How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

[Sargonski]

Actually humans have hair, but not much. It is best to say mostly hairless.

The degree and type of hair in mammals evolved in adaptation to different environments

No kidding friend ! "Humans have hair" excellent observation .. and adapt to different environments .. the deeper into the jungle the darker the color ? .. fascinating Dr. Watson .. are you suggesting that this observation is the result of intelligent Design .. .as Per your ID hypothesis.

 

[paarsurrey]

How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

It's either evolution or magic. Personally i don't believe in magic

Why not to mention another, one has ignored, please, right??

Regards

 

[YoursTrue]

The Bible don’t teach science or maths.

The Bible talk of Joseph being a carpenter, but the gospel cannot teach anyone how to make tables and chairs from wood. It also doesn’t teach how one would fish.

The thing is, the Bible provides nothing that explains or instruct, about how people do things (eg farming, fishing, crafting tools, etc), or how the world works, eg how it rain, why there are thunders after lightnings, what cause high and low tides, how the earth rotate, etc.

A lot of the things that God say about nature, in Job 38, 39, 40 & 41, are utter garbage filled with superstitious nonsense. God can do things, hence the “God did it”, are not explanations in those chapters, the passages in those chapters in the book of Job, are demonstrations that the author have zero understanding of the natural world.

You were making sense until your last paragraph. Which is too bad. Nothing has been found or discovered that demonstrates the process of evoliution said to be that caused water dwelling fish to move up to land. Absolutely nothing. No fossils show that -- even if scientists say they do, they don't, because water dwellers remain that, and there is no evidence that water dwellers evolved to become land dwellers.

 

[Sargonski]

You do not deserve any other response considering your failure to respond coherently and began with insults,

Projection .. let us not tar others with your predilection .. your position was crucified .. found yourself in self contradiction . and have yet to correct this aflixion .. nor answer the simple question of clarification of your position

Did you have trouble understanding the question SunnyD ?

1) mutations are driven by a number of forces .. some static .. some random .. Agreed ?

Or did you not understand that I am a Chemist .. applied microbiologist .. papers up the yang getting those cridders to do what I want .. in an effort to save the world .. from the likes of you know who ! Did "Quantum" in my 4th year .. 400 level fun fun fun in the hot hot sun .. doing them shrodinger wave equations .. or "solving them" if you wish to get funky..

When you put the quantum into the Fractal Equations things get really nifty .. but we don't need no funky math to solve the above question .. the really smart ones can explain things to a novice .. the ones that know .. don't need to jargonate ..

Have no fear as your intelligent design hypothesis is accepted here .. .. least by me .. not that I agree .. but not going to make fun .. cept the ignorant one .. which clearly isn't you knowing what a fractal is and all .. Fibonachi numbers you probably know as well .. hoping that path will not lead you to Hell !

Do you understand (1) ?

 

[Sargonski]

whatever...

You don't believe in God ? ... that is fine .. but that doesn't change the fact that we know how it happened "What-ever" LOL ... talk about thought stopping mechanism kicking in .. might want to get that poison lizard extracted . I can recommend a good extraction service if you like

 

[Sargonski]

You were making sense until your last paragraph. Which is too bad. Nothing has been found or discovered that demonstrates the process of evoliution said to be that caused water dwelling fish to move up to land. Absolutely nothing. No fossils show that -- even if scientists say they do, they don't, because water dwellers remain that, and there is no evidence that water dwellers evolved to become land dwellers.

You can just stop right there .. we have found enourmous amounts of things that demonstrate the process of Evolution ... applicable regardless of trait .. mutaion happens .. sometimes an aquatic creature adapting to land over time .. and we see this currently .. "Walking fish" and in the fossil record .. heh heh .. partially walking .. making the first step in the jump .. .. never mind the small changes over billions of years that resulted in you .. well .. a primative you .. then the sky people came .. created a hybrid from them and the primative earthling .. which resulted in YOu..

So the first part was natural evolution .. the second a hyper accellerated variety .. aided by the hand of God if you like .. 10 thousand years later .. now we humans going into space .. The Bible tells it straight what can we say .. hey . hey . hey !

 

[Brian2]

Exactly, and since they are survive based on adaptability, natural selection is not random.

The mutations would be random but natural selection is not and is based on survivability in a particular environment.
It seems that this would make the whole process of evolution, something that could be pre planned to lead to certain end points in known environments.

 

[shunyadragon]

No kidding friend ! "Humans have hair" excellent observation .. and adapt to different environments .. the deeper into the jungle the darker the color ? .. fascinating Dr. Watson .. are you suggesting that this observation is the result of intelligent Design .. .as Per your ID hypothesis.

As before, your insults continue. I do not believe in Intelligent Design.

I correctly referenced a source that humans are not the only mammal species that have limited or no hair.

Skin color is another issue, but I do not believe your statement above is correct Chimpanzees have light skin color.

 

[shunyadragon]

The mutations would be random but natural selection is not and is based on survivability in a particular environment.
It seems that this would make the whole process of evolution, something that could be pre planned to lead to certain end points in known environments.

Old antiquated science. No, mutations are not random. I referenced a list of over one hundred research papers that describe mutations as following fractal patterns based on Chaos Theory. As with other individual cause and effect events the timing is random, but the process of mutation is not random.

 

[Brian2]

Evolution is well documented and easily observed. People have been doing selective breeding for thousands of years. It works. Variation and selection happens.
The mechanisms of evolution are well known and easily observed. Evolution is acknowledged by almost everyone but the religiously deluded. There is neither need nor evidence of a designer.

You are mistaken if you think that science has shown that there is no need for a designer or no evidence for a designer. These come from faith and not from science or lack of evidence.

No. It's an argument from evidence, by people who follow the evidence whether they like it or not.
Evolution is well evidenced, God is not.

