I have not seen anyone imply otherwise. Perhaps you have misread those posts.
Do you know what the implication was about?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I have not seen anyone imply otherwise. Perhaps you have misread those posts.
Your post about Raup that started this was quite the non sequitur. If anything you saw some non existent implication.Do you know what the implication was about?
The origin of the turtle shell: Mystery solved
To investigate whether the turtle carapace evolved with any contribution from its ancestors' exoskeleton, Dr. Tatsuya Hirasawa and his team carefully observed developing embryos of Chinese soft-shell turtles, chickens and alligators. In their analysis, they compared the development of the turtle carapace, the chick's ribs and the alligator's bony skin nodules. The researchers found that the major part of the turtle's carapace is made from hypertrophied ribs and vertebrae and therefore derives solely from endoskeletal tissue.
This finding was confirmed by the observation of fossils of the ancient turtle Odontochelys and the ancient reptile Sinosaurosphargis, that both exhibit shells of endoskeletal origin. Odontochelys has a rigid shell instead of a flexible ribcage. And Sinosaurosphargis possesses an endoskeletal shell similar to the turtle's under, and separate from, a layer of exoskeletal bones.
Taken together these results show that the turtle carapace has evolved independently from the exoskeleton. This scenario is also consistent with the recent phylogenetic analyses based on genomic data that have placed turtles in the same group as birds, crocodiles and marine reptiles like Sinosaurophargis, contradicting recent studies based solely on fossil record.
"Recently, genomic analyses had given us evidence that turtles evolved from reptiles closely related to alligators and dinosaurs, not from primitive reptiles as once thought. Our findings match the evolutionary history revealed by the genomic analyses, and we are about to unravel the mystery of when and how the turtle shell evolved," explains Dr. Tatsuya Hirasawa who led the research.
This is the kind of stuff some apparently consider strong and reliable evidence - one assumption after another, and the one that can fit all of them into the better package wins, until another one comes along to replace it.
Well.
I got to thinking... Why don't they check all the bacteria and see if they are missing the genitalia gene? That way, they can work on explaining why they haven't evolved them. Which interpretation gets awarded as the best evidence?
Evolution of Genitals
While the fin-to-limb transition has received considerable attention, little is known about the developmental and evolutionary origins of external genitalia. Similarities in gene expression have been interpreted as a potential evolutionary link between the limb and genitals; however, no underlying developmental mechanism has been identified. We re-examined this question using micro-computed tomography, lineage tracing in three amniote clades, and RNA-sequencing-based transcriptional profiling.
Here we have, in the early known stages of life, seeing fully formed complex living organisms appearing seemingly out of nowhere, and persons are willing to accept fanciful tales to explain their arrival to fit a scripted mythological story called The Theory of Evolution.
We have a whole host of organisms that were supposed to be the first living organisms, still existing for supposedly billions and billions of years, with no change at all, no reproduction that produces major evolutionary change... Wow.
How did male genitalia evolve? Harvard researchers discover origins of reproductive organs
Sexual selection and genital evolution
Explaining genital diversity is a longstanding problem that is attracting renewed interest from evolutionary biologists. New studies provide ever more compelling evidence that sexual selection is important in driving genital divergence. Importantly, several studies now link variation in genital morphology directly to male fertilization success, and modern comparative techniques have confirmed predicted associations between genital complexity and mating patterns across species. There is also evidence that male and female genitalia can coevolve antagonistically. Determining mechanisms of genital evolution is an important challenge if we are to resolve current debate concerning the relative significance of mate choice benefits and sexual conflict in sexual selection.
The Fascinating Evolution of Animal Genitalia (Video)
Yes, these are all so fascinating... Fascinating Fanciful Fairytale imo.
I understand why some persons prefer these fantasies, to the evidently more realistic explanation, so maybe some time in the future, who knows? Perhaps someone might author of another book - The God Delusion : Ripping God to Shreds.
Regarding design.
