Genesis & Science - Friend or Foe?

[nPeace]

Speciation has been observed. Is that what you mean by evolution above species level?

Here is speciation in a virus within one month in a flask.
https://phys.org/news/2016-11-biologists-speciation-laboratory-flask.html

Plant speciation has also been observed in less than a century.
Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.

How did this happen? It turns out that the parental plants made mistakes when they created their gametes (analogous to our sperm and eggs). Instead of making gametes with only one copy of each chromosome, they created ones with two or more, a state called polyploidy. Two polyploid gametes from different species, each with double the genetic information they were supposed to have, fused, and created a tetraploid: an creature with 4 sets of chromosomes. Because of the difference in chromosome number, the tetrapoid couldn't mate with either of its parent species, but it wasn't prevented from reproducing with fellow accidents.

In vertebrates as well, a new species of finch has been observed to emerge in Galapagos,
New species evolve in just two generations | Cosmos
A team of researchers led by Leif Andersson from Uppsala University, in Sweden, report the emergence of a new species of finch, dubbed Big Bird, arising from an initial cross breeding between two species, the large cactus finch (Geospiza conirostris) and the medium ground finch (Geospiz fortis). From a first chance encounter, a new lineage which boasts a unique beak shape, unique vocalisations, and the inability to breed with other finch species emerged.

The Big Bird today comprises only about 30 individuals – all fiercely inbred, but meeting the definition of distinct species, nonetheless.

The case study is watertight because the set-up for the foundation mating between the two originator species was observed by a pair of scientists from Princeton University, who were visiting the Galapagos island of Daphne Major at the time.

The Grants, having taken an initial blood sample from the outsider, continued to monitor the little population of Big Birds, taking blood from the subsequent six generations.

Now, Andersson and his colleagues from Uppsala have analysed the DNA collected from each of those generations. They conclude that the Big Birds quickly developed unique structural characteristics with which they were able to forge an entirely new environmental niche that did not put them in competition with the more numerous resident finch species.

“It is very striking that when we compare the size and shape of the Big Bird beaks with the beak morphologies of the other three species inhabiting Daphne Major, the Big Birds occupy their own niche in the beak morphology space,” says co-author Sangeet Lamichhaney.

“Thus, the combination of gene variants contributed from the two interbreeding species in combination with natural selection led to the evolution of a beak morphology that was competitive and unique.”


So speciation happens, and evolution within species (adaptation) has been known to happen for a very long time. And that, concisely, is all that constitutes the theory of evolution.

I thought you were here to teach me.
No, not at the species level, but above the species level.
We already went through speciation in the thread... somewhere.

 

[nPeace]

@Polymath257 I haven't forgotten you. I just haven't gotten the time as yet, but soon, I'm sure. I already researched one, and had an interesting find. Stay tuned.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You probably would include Jesus and his apostles in that.
The reason Jesus' disciples understood and did things Jesus did, is because they were taught by him - they learned by his teachings and example.
Today, I have seen people become electricians, and artisans without going to any school.
How did they learn? Simply by being with, and learning from their fellow brothers in the faith... and by putting it into practice.
These are persons between teen years, and past middle age - many of whom had little education. They are so skilled, their work receives high praise.

Hey, what do you know... Look how Paul viewed it.
Philippians 3:8
What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ

Paul, you ignorant man you.
No, like many today, young and old, they use their common sense, and appreciate the value of God's word, the Bible... unlike some.

There are many jobs that one can do without advanced education. So what? You seem to think that somehow enables one to criticize work that they do not understand. Strangely you seem to feel this way only about the science that shows that your beliefs are mythical.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I thought you were here to teach me.
No, not at the species level, but above the species level.
We already went through speciation in the thread... somewhere.

Ahem, speciation is above the species level.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Please explain the significant problem science has with the flood account, if it's not a personal hangup.

The flood claim actually makes testable predictions.
When you test these predictions, they do not check out.

