Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[metis]

Answer my question,

Were you created and made by your mother's womb or evolved by nature ?
i ain't asking you about the origin of monkeys.

Both.

 

[Nietzsche]

Just a reminder

That might work, but it makes the dangerous assumption that they can read.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Yes of course it is a natural process which needs a male and a female,then the fetus will be created naturally in the mother's womb, never evolved, so we're a creation and evolution is billions of years ago.

Evolution is not a "start stop" process. True, it goes in spurts, but evolution is a continuing phenomenon. We are constantly finding new species, and we are constantly seeing other species go extinct. Even within the human population, we are seeing sharp declines in persons born with wisdom teeth -- these being no longer necessary to the survival of homos sapien.

Here is one adorable species we have discovered within the last 5 years:

Caqueta monkey

Discovering a new mammal is a relatively rare occurrence; discovering a new monkey is rarer still. In 2010, a team of scientists ventured into the Amazon jungle in southern Colombia and documented, for the first time, the Caqueta titi monkey, an adorable, tiny primate notable for being one of the few monogamous monkeys and for purring like a cat. Primatologist Thomas Defler led his team to the Colombia's Caqueta province, which was too dangerous (because of gang activity) to visit just a few years ago. Sadly, just as we're discovering the Caqueta titi monkey, we're considering listing it as an endangered species. It's estimated that there are fewer than 250 living in the wild.

9 newly discovered species: Caqueta monkey | MNN - Mother Nature Network

Not to mention the observed phenomenon of the formation of nylon-eating bacteria and the changes evident within a few generations of relocated living things.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

 

[FearGod]

So these things are undesigned until they evolve into being designed?

And this miracle needs billion of years to happen.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

And this miracle needs billion of years to happen.

Obviously, you didn't watch the videos which directly addressed the myth that evolution must, and always must, require "billions of years" to happen.

 

[leibowde84]

And this miracle needs billion of years to happen.

What miracle?

 

[FearGod]

That's not really a question, but the obvious answer is that I (as an individual) am both a product of development in my mother's womb and the product of the evolution of carbon based life forms on the planet earth. I can't answer the question any more clearly than that (although, I'm not sure it was actually a question). The answer is that I am a product of BOTH development and evolution.

Are you trying to say that it cannot be both? If so, why do you feel that way? One describes the origin of me specifically, and the other describes the origin of the species of which I am a part.

Can we say you were evolved from (a monkey like) animal then created as human in your mother's womb, or can we go farther and say you evolved from a bacteria and now were created in your mother;s womb.
I think you're happy now as i mentioned evolution before being created.

 

[FearGod]

What miracle?

Random mutations to have it right by chance and to be directed by natural selection.

 

[leibowde84]

Can we say you were evolved from (a monkey like) animal then created as human in your mother's womb, or can we go farther and say you evolved from a bacteria and now were created in your mother;s womb.
I think you're happy now as i mentioned evolution before being created.

You are asking two completely different questions, that's all.

1. Are you as an individual the product of development in your mother's womb?
2. Are you as an individual identified with a certain species, and is that species the product of natural evolution from a common ancestor of modern apes?

The answer to both are "yes". There is no "first" as they are part of different aspects of life. One is questioning the origin of the individual, the other is questioning the origin of the species that individual belongs to. I'm not sure where your confusion lies. Can you explain your issue a bit?

 

[McBell]

1. Are you as an individual the product of development in your mother's womb?

Except he is not asking about developing, he is asking about being created.

 

[leibowde84]

Random mutations to have it right by chance and to be directed by natural selection.

Natural Selection cannot actively "guide" anything. It is a literary term describing the fundamental notion that the strong (various aspects of "strength" are included) have a better chance for longer lives than the weak. Evolution is simply a victim of this indisputable fact. And, most mutations are neither good nor bad. They certainly make up the vast majority of all mutations. Then the "negative" mutations are roughly equal to the "positive" mutations on opposite sides of these "neutral" mutations. The negatives usually make reproduction a bit harder, and the positives usually make reproduction a bit easier.