@Cacotopia Design is not the same as appearance. @QuestioningMind, @blü 2 Design is not the same as patterns. (Please see Randomness in design)
So I made no mention of either. I gave the definition of design, and there is a clear explanation given. It can be read in the OP.
No one therefore is looking at a bird and going, "Hey! It looks like it was designed! Therefore God..."
To illustrate.
When scientists peer at the cell, what do they see?
They see... a cell.
When they peer into the cell, and study its components, and how they work, and for what purpose... what do they see?
Ah. Now they see... DESIGN!
Biology: Cell Structure I Nucleus Medical Media
They may not have seen the designer, but the evidence of design says there is.
Randomness in Design
Cell division of meiosis and mitosis
A programmer writes a computer program that creates or generates objects in an environment with randomness applied. The program works as it's designed to - produce an object... with random features, due to the environment never being the same. Like a snowflake.
@viole What is magical, and ridiculous fantasies...
is when one says that all these components somehow assembled themselves in an intelligent manner. Enter the fairy godmother - natural selection.
Explain how natural selection created, or designed the cell. That's right, for more than 150 years they are still trying to see how they can get the genie to grant their wish.
The origin of the first cells remains a mystery
...before cells could form, the organic molecules must have united with one another to form more complex molecules called polymers.
...For a cell to come into being, some sort of enclosing membrane is required to hold together the organic materials of the cytoplasm. A generation ago, scientists believed that membranous droplets formed spontaneously. These membranous droplets, called protocells, were presumed to be the first cells. Modern scientists believe, however, that protocells do not carry any genetic information and lack the internal organization of cells. Thus the protocell perspective is not widely accepted. Several groups of scientists are currently investigating the synthesis of polypeptides and short nucleic acids on the surface of clay. The origin of the first cells remains a mystery.
Oops! Whatever happened to the Darwinian transition?
The first cells
The origin of cells was the most important step in the evolutionary theory of life on Earth. The birth of the cell marked the passage from pre-biotic chemistry to partitioned units resembling modern cells. The final transition to living entities that fulfill all the definitions of modern cells depended on the ability to evolve effectively by natural selection. This transition has been called the Darwinian transition.
Give it a few more years. I'm sure the fairy godmother will come true... some day.
@Salvador I should have mentioned that I do agree with you that there is higher intelligence, for obvious reasons.
.
@viole What is magical, and ridiculous fantasies...
is when one says that all these components somehow assembled themselves in an intelligent manner. Enter the fairy godmother - natural selection.
Explain how natural selection created, or designed the cell. That's right, for more than 150 years they are still trying to see how they can get the genie to grant their wish
Complexity in no way evidences god in any way, so what's your point? Evolution can easily explain complexity. And, it is a natural explanation. All that is required is vast amounts of time and space ... both of which we do, in fact, have. But, what is your argument?In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. - Genesis 1:1
Can you explain why you think that complexity somehow provides evidence for god?In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. - Genesis 1:1
How this magic you rely on works.
Exactly how does one poof a species into existence in your model?
You sure that's what you want? Okay.Specify what you say are the 'assumptions'. Present us with a list of them.
And ─ even more importantly ─ spell out for us what happened instead.
The ancient Hebrews tell us this...So you can't list the 'assumptions' you asserted were there? No surprise.
How were they "brought forth"? By magic, as described in Genesis 1? How does that work, exactly?
It seems to me you are repeating yourself. Why is that? Is it Merry-go-round time?Wow, that really sounds handy! How does it actually work? Oh, by magic ...
No wonder you like to use that word magic so loosely - apparently you believe in it.The unnamed magician poofs species into existence for no obvious reason
I wouldn't say quite busy, only at times like today, I may not be well, so it might be a bit pressing. When that's the case, I may not spend too much time, depending, but if the posts are short, I try to address them.Looks like you have been pretty busy with this thread... I haven't had time to reply or review other posts in this thread.. hoping to study further all that has been said with others so I don't duplicate questions or our time...
I'm a little confused on your view here.. a couple of quick questions.
