of great size fails to survive.

You can call that evolution if you want to.

I call it...God.....tweaking His creation.

 

[Skwim]

So, dogs produce dogs? Okay!

Our household pets are

FAMILY: Canidae (Dogs, Wolves, Coyotes and Foxes)

GENUS: CANIS (Dogs, wolves and Coyotes, but no Foxes).

SPECIES: Canis Familiaris.

So, "each after their own kind" and dogs give birth to dogs, so therefore, "Kind" must mean "Family".

Just an FYI. Because of somewhat recent changes in the taxonomy of dogs, this should read:

GENUS: Canis (dogs, wolves, and coyotes, but no foxes ).

SPECIES: Canis lupus familiaris (dogs have been downgraded to subspecies status)

​

And, from Answers in Genesis we have this neat explanation of "kind."

"Creation scientists use the word baramin to refer to created kinds (Hebrew: bara = created, min = kind). Because none of the original ancestors survive today, creationists have been trying to figure out what descendants belong to each baramin in their varied forms. Baramin is commonly believed to be at the level of family and possibly order for some plants/animals (according to the common classification scheme of kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species). On rare occasions, a kind may be equivalent to the genus or species levels.
source

​

So "kind" may refer to organisms in the Order, Family, Genus, or Species ranks. Pretty much depends on what creationists need to make their argument work.

 

[idav]

[/INDENT]So "kind" may refer to organisms in the Order, Family, Genus, or Species ranks. Pretty much depends on what creationists need to make their argument work.

Correct.

Which is ridiculous and why I think that labeling species just confuses the issue.

I could put it in simpler terms.

D1- D9 equals dog species. When it becomes D10 it is something else but rather arbitrary. There is no specific basis for any divergence cause every single organism is divergent.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If that was the case then it wouldnt be replaced with the web of life which it is now. It isn't hard science it is philosophy, which is why it is being left behind by more "hard science".

Care to provide a list this science that is abandoning evolution?

People, people...dogs produce dogs.

Very true, except, eventually, when enough variations in the genetic code have occurred, over many, many generations, it becomes harder to tell exactly where dogs end and the new species begins, and eventually the new species becomes more clear. There are actually some humanoid/ape fossils that challenge and defy classification because the lines between ape and human are so blurred in the fossil that it is even difficult for experts to tell.

 

[Windwalker]

Well it is a response to an assertion that evolution is guided by god, and my response is what sort of god is that. An unintelligent one for starters. Yes we learn, life learns which means matter fell into a nitch where learning could happen. That would be where intelligence comes from, billions of years of nature learning from itself.

When you were born, did you immediately posses the intelligence of your parents, or did it takes years of self-learning to come to that level of self-knowledge? But it could be argued that you were given all the ingredients to grow and become who you are. In a sense, because you existed in a world where higher intelligence existed, you developed as a result of that higher intelligence as you reached to unite with your parents. And each child develops unique personalities and traits, as well as their commonalities. Couldn't you call this system "guided" via influence, as the sun influences the plant, or the parent the child?

Matter is able to learn because there is a potential for intelligence else there would be no way. IOW it is "guiding" itself.

It has the potential, or intelligence, to guide itself. But it is not self-guidance in a vacuum. It is not then truly random. There are reasons it develops. It follows a direction and maintains it, until it is time to branch out. So it is in our own development as children. So it is in the whole of creation. There exists purpose and intention. And that, is intelligence.

I can't get away from that idea especially seeing biologically how life got to what it is today, or even the very idea that some ooze on some planet could start showing signs of volition. I don't believe just basic interactions can do it either, the potential comes from the micro level, from within.

You could say micro-level, but I don't believe it exists as a particle. It is equally the same in all things and itself having no shape or dimension. It is never any "where", and all "wheres" at once, and all time, and no time. Terms of physics do not apply. It is merely present. And if all is in touch with this potential of intelligence, and it present in all, then isn't this the Ground of Being, which springs forth intelligently, creating and becoming through the process of a self-guided evolution, as a child growing towards maturity does?

This of course puts a finer point on the misapplied term "Intelligent Design". This is not an anthropomorphic deity out there sending miracle bolts from the sky in fits of creativity. Rather, we are children in the womb of Intelligence itself.

 

[idav]

When you were born, did you immediately posses the intelligence of your parents, or did it takes years of self-learning to come to that level of self-knowledge? But it could be argued that you were given all the ingredients to grow and become who you are. In a sense, because you existed in a world where higher intelligence existed, you developed as a result of that higher intelligence as you reached to unite with your parents. And each child develops unique personalities and traits, as well as their commonalities. Couldn't you call this system "guided" via influence, as the sun influences the plant, or the parent the child?

A valid point. I just don't call a blank slate an intelligence, only in potentiality. Sure matter has the potential else we wouldn't be here, it wouldn't be possible.

It has the potential, or intelligence, to guide itself. But it is not self-guidance in a vacuum. It is not then truly random. There are reasons it develops. It follows a direction and maintains it, until it is time to branch out. So it is in our own development as children. So it is in the whole of creation. There exists purpose and intention. And that, is intelligence.