2 examples:
- it predicts a global flood layer in the geological column (there is no such universal layer in the geological record)
- it predicts a MASSIVE genetic bottleneck in ALL species which should date to roughly the same period. This bottleneck also does not exist.

These 2 alone, completely disprove the entire story.

And then we haven't even gotten into the physical fact of a wooden boat with such measurements being not seaworthy at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You mean the fact that the bible states that there was a global flood, while there is ZERO geological evidence that a global flood ever occurred? That's what's called a CONFLICT between what the bible says and what good science has determined.

It's a lot worse.
It's not that there is just "no evidence" that this flood occured.
It's actually that there are mountains of evidence showing that this flood as claimed in the story DID NOT occur.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You interpret it one way, and say there is no evidence for X
Another interprets it another way, and says there is evidence for X.

That's not how evidence works.
If "evidence" can be used to support mutually exclusive ideas, then it's not evidence at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Face/palm!!..
I said Mysteries are meant for making true senses of its True meaning.

You than replied with exact words:

“So you are claiming that God deliberately lied? Now that makes no sense at all.”

Now Tell me!..can you see where it got ‘shifted’????

How has making senses of something become a lie???
Figure it out!..mr simple.


And I told you..you WILL find it’s proof and evidence of none!..what more do you want me to say?

Yes..it does make sense you have come to that!..and than so what!..what is your plan now?
Live happily ever after? I guess..
Good luck!


So than back to your MISTAKE you’ve made earlier..I want to make it clear with you where you are going wrong in looking for evidence.

Mystery like I said is making senses of what its true meaning..to come to a conclusion of it being a lie means you did NOT find it!
And if it comes to that..than its purpose for that will NOT BE for GOD..this was the GENIUS work of it.

Mystery is placed to hide something important!..do you know what it is?
It’s a CODE!.. yes! A CODE!
Now Please tell me at least you understand how codes work?

Then we both can agree it’s a difficult process of solving. You have become blinded by it’s story..and like I said it was purposely done for that reason for many like you WILL NOT get access to it..sorry to break it to you, it’s WAY more than what you know.
For you WILL not know how to test this opportunity!.you have become blind like its science methods of it as well. i know you’ll think all this is nonsense but hey guess what! Nonsenses will lurk within you and your living because of it.

I love how you are pretending to have access to some kind of "special knowledge" that we non-believer can't get to or understand.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What has good science determined that conflicts with a global flood?

- no universal genetic bottlenecks, which should be there if the story is true
- no global flood layer in the geological column, which should be there (and dating it would have to match the genetic bottleneck) if the story is true
- the ark as described is not sea worthy
- the ark as described is impossible to maintain and manage by only a handfull of people
- a physically impossible amount of water is necessary
- if we bend over backwards and assume such a body of water found its way to earth anyway and that for some mysterious magic reason the ark could float for more then a day without breaking up and sinking, then nothing would have survived still - and that includes everything and everyone on the ark, due to atmospheric impact of such dramatic changes to the earth's surface and amount of water and what not.

Literally NOTHING about this story is possible. EVERYTHING about it is easily disproven with high-school level science.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The entire Bible reports it as history - from Moses to David; from Solomon to Ezekiel; from Jesus to the last living disciple of Jesus.
It is not written metaphysically, and God himself - in relating it - says that it is history.
If you want, I can make a list of all the scriptures that show this.

If that is actually true, then all the evidence of reality, all our observations, all of science,... completely and utterly refute, debunk, falsify, obliterate everything about the christian religion.

Then we can safely say that science completely disproves christianity.

If Genesis is not history, then all the characters right down to the apostle John, are mythical, and all the books too.

Ow, well.
If that's the case, then that's the case, isn't it?

What reason do you have for saying it's metaphorical?

I personally have no reason to say that. I don't actually care at all. I'm not a christian.
I care about as much about Christian scripture, in that sense, as you care about muslim or hindu or mayan religious lore.

