God gave us mind to know Him,or deny Him?

[Kirran]

We've evidenced and observed speciation over historical timescales.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No, you are wrong. Perhaps simply unaware?

I believe in evolution but not that we evolved from lower life forms. Man was always man.

 

[Kirran]

I believe in evolution but not that we evolved from lower life forms. Man was always man.

1) 'Lower' and 'higher' lifeforms is your own value judgement.
2) In what way was the ancestor of you and me who lived 1 billion years ago a human?

 

[loverofhumanity]

1) 'Lower' and 'higher' lifeforms is your own value judgement.
2) In what way was the ancestor of you and me who lived 1 billion years ago a human?

I'm only relating to you what a Manifestation of God has stated. Take it or leave it as you please but for me God knows far more about how the universe and life evolved than you or I do and I back Him as He's All Knowing.

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe in evolution but not that we evolved from lower life forms. Man was always man.

That is a direct contradiction of claims.

 

[loverofhumanity]

That is a direct contradiction of claims.

We believe in evolution within the same kingdoms. For example animals can evolve within the animal kingdom, the mineral and vegetable kingdoms likewise and the human kingdom within the human kingdom but no cross migration.

So a stone will never develop the senses as it can only take on characteristics of its kingdom. Apes will never evolve into scientists or prophets as the limitations of the animal kingdom prevent it.

 

[Kirran]

We believe in evolution within the same kingdoms. For example animals can evolve within the animal kingdom, the mineral and vegetable kingdoms likewise and the human kingdom within the human kingdom but no cross migration.

So a stone will never develop the senses as it can only take on characteristics of its kingdom. Apes will never evolve into scientists or prophets as the limitations of the animal kingdom prevent it.

You seem to think that means a lot more than it does. Biologically speaking, humans are classified in the animal kingdom. Obviously you break with this, which is as it is. Really, what would a human 1 billion years ago have been like?

 

[Godobeyer]

Uh... unfortunately, you are lying. Quite strongly, too.

That's my opinion.
I am not lying, the lying is when you trying to represent a theory as fact.

The evolution had two timelines. and two types microevolution(fact) and macroevolution(theory).

past and present(future) , the study"claims" of past(theory) had nothing to do with study of present(fact). two are different studies methodes.

 

[loverofhumanity]

That is a direct contradiction of claims.

Actually I can send you an interesting pre publication Book written by a Baha'i on the Originality of Species if I have an email address.

As it's pre publication some photos in earlier pages cover some text but it's mostly in excellent format and goes into extraordinary depth. More scientific than theory and He has asked for criticisms and comments.

 

[LuisDantas]

That's my opinion.

That would make it even worse, and still not even remotely true either.

I am not lying, the lying is when you trying to represent a theory as fact.

Must we really waste time like this?

 

[LuisDantas]

Actually I can send you an interesting pre publication Book written by a Baha'i on the Originality of Species if I have an email address.

It better come with a huge appendix of sources and evidences. I wonder if it includes a chapter on why the world behaves as if Bahai teachings were clueless.

As it's pre publication some photos in earlier pages cover some text but it's mostly in excellent format and goes into extraordinary depth. More scientific than theory and He has asked for criticisms and comments.

And yet it neglects to take the evidence seriously...

 

[Godobeyer]

You are misinformed. Either about evolution specifically, about what "theory" means in science, or about what evidence really exists.

Or some combination of those.

Labeling will not deceive.

Call it even "miracle of evolution", that will not change anything the reality that's it remain "theory"

 

[Godobeyer]

Do you think that makes it possible for speciation (what is called somewhat "hopefully" "macro-evolution" by some) to no longer happen, or no longer be known to have happened and remain happening?

That makes about as much sense as hoping gravity to no longer be known in a few decades.

Marco-evolution never happened and will not happaned.

 

[LuisDantas]

Labeling will not deceive.

It often does. That is why there is this so-called "controversy".

Call it even "miracle of evolution", that will not change anything the reality that's it remain "theory"

You are unaware of the meaning of the word theory in science. And, clearly, of what the Theory of Evolution says as well.

 

[LuisDantas]

Marco-evolution never happened and will not happaned.

Reality disagrees.

 

[Godobeyer]

Reality disagrees.

Your reality

 

[Godobeyer]

It often does. That is why there is this so-called "controversy".

Good that you know that

You are unaware of the meaning of the word theory in science. And, clearly, of what the Theory of Evolution says as well.

This is it, I was refering to meaning "theory" not "fact"

 

[Kirran]

Speciation (what you're calling macroevolution) has been observed in the field and in the lab.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

In what ways do you understand our current understanding of evolution to differ from Darwin's, if you're saying they're different theories altogether, Godobeyer?

 

[loverofhumanity]

It better come with a huge appendix of sources and evidences. I wonder if it includes a chapter on why the world behaves as if Bahai teachings were clueless.

And yet it neglects to take the evidence seriously...

Without reading a page you've already condemned it?

 

[Valjean]

I propose an extension of Godwin's Law:
Whoever uses "only a theory" in a discussion of evolution looses all credibility.
Whoever brings up Darwin as a current biological theoretician, looses credibility.