I was not talking about whether evolution happened or not.
If somebody says "I don't see how evolution could have happened without a designer", it is no more a fallacy of incredulity than somebody else who says "Evolution happened without a designer because I find it hard to believe in a designer".

Not at all; neither of them.

Well what you really mean is that you don't see how that is possible. But if I can do it, then it is possible.

 

[shunyadragon]

Projection .. let us not tar others with your predilection .. your position was crucified .. found yourself in self contradiction . and have yet to correct this aflixion .. nor answer the simple question of clarification of your position

Did you have trouble understanding the question SunnyD ?

1) mutations are driven by a number of forces .. some static .. some random .. Agreed ?

Or did you not understand that I am a Chemist .. applied microbiologist .. papers up the yang getting those cridders to do what I want .. in an effort to save the world .. from the likes of you know who ! Did "Quantum" in my 4th year .. 400 level fun fun fun in the hot hot sun .. doing them shrodinger wave equations .. or "solving them" if you wish to get funky..

When you put the quantum into the Fractal Equations things get really nifty .. but we don't need no funky math to solve the above question .. the really smart ones can explain things to a novice .. the ones that know .. don't need to jargonate ..

Have no fear as your intelligent design hypothesis is accepted here .. .. least by me .. not that I agree .. but not going to make fun .. cept the ignorant one .. which clearly isn't you knowing what a fractal is and all .. Fibonachi numbers you probably know as well .. hoping that path will not lead you to Hell !

Do you understand (1) ?

You do not deserve any other response considering your failure to respond coherently and began and continue with insults,

It went down hill when you could not distinguish between a natural event and a natural process.

 

[Brian2]

Evolution is a pretty simple and well understood process.
There is no agent involvement necessary at all.
That indeed has been demonstrated.

If God brought different environments at different times, to produce a type of life, then a third party was involved and science would not know,,,,,,,,,,,,, and more importantly it is not science that says that no third party was involved,,,,,,,,,, it is people who make statements of faith that say such things.

 

[Brian2]

Yes, with makes it non-random.

Which makes it predictable and even planned and designed to work that way.

 

[Brian2]

Natural Selection nor mutations do not involve a random process.

I have always heard that mutations are random.

 

[Sargonski]

As before, your insults continue. I do not believe in Intelligent Design.

I correctly referenced a source that humans are not the only mammal species that have limited or no hair.

Skin color is another issue, but I do not believe your statement above is incorrect Chimpanzees have light skin color.

SunnyD .. the hair thing was a joke .. Did you miss the part about aliens teaching humans about clothes ?

and good you do not believe in Intelligent design but if you don't agree that 1) mutations are driven by a number of forces .. some static .. some random) .. then what is the driving force for evolution .. The Invisible Hand ?

 

[YoursTrue]

You don't believe in God ? ... that is fine .. but that doesn't change the fact that we know how it happened "What-ever" LOL ... talk about thought stopping mechanism kicking in .. might want to get that poison lizard extracted . I can recommend a good extraction service if you like

I believe in God. I think you are making outstanding claims that you do not back up.

 

[Sargonski]

You do not deserve any other response considering your failure to respond coherently and began and continue with insults,

It went down hill when you could not distinguish between a natural event and a natural process.

A complete falsehood on your part .. I gave you an example a natural event which impacted a the natural process of evolution .. contrary to your insulting falsehood in my name .. tsk tsk on you .. for crying boo hoo .. when it is all You .. who is doing what you accuse others of doing .. needing to heed the words of Jesus .. and take log out of own eye.

Now .. you say you do not believe in Intelligent design but if you don't agree that 1) mutations are driven by a number of forces .. some static .. some random) .. then what is the driving force for evolution .. The Invisible Hand ?

 

[YoursTrue]

You can just stop right there .. we have found enourmous amounts of things that demonstrate the process of Evolution ...

No, we haven't. "We" have found fossils.

applicable regardless of trait .. mutaion happens .. sometimes an aquatic creature adapting to land over time .. and we see this currently .. "Walking fish" and in the fossil record .. heh heh .. partially walking .. making the first step in the jump .. .. never mind the small changes over billions of years that resulted in you .. well .. a primative you .. then the sky people came .. created a hybrid from them and the primative earthling .. which resulted in YOu..

So the first part was natural evolution .. the second a hyper accellerated variety .. aided by the hand of God if you like .. 10 thousand years later .. now we humans going into space .. The Bible tells it straight what can we say .. hey . hey . hey !

Walking fish cannot last long out of water and show no "growth," (evolution) in that they head on towards solely land dwelling animals. Scientists can study their genetic makeup, but that does not mean these fish in any way are in the process of evolving towards land dwellers who can live out of water entirely.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, we haven't. "We" have found fossils.

Walking fish cannot last long out of water and show no "growth," (evolution) in that they head on towards solely land dwelling animals. Scientists can study their genetic makeup, but that does not mean these fish in any way are in the process of evolving towards land dwellers who can live out of water entirely.

Oh, and one more thing to @Sargonski -- gorillas and monkeys, etc., mankind's closest genetic relatives insofar as I understand, have not invented microscopes and do not concern themselves with figuring out their origins. In other words, there is a vast difference in cognition (mental attitude) between humans and gorillas. Or bonobos.

 

[John53]

Oh, and one more thing to @Sargonski -- gorillas and monkeys, etc., mankind's closest genetic relatives insofar as I understand, have not invented microscopes and do not concern themselves with figuring out their origins. In other words, there is a vast difference in cognition (mental attitude) between humans and gorillas. Or bonobos.

So that means there was a vast difference in cognition (mental attitude) between humans of today and humans of 2,000 years ago because the microscope was invented about 1590.