 

[viole]

No, that is not what is happening here.
Show me please, how evolution above the species level has been shown to be a theory using the scientific method.

What is your knowledge about biology?

Let me guess: the same that the authors of Genesis had

Ciao

- viole

 

[sayak83]

I thought you were here to teach me.
No, not at the species level, but above the species level.
We already went through speciation in the thread... somewhere.

No. I am simply providing information if asked. I am not presumptuous enough to teach anyone anything.

There is, as far as I know, nothing like evolution above the species level. There is speciation, when one species splits into two (as the examples I provided) and evolution within a species which is called adaptation. So if species A gives rise to another species C, after which the now two distinct species continue to evolve (adapt) in their seperate ways in accordance to their changing habitats. And maybe in future A can give rise to another species B, or C can give rise to a new species D and so on.
That's the theory of evolution. And people have seen both speciation and adaptation happen. And that is the end of story.

 

[shunyadragon]

Now that you asked...
Have you or anyone ever observed evolution above the species level?

In the course of your dialogue here you have demonstrated the only knowledge you have is from unethical Creationist sources, and not science.

Even though evolution is a gradual process over tens of thousands of years at minimum. Actually evolution on the species level is observed, but this is not necessary to demonstrate evolution beyond a reasonable doubt. The following is an example of evolution on the species level:

From: Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.

For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.

How did this happen? It turns out that the parental plants made mistakes when they created their gametes (analogous to our sperm and eggs). Instead of making gametes with only one copy of each chromosome, they created ones with two or more, a state called polyploidy. Two polyploid gametes from different species, each with double the genetic information they were supposed to have, fused, and created a tetraploid: an creature with 4 sets of chromosomes. Because of the difference in chromosome number, the tetrapoid couldn't mate with either of its parent species, but it wasn't prevented from reproducing with fellow accidents.

This process, known as Hybrid Speciation, has been documented a number of times in different plants. But plants aren't the only ones speciating through hybridization: Heliconius butterflies, too, have split in a similar way.It doesn't take a mass of mutations accumulating over generations to create a different species - all it takes is some event that reproductively isolates one group of individuals from another. This can happen very rapidly, in cases like these of polyploidy. A single mutation can be enough. Or it can happen at a much, much slower pace. This is the speciation that evolution is known for - the gradual changes over time that separate species.

If not, what reason(s) caused you to believe and have faith that it happened/happens/can happen?
If you don't mind, could you do more than just say, "There is overwhelming evidence for it". Rather, could you specifically mention what evidence convinces you?
Thanks.

Evolution has been confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt based on the objective verifiable evidence.

Fundamentalist Creationists bark at the moon with fallacies of 'arguing from ignorance,' moving the goal posts with arguing gaps within gapas within gaps, and unethical citing science..

 

[shunyadragon]

The myth of evolution is simply the story created to explain the diversity of life on earth, by using simple everyday processes seen today (reproduction, adaptation, speciation), along with assumption made about similarity in features and traits in the living and dead, and then extrapolating that.

The theory has been long refuted, by the Cambrian, and other evidence, which destroyed the slow process evolution, resulting in die hard supporters of the theory to create a number of hypothetical to adjust the theory to fit the evidence - instead of going where the evidence led.

Why mention the Cambrian in unethical selective references, when you do not accept an earth and life billion of year old?

This is not a creationist agenda. You lost scientists and atheist both, who saw problems with a "theory in crisis".
Many evolutionists and atheist - not Creationists, saw the reality of the situation.


Many biologist work without evolution. Evolution theory is new, not biology.
That's just another way of taking facts, and trying to prop up a theory.
It's rejected by many, and will continue to be, regardless of who props it up, and calls it well established.

It most definitely a Creationist agenda. It is documented that 99%+ of all scientists related to the science of evolution support evolution. What you describe above concerning opposition to evolution is unethically and dishonestly false without supporting references.

