Homosexuality and Evolution: God's Will and Human Belief

[Audie]

This statement makes absolutely no sense. All of the parts are ALREADY functioning - all evolution does is refine and specialize those functions. It doesn't generate an entirely new appendage out of nothing.

A good example is the evolution of an eye. The process doesn't go "no eye > half-eye > full eye". It starts with a function - in this case, the detection of light - and slowly produces improved variations of it. Without going into specifics, the process is more like: patch of light sensitive cells > cupped patch of light sensitive cells allowing for detection of the direction of light > deeper cupping further increasing directional detection > increasing cupping leading to a pinhole forming allowing for even greater light detection > cup fills with a transparent humor that protects the rear of the chamber > lens forms over pinhole for enhanced detection and protection > separate iris and cornea develop allowing for control over the amount and range of light entering the chamber.

Note how each step the process described above represents a perfectly functioning appendage, with each step being a slight improvement on the former. At no point is any organism in the process left with a "half formed" appendage that confers no use or advantage.


Once again, this makes no sense. What is a "half species"? The concept doesn't exist in evolution.

For example, look at your own family tree. In particular, picture your father and your paternal grandfather. Now, in evolutionary terms, it could be said that your father represents a "transition" between your grandfather and you. So, tell me, because you are a fully-formed human, does this mean that your father, who represents a transitional state, is somehow "half you"? Does he have exactly half your features? Half limbs? Or are they a fully-formed human who produced a slight variation of what they were while being a slight variation of what you grandfather is?

When you can answer that question, you'll realize how your question makes no sense.

When you can answer that question, you'll realize how your question makes no sense.

Yep. But how much sense does it make to keep
asking and waiting?

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I did NOT write "transitional fossils" I wrote FULLY FORMED FOSSILS created by just-so evolutiondidit storytelling.

Transitional fossils are fully formed fossils. So how in the world do transitional fossils support creationism?

 

[SkepticThinker]

That's why I quoted the Third Way, because they are NOT creationists but are scientists who are tired of evolutiondidit storytelling that doesn't line up with modern science.

None of them are denying that evolution occurs though.

 

[BilliardsBall]

This statement makes absolutely no sense. All of the parts are ALREADY functioning - all evolution does is refine and specialize those functions. It doesn't generate an entirely new appendage out of nothing.

A good example is the evolution of an eye. The process doesn't go "no eye > half-eye > full eye". It starts with a function - in this case, the detection of light - and slowly produces improved variations of it. Without going into specifics, the process is more like: patch of light sensitive cells > cupped patch of light sensitive cells allowing for detection of the direction of light > deeper cupping further increasing directional detection > increasing cupping leading to a pinhole forming allowing for even greater light detection > cup fills with a transparent humor that protects the rear of the chamber > lens forms over pinhole for enhanced detection and protection > separate iris and cornea develop allowing for control over the amount and range of light entering the chamber.

Note how each step the process described above represents a perfectly functioning appendage, with each step being a slight improvement on the former. At no point is any organism in the process left with a "half formed" appendage that confers no use or advantage.


Once again, this makes no sense. What is a "half species"? The concept doesn't exist in evolution.

For example, look at your own family tree. In particular, picture your father and your paternal grandfather. Now, in evolutionary terms, it could be said that your father represents a "transition" between your grandfather and you. So, tell me, because you are a fully-formed human, does this mean that your father, who represents a transitional state, is somehow "half you"? Does he have exactly half your features? Half limbs? Or are they a fully-formed human who produced a slight variation of what they were while being a slight variation of what you grandfather is?

When you can answer that question, you'll realize how your question makes no sense.

So the eye with its many functions and its connection to the brain evolved simultaneously? How is that not a just-so story?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So the eye with its many functions and its connection to the brain evolved simultaneously? How is that not a just-so story?

BB, that is literally the exact opposite of what I just explained. Did you even read my post?

Are you a Poe?

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

So the eye with its many functions and its connection to the brain evolved simultaneously? How is that not a just-so story?

The claim that all of those features had to evolve at the same time is a just-so story. There are many examples of eyes that lack features. For example, the eye found in comb jellies is not connected to a brain. There are eyes that have no pupil and are simply a light sensitive spots.