1. So I take it you don't believe in the common biblical view of a 6 day creation but a "designed" creation over billions of years... i.e. the designer sparked the big bang to the the formation of earth?
2. And you believe life was designed and created on earth 3.5b years ago not 6 or 7 thousand years ago? And you view the designer using evolution, thus the designer programmed and deployed the mutations needed for new species? And possibly designing extinctions to make changes in the formation of life, i.e. the Permian and KT events?
3. And also you believe that death was natural on earth and not the common biblical view it was brought on earth by the fall of Adam?
I know a lot of the ID people like Steven Meyers and Hugh Ross that have this view.
These views are contradictory to common biblical views by most denominations.
Do you think genitals are the problem of a designer?
I mean, using the same organ for both creating new souls and pee? Really?
Shall we call it SD instead of ID, maybe?
Ciao
- viole
If you knew what you say we know, there would right now be no arguments or debates about it, now would there. Paleontologists often claim that fossils tell us something. But fossils, by themselves, tell us nothing; not even that they are fossils.I have no clue. Nobody knows how the first cell arose. And by definition, what came first, was not subject to natural selection, probably.
Is that your main challenge? That seems to indicate that you are happy with natural selection acting on what came afterwards. In other words, what we know. That we share the same common ancestor, whose origin is unknown, with carrots, pigs, monkeys, fungi, etc.
Right? How does that ignorance about the first cell help your theology then?
Ciao
- viole
You left out the only part that matters: the means by which each example of "various life" was brought forth.
blü 2 said:
You sure that's what you want? Okay.
Read Genesis chapter 1. It's too long to post here. However, when reading it, think of each day as long periods of time, even thousands of years where various life for were brought forth, lived and died.
I notice you use a lot of Bible scriptures in your post..I wouldn't say quite busy, only at times like today, I may not be well, so it might be a bit pressing. When that's the case, I may not spend too much time, depending, but if the posts are short, I try to address them.....
Anything you don't find to be clear, feel free to ask.
Not following you. By means of God's power. Is that what you mean?You left out the only part that matters: the means by which each example of "various life" was brought forth.
I don't believe the Bible is perfect. Nothing in this world is, but we use our judgment in knowing what to believe, and why it's reasonable to do so.I notice you use a lot of Bible scriptures in your post..
1. Do you believe in the infallibility of the Bible?
2. If the Designer wrote the bible via oracles like Moses, prophets, apostles, and kings, how is that it cant be authenticated? The bible is known to be a compiled assembly of recopied manuscripts of several generations and through corrupted kings, priest and early Jewish and Christian sects. Compare the bible to the hIstory written in geological columns and space that have never been touched or edited by humans, which is obviously creditable?
3. The Egyption RA predates the Jewish Yahweh as ancient documented creator. Both people have worshipped and died serving. What creditable fact makes one ancient account a truth and the other a myth?
4. If a designer does exist, why the game of faith via in old ancient writings left to human imagination?
P.s. You mentioned your not feeling well, hope your doing better or get well soon..
By being able, but unwilling.How is He, "negligent"?
There's a reason we have a government instead of just sitting there looking at the Constitution all day.He's provided a wonderful letter (the Bible) for us
Even sinners love those who love them. Why should I be held to a higher standard than God?Well, 1 John 3:22 to them..... "and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him." (ESV.com)
Gautama spent a lot of time trying various means of answering the questions. He then realized the questions were kind of stupid.There is no religion you can name, that is not concerned with those questions, except they formulated the idea after a seemingly futile pursuit of answers that suits them.
All religions are human-based, at least until you can prove non-humans have a religion.Now this is what I would consider, human religion you referred to
*sigh* There. Is. No. Goal. Either the new combo works or it doesn't and most of the time it doesn't, hence spontaneous abortions being quite frequent in many species.Okay, so a design - a machine (a caterpillar - tractor) for example... It was designed with various components, which operate in specific ways, to reach an end goal.