You have not responded to my references with objective verifiable evidence concerning your dishonest claim of evidence for a universal flood.

 

[shunyadragon]

No, that is not what is happening here.
Show me please, how evolution above the species level has been shown to be a theory using the scientific method.

Get a basic education in the sciences, especially genetics, and do not ask others to spoon feed you science you plan to reject in advance.

 

[Workman]

I love how you are pretending to have access to some kind of "special knowledge" that we non-believer can't get to or understand.

And I like how you “Pretend” as well..
Don’t worry I won’t tell anyone..your secret! You figure out your own problems!..tick tock..time is ticking.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And I like how you “Pretend” as well..

What am I pretending?

Don’t worry I won’t tell anyone..your secret!

What secret?

You figure out your own problems!

What problems?

..tick tock..time is ticking.

Time is ticking for what?

 

[Windwalker]

So I also believe the wisdom you speak of is utter foolishness.
(1 Corinthians 3:19) . . .For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. . .

I agree that Wisdom is divine. However, that includes knowledge of the world. It does not say that the "knowledge of the world" is foolishness. But if your mother tells you to look both ways before crossing the street, that is not foolish. That is wisdom based on actual, substantive, provable, and practical knowledge. Getting an education is necessary as a foundation for Wisdom, which comes later.

All the rest you quote is answered in this.

It's futile, because it is really not wisdom at all.
It puffs up, making one feel superior, or better than another, just because they went to a particular school, or achieved a level of learning, or received a certificate with a certain degree.

Actually, no it does not. It's when we're young and ignorant and think we really know things, that we get all puffed up. Actual knowledge, a real education, humbles you. There is a saying I subscribe to. "The more you know, the more you know you don't know". That's humbling.

It's the arrogance of ignorance that "puffs one's self up" imagining they know something when they don't. Such is the bane of fundamentalism, IMHO.

That's why we have the saying, "Knowledge puffs up; Love builds up".

Love is supported by knowledge. You do know that the Apostle Paul was a well-educated man himself, don't you? Quite a number of very gifted and gracious Christians are highly educated.

I believe it's only the ones that lack that and who for some reason feel threatened by education, who make these complaints and try to find reasons to put it down, effectively shooting themselves in their own feet. God gave us intelligence and the faculties of reason for a good purpose. Education is a gift, not an evil.

Before his death, Jesus had educated and trained them and his other disciples extensively.

As you can see, education helps guide understanding.

Even persons who have had higher learning has recognized the truthfulness of these words...
(James 3:17) . . .But the wisdom from above is first of all pure, then peaceable, reasonable, ready to obey, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, not hypocritical.

Yes, Wisdom is divine. But if you don't know to look both ways before you cross the street, it won't be a very fruitful wisdom for long.

So that they believe, even the lowliest individual - a child, can understand God's word, and teach the highly educated.
This I have seen on a regular basis.

Understanding the nature of Divine Love, does not require an education. To open the pages of the Bible and try to say that the authors of Genesis intended the book to be an answer to modern science, has nothing to do with Wisdom. That's just speculations, based upon a severe lack of knowledge. You cannot take faith, and make claims of facts from that. That is a complete abuse of faith.

The wisdom from above has proved superior in my life, and millions of others.

As it does for me as well. But having a knowledge of how things work together in this world is also a truly valuable gift.

 

[Workman]

What am I pretending?



What secret?



What problems?



Time is ticking for what?

What am I pretending?



What secret?



What problems?



Time is ticking for what?

This is how you answer!!!!
You should’ve disagreed to avoid further more..and instead..You want to play a guessing game! your making it too obvious!..I suggest you stop lying to yourself and live life YOUR OWN WAY!! (Not proving yourself for others)

 

[BilliardsBall]

I do not know of any compelling evidence that suggests a global flood, or supports a global flood. There is nothing. Coming to a conclusion that fits the evidence is not being closed-minded.

Why don't you know of any? What is your excuse, since there are thousands of websites on the subject?