What is so unbelievable about that?

 

[dust1n]

And this miracle needs billion of years to happen.

Hmm, I'm not sure we are at a disagreement, other than what you call a miracle, I don't call it a miracle.

 

[leibowde84]

Except he is not asking about developing, he is asking about being created.

Being created? What do you mean? I thought he meant development. It's not like a fetus appears out of nowhere. It comes into being as a result of conception.

 

[FearGod]

You are asking two completely different questions, that's all.

1. Are you as an individual the product of development in your mother's womb?
2. Are you as an individual identified with a certain species, and is that species the product of natural evolution from a common ancestor of modern apes?

The answer to both are "yes". There is no "first" as they are part of different aspects of life. One is questioning the origin of the individual, the other is questioning the origin of the species that individual belongs to. I'm not sure where your confusion lies. Can you explain your issue a bit?

So is it correct to say that now you were created as human being in your mother's womb but as species you were descended from Apes.

 

[FearGod]

Being created? What do you mean? I thought he meant development. It's not like a fetus appears out of nowhere. It comes into being as a result of conception.

We aren't all alike even though that life evolved from simpler to more complex ones, but we're different creations, you aren't like me and i'm not like him.....etc

 

[McBell]

Being created? What do you mean? I thought he meant development. It's not like a fetus appears out of nowhere. It comes into being as a result of conception.

At best he is unintentionally conflating the terms.
At worst he is being flat out dishonest.

I suspect it is somewhere in between.

Interestingly enough, the womb does not "create" anything.
Nothing at all.

So the term is most inappropriate from get go.

 

[leibowde84]

So is it correct to say that now you were created as human being in your mother's womb but as species you were descended from Apes.

No, humans did not "descend" from Apes. We have a common ancestor with what today we refer to as "apes". The common ancestor has been extinct for a very long time. They do not exist anymore.

And, there is no "creation" involved, so I am not sure why you are using that word. The fetus is a product of conception. The sperm and the egg are part of the conception process that produces a Zygote. This Zygote develops inside the mother's womb until it reaches the stage where it can be classified as a "fetus". That "fetus" then develops into what is considered, post-birth, to be a "baby".

So, I would say that individually, we develop in our mother's womb. As a species we have evolved from an ancestor we have in common with modern apes. However, since we are all products of the species we are a part of, individually we are "products" of both.

Would you not agree with this assessment? If not, specifically what part are you having issues with?

 

[leibowde84]

We aren't all alike even though that life evolved from simpler to more complex ones, but we're different creations, you aren't like me and i'm not like him.....etc

What does that have to do with being "created" in the womb? Of course we are all different. We all have slight variations in our DNA, so shouldn't we expect that?

 

[FearGod]

No, humans did not "descend" from Apes. We have a common ancestor with what today we refer to as "apes". The common ancestor has been extinct for a very long time. They do not exist anymore.

And, there is no "creation" involved, so I am not sure why you are using that word. The fetus is a product of conception. The sperm and the egg are part of the conception process that produces a Zygote. This Zygote develops inside the mother's womb until it reaches the stage where it can be classified as a "fetus". That "fetus" then develops into what is considered, post-birth, to be a "baby".

So, I would say that individually, we develop in our mother's womb. As a species we have evolved from an ancestor we have in common with modern apes. However, since we are all products of the species we are a part of, individually we are "products" of both.

Would you not agree with this assessment? If not, specifically what part are you having issues with?

Oh, sorry i didn't realize that you're allergic to the word creation, so we can use develop instead


develop - make something new, such as a product or a mental or artistic creation; "Her company developed a new kind of building material that withstands all kinds of weather"; "They developed a new technique"
evolve, germinate, develop - work out; "We have developed a new theory of evolution"
build - give form to, according to a plan; "build a modern nation"; "build a million-dollar business"
create - bring into existence; "The company was created 25 years ago"; "He created a new movement in painting"
create by mental act, create mentally - create mentally and abstractly rather than with one's hands

develop - definition of develop by The Free Dictionary