The purpose of a caterpillar is to have no purpose. It munches plant matter because it can, not because it feels some existential need to.A caterpillar (animal), it has basic components, which allows it to have specific function, with an intended purpose/objective.
Which "He"? In more primitive, more ancient verses, Yahweh is just a district manager, handed the governing of Hebrews by His Father El. His Siblings governed other tribes/nations. This is confirmed by other non-Jewish texts, at least in terms of El being the Dad and everyone else being just part of the Family.Isaiah 40:26 “Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who brings out their army by number; He calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power, Not one of them is missing.
Not if we want to include pre-Jewish theology. Yahweh was merely part of a pantheon. Baal Hadad and Anat took part in His murder. Yam, son of El, was renamed Yah(weh) when made "King of Kings" or "King of the Gods". Baal and His followers got upset and killed Yah(weh). I forget how Baal died but I know Mot, God of Death, wanted Him dead. Anat then slew Mot (so She defeated death, not Jesus). I don't just mean stabbed Him or anything, She flat out butchered the Guy, chopping Him up into tiny pieces. I think She might need anger control classes.Before me there was no God formed, and after me there continued to be none.
Yahwist prophets wanted, no, needed you to believe that because polytheism means they can't get all the money, er, "divine glory for the Lord".‘I am the first and I am the last. There is no God but me.
This means God cannot create nor destroy.The first law of thermodynamics, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; energy can only be transferred or changed from one form to another.
I'm more interested when that complicated machine breaks down as it often does.What is fascinating to me, is that the organ that is the most complex in the universe, is what utilizes, or processes these - thought and intelligence, and also understanding speech.
There is no way to establish this. If God lived longer than even a single human generation, He could claim to be eternal and it's unlikely humans would be able to counter it. The only way to prove eternity is to somehow show there is no such thing as a beginning or end, but as we have both, we will never be able to prove it even exists.It has no beginning. It has no end, but is rather the beginning and the end. Isaiah 48:12; Revelation 22:13
Not really. The plot would be less than 5 pages long if God had any kind of sense. The ENTIRE story revolves around the drama that follows one of God's many tantrums or ignorant screw-ups. At least the Mahabharata has the good sense to lampshade the narrative issues of its own stories.Our God, Jehovah is AWESOME! His name is MAJESTIC! The Bible is a FANTASTIC and fascinating work that seems clearly evident, it is the inspired word of God.
As Darwin didn't know about genes yet and we can do genetic comparisons all day long if we want to, it's not the same. Just as a paternity test can prove familial relationships, DNA testing can show us which of us species are related more closely than others.Isn't this a lot like Darwin's speculations on finches, that one 'turns into another'?
Genesis 1 doesn't really say much of anything because it's like a teaser trailer. Genesis 2 makes God out to be unbelievably idiotic. He makes male and female species all over the place but when a man comes along, it is SHOCKING that He must also make a female of a species He made that isn't asexual AND He can't even keep the recipe for dirt humans and must resort to bad cloning to make a female. He also makes us in HIS IMAGE and then gripes THE ENTIRE REST OF THE PLOT about how we want to be like gods, when that would make sense IF WE WERE CREATED TO BE IN HIS IMAGE. I mean, God wants to be God, right? His instincts would be our instincts. He positively loathes the idea that creatures made in God's image could do godly things, which apparently also includes making a multi-story building, which He is honestly, HONESTLY afraid will reach to Heaven when people like you say He lives outside the known universe. It is just one big bag of stupid page after page.Read Genesis chapter 1.
ACME? Like Wile E. Coyote, SUPER Genius, God just checks the "Instant Delivery" box on the item request?How were they "brought forth"? By magic, as described in Genesis 1? How does that work, exactly?
We have things even better than iron chariots now, so He should watch out.Jehovah God promises to do a work on the day referred to as Harmageddon, when he will use his active force operative upon his appointed king and his army, to utterly destroy all his opposers.
Yes. It's the most plausible explanation.2. Are you sure the ear evolved, as suggested in the article?