Another good point. I guess it is the definition of intelligent here. Like intelligence that is able to pass a test vs a being that has potential knowledge. Yes I can see the argument for even intelligence being fundamental but it isn't necessarily knowledge(as much as it is data) and that is one of my major contentions.

You could say micro-level, but I don't believe it exists as a particle. It is equally the same in all things and itself having no shape or dimension. It is never any "where", and all "wheres" at once, and all time, and no time. Terms of physics do not apply. It is merely present. And if all is in touch with this potential of intelligence, and it present in all, then isn't this the Ground of Being, which springs forth intelligently, creating and becoming through the process of a self-guided evolution, as a child growing towards maturity does?

Yes agreed.

This of course puts a finer point on the misapplied term "Intelligent Design". This is not an anthropomorphic deity out there sending miracle bolts from the sky in fits of creativity. Rather, we are children in the womb of Intelligence itself.

Yes that is interesting.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

Care to provide a list this science that is abandoning evolution?


Very true, except, eventually, when enough variations in the genetic code have occurred, over many, many generations, it becomes harder to tell exactly where dogs end and the new species begins, and eventually the new species becomes more clear. There are actually some humanoid/ape fossils that challenge and defy classification because the lines between ape and human are so blurred in the fossil that it is even difficult for experts to tell.

"Many many generations". Of course, that is the evolutionist's escape goat. They have to provide a explanation of why we don't see the changes occur before our very eyes...and their answer is always "because it takes sooooooo long to occur...millions and millions and millions and millions of years."

All part of Satans plot to get people to believe in lies.

 

[Revoltingest]

"Many many generations". Of course, that is the evolutionist's escape goat. They have to provide a explanation of why we don't see the changes occur before our very eyes...and their answer is always "because it takes sooooooo long to occur...millions and millions and millions and millions of years."

All part of Satans plot to get people to believe in lies.

Satan also tricked us into requiring a long time frame for cosmology & geology too, eh?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"Many many generations". Of course, that is the evolutionist's escape goat. They have to provide a explanation of why we don't see the changes occur before our very eyes...and their answer is always "because it takes sooooooo long to occur...millions and millions and millions and millions of years."

All part of Satans plot to get people to believe in lies.

Actually we see changes occurring all the time within a species, just as evolution predicts. Dogs and bacteria are probably the best two examples of microevolution. These changes, which going from parent to offspring may be so insignificant that they go unnoticed, but once enough generations have passed, and these changes accumulate to the point the current generation begins to loose significant genetic similarities with ancestor generations is when we begin to see new species emerge. Dogs will always give birth to dogs, as apes have always given birth to apes, but eventually the a descendant of the dog and the ape is genetically dissimilar enough to even prevent this new species from reproducing with the dogs and apes of old.

 

[Mycroft]

"Many many generations". Of course, that is the evolutionist's escape goat. They have to provide a explanation of why we don't see the changes occur before our very eyes...and their answer is always "because it takes sooooooo long to occur...millions and millions and millions and millions of years."

All part of Satans plot to get people to believe in lies.

I have a question for you. It's an odd question, but bear with me: Why do you sit down to poo?

 

[idav]

"Many many generations". Of course, that is the evolutionist's escape goat. They have to provide a explanation of why we don't see the changes occur before our very eyes...and their answer is always "because it takes sooooooo long to occur...millions and millions and millions and millions of years."

All part of Satans plot to get people to believe in lies.

This isnt true. Plants and insects have quicker generation cycles and confirm evolution with direct observations.

Satanic conspiracy theory is a bit outdated. If things just look that way then it is because evidence suggests it. If god really wanted believers it would make things look like whatever texts he is trying to push instead of letting satan make the bible look like a bunch of lies or misconceptions.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

I have a question for you. It's an odd question, but bear with me: Why do you sit down to poo?

I don't know.

 

[Windwalker]

Yes I can see the argument for even intelligence being fundamental but it isn't necessarily knowledge(as much as it is data) and that is one of my major contentions.

Well yes. Knowledge is really little more than a perception that we label and identify. That knowledge changes with greater and greater perceptive awareness, through whatever evolved means. The knowledge of the world to a worm is consistent with its perceptions it has access to. The knowledge of the world to humans is considerably more complex because of expanded awareness through not only our tools we use, but because of the abilities of our brains. But it is still relative to our perceptions, which are also far from complete.

I find starting with human perception and considering that intelligence and limiting intelligence to that mode of perception is little different than a geocentric model of the universe with us as the hub and all spokes radiating out from humans at the center of God's creation. It's still doing the same thing, except with scientific language instead of mythic language. Everything is intelligent in that it interacts with its environment, in agency. The problem with the typical Intelligent Design models, are that they are just a fancy cloak from the mythic deity symbol, with a fully aware superhuman-like mentality. In reality, intelligence has little do with a certain narrowly defined set of mental modeling.