3. Are you sure the eye evolved, as suggested in the article?
If I studied at one of the wizarding schools from the Potterverse, I'd be offended that magic is being dissed like that because I'm sure there are entire classes and "degree programs" of a sort devoted to how magic works.Without that 'how' it's still just magic.
That is the only available method, unless you can describe HOW God does anything. "By the Holy Spirit" doesn't say anything at all. It's like saying a chemist made rubber through chemistry. Duh. HOW did the chemist make rubber?Scientists try to retrace the path by using one method, and one method only - natural science. It restrict its exploration, and therefore cannot be considered a clear pathway to truth. In fact it does not even try to reach that.
And given that houses can fall down, obviously intelligence is not necessary to make one.There is no evidence to support a house being built from straw and wood whipped up by the wind, much less without anyone putting it together - building it.
Please explain why God, who had been making males and females for several days, suddenly can't seem to recall how to make a second dirt human.The Bible is no science book, but when it comes to true science - observed and demonstrated - it's bang on.
So superior He only realizes later a sexual being requires another sexual being to reproduce, even after just making sexual beings for several days.For one thing they are being formed by someone with intelligence, understanding and wisdom - not he human kind, but vastly superior
There are much older texts that describe the origin of the universe, some with better if still metaphorical knowledge about how things actually work.However, the Bible exists as the oldest know in history, and its writings are about a creator of the universe. Its very first words state the act of creation. That is profound.
So you believe the time when King Josiah tells someone to go find a law book, and one just "happens" to be found, which is one book out of the entire OT, which has to mean everything else was made up during his reign at the earliest? Because lots of times the bible claims "people did not know the Lord", which should be impossible if the texts were sitting right there.The historical accounts are accurate
You have lived all those experiences, including Ten Plagues, a Global Flood, someone claiming to fix all sin and death, etc? How old are you and where on earth do you live for your life to be filled with such horrors?Examining the Bible has convinced me that what it says is the truth, and I have lived these experiences. They are real.
Which is why they felt a sequel was necessary to fix the original stories.It moral principles and values are practical, and timeless
That's nice. When they make a woman out of that, let me know.Team studied patient who had part of a rib removed
Eight cm of missing bone and one centimeter of missing cartilage repaired in just six months
Then God is lying when He calls it the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, yes?According to the Bible the snake not talking, and the trees did not magically transmit knowledge.
They never ate?Death introduced on all life on earth from the fall of Adam and Eve.
It's not hard to find fault with a text so full of plot holes you could fly a plane through them.It just anther case of not understanding the Bible but seeking to find fault with it.
How? Supposedly the story was written by Moses and he wasn't even alive back then. Again, really poor writing.The Bible writers reported a global flood. It is quite obvious it was an event that was witnessed.
Please explain how animals crossed entire oceans to get to continents even God doesn't know about because He never mentions them.What is the problem with "all human civilizations on Earth from Noah's sons and wives. And an animal migration from Turkey to their present habitat"?
If you've ever taken a foreign language class, you will see why this story is really stupid. People get by knowing different languages all the time. In fact, society has pretty much dealt with every "curse" God has ever put to paper:What is wrong with the "Tower of Babel being the start of separation of human languages and races"?
Yeah. Like, I want all the people who think Adam was made from dirt go to Home Depot, buy a bag of mulch, and pray to God to make a man out of it. I just want the entertainment value of watching people do a song and dance over some dirt to make it sentient.So persuade me. What's an example of it, authenticated to scientific standards? How does it work? What impartial studies have been carried out on it? Where can I read them?
And like my parents, I realized they were hypocritical narcissistic sociopaths who don't know nearly as much as they thought they did.We can use the same approach with the Bible. I was a babe to the milk of God's word. I didn't understand it , but a few things were true, without question - we observed and experienced them for real.
I mean, how does God's power work? What exactly does God know that science doesn't? Science, naturally, would like to know.Not following you. By means of God's power. Is that what you mean?
You mean he realized they were stupid because after spending most of his life trying to find the answers, he came up empty? I know of school dropouts that did practically the same thing.Gautama spent a lot of time trying various means of answering the questions. He then realized the questions were kind of stupid.
There is nothing in the Eightfold Path or Four Noble Truths that I can remember being about gods or afterlives or whatever.
I could agree with you there, because pure worship was replaced by many and diverse forms of worship. However, there is one that is acceptable to God, because he is restoring pure worship. James 1:27All religions are human-based, at least until you can prove non-humans have a religion.
The printing press at RF broke down, due to a glitch in the system. Therefore, it had no goal.*sigh* There. Is. No. Goal. Either the new combo works or it doesn't and most of the time it doesn't, hence spontaneous abortions being quite frequent in many species.
Take away it's mouth then.The purpose of a caterpillar is to have no purpose. It munches plant matter because it can, not because it feels some existential need to.
The Israelites worshiped gods they were not supposed to worship. However, not all did.Which "He"? In more primitive, more ancient verses, Yahweh is just a district manager, handed the governing of Hebrews by His Father El. His Siblings governed other tribes/nations. This is confirmed by other non-Jewish texts, at least in terms of El being the Dad and everyone else being just part of the Family.
Not if we want to include pre-Jewish theology. Yahweh was merely part of a pantheon. Baal Hadad and Anat took part in His murder. Yam, son of El, was renamed Yah(weh) when made "King of Kings" or "King of the Gods". Baal and His followers got upset and killed Yah(weh). I forget how Baal died but I know Mot, God of Death, wanted Him dead. Anat then slew Mot (so She defeated death, not Jesus). I don't just mean stabbed Him or anything, She flat out butchered the Guy, chopping Him up into tiny pieces. I think She might need anger control classes.
Yahwist prophets wanted, no, needed you to believe that because polytheism means they can't get all the money, er, "divine glory for the Lord".
Please explain.This means God cannot create nor destroy.
Many have, I'm sure.I'm more interested when that complicated machine breaks down as it often does.
I can't prove a lot of things. Nor does science.There is no way to establish this. If God lived longer than even a single human generation, He could claim to be eternal and it's unlikely humans would be able to counter it. The only way to prove eternity is to somehow show there is no such thing as a beginning or end, but as we have both, we will never be able to prove it even exists.
A mechanic can pull down a V8 engine, and take it apart down to the tiniest part. He can probably tell you all the parts that are closely related too, but I am quite sure he's not going to tell you that one engine came from another.As Darwin didn't know about genes yet and we can do genetic comparisons all day long if we want to, it's not the same. Just as a paternity test can prove familial relationships, DNA testing can show us which of us species are related more closely than others.
Deuteronomy 31:24-26So you believe the time when King Josiah tells someone to go find a law book, and one just "happens" to be found, which is one book out of the entire OT, which has to mean everything else was made up during his reign at the earliest? Because lots of times the bible claims "people did not know the Lord", which should be impossible if the texts were sitting right there.
Boat.Please explain how animals crossed entire oceans to get to continents even God doesn't know about because He never mentions them.
...and you were satisfied with your realization right? ...but you didn't think everyone should have the same realization as you did.And like my parents, I realized they were hypocritical narcissistic sociopaths who don't know nearly as much as they thought they did.
You'll probably make the same argument about the windpipe and swallow-pipe right?
Both are good design. However, my argument is not about whether the design is liked or disliked
Why do you think those arguments are somehow reasonable arguments for this topic?.
It always beats me, so perhaps you can explain, if you don't mind.
If you knew what you say we know, there would right now be no arguments or debates about it, now would there. Paleontologists often claim that fossils tell us something. But fossils, by themselves, tell us nothing; not even that they are fossils.
So it seems we are all one big ignorant bunch.
Unless of course you have the "ace up your sleeve", and will now pull it out and show me how mutations were guided by nature selection, to evolve whole new organisms.
I like surprises, so surprise me.
By the way, what I presented is an undeniable fact, not an ideology. Care to try disproving it?
@leibowde84, my argument is not about complexity.