Just Accidental?

[Jose Fly]

Yes, please tell me. I’m interested! I’ve seen some of his school science book accusations, and those books served to verify what he stated, but I haven’t seen researched them all. Enlighten me.

But it better be concrete evidence, not the circumstantial kind that permeates the evolutionary sciences!

In Wells' Icons of Evolution, there is a section entitled "Peppered Moths Don't Rest on Tree Trunks". That's simply not true, as the data from Majerus' work on peppered moths shows....

Wells is lying on a very basic, fundamental level.

 

[Jose Fly]

How easily you fob off the difficult questions with personal insinuations.......is this all you have.....? Pathetic IMO.

Are you really this clueless? Have you actually convinced yourself that your religious beliefs play no role at all in any discussion of science with you?

Wow.

 

[Deeje]

"BioLogos invites the church and the world to see the harmony between science and biblical faith as we present an evolutionary understanding of God’s creation."
What We Believe

Not what I believe. Not even close. Often "Christians" will look for ways to justify evolution as part of creation, but its just a face saving exercise. You cannot marry them....they are opposing beliefs.

"Evolution is a scientific theory supported by an overwhelming amount of evidence. Some Christians fear that accepting the theory means rejecting God as creator. But that just doesn’t follow. Christians accept scientific theories about the weather, the formation of mountains, and even the conception and development of individual human beings while still acknowledging that God is the creator and sustainer of these things. So giving a scientific description for a process does not rule out a legitimate theological description of the process as well.

Not what I believe. The "scientific description for a process" is not in the least in line with what scripture says. They are poles apart. The "overwhelming evidence" when you really examine it is totally "underwhelming" to say the least.

This article summarizes multiple independent lines of evidence that evolution is the best scientific description of the process by which life has diversified. Think of each of these lines of evidence as a clue to the past, all of which together form a compelling picture of the relatedness of all species."
What is the evidence for evolution?

The first point from you link...

"Forms and structures point to common ancestors
When we examine the bodies of today’s animals in detail, we find some remarkable similarities."

"Point to a common ancestor"..."remarkable similarities"? Very scientific....

"We can also look at the bodies of animals today and find features that are similar to what other animals have, but which no longer seem to function (or have different functions). Scientists call these vestigial traits."

Vestigial traits are not evidence of evolution because many of these so called "vestigial" features were later found to be useful in a creature's design.

"Some classic examples are non-functioning eyes in blind cave fish, the hip bones on whales, and leg bones buried in the muscles of some snakes."

The 'non functioning eyes in blind cave fish' is more likely to be an example of adaptation....not macro-evolution. Like blind humans, the other senses become heightened and the fish no longer needed vision in their dark, cave habitat. Adaptation may have phased them out. Adaptation is a slow process too. But the fish are still fish.

"Hip bones on whales"....not vestigial after all. They are vital for sexual function as it turns out.
https://evolutionnews.org/2014/09/whales_hips_ano/

"Leg bones in snakes" .....may also be linked to their sexual activity. If these bones are only found near the base of a boa constrictor's tail, then do we assume that this snake's ancestors walked on only two legs? Funny word pictures indeed.

"In our own bodies, we can point to the appendix, wisdom teeth, goosebumps, and many other features. These are more clues that today’s animals have a history that extends back to ancestors that were quite different."
"Clues"? Where is Sherlock Holmes when you need him?

Here is an evolutionist's explanation for "vestigal" things in man.
Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find
So even evolutionists are finding that their previous ideas about "vestigial" things are not so vestigial after all. Turns out to be 'elementary my dear Watson'.

Evolutionists have apparently designed words in 'patterns that form structures' in the human mind, that they teach to others so that this ridiculous notion is perpetuated. It doesn't matter how stupid their theories may be, it still required minds to construct them and minds to keep teaching them as concepts to others. The fact that intelligent men of science are carried along in this ruse is staggering until you realize what the driving force is.....ego....recognition....accolades....and grants. Ridicule is routinely used to keep wondering minds in check.

"The fossil record reveals intermediate species
It is often claimed by those who deny evolution that no “intermediate” fossils have ever been found that support the theory’s claims. This just isn’t true. Fossils can’t prove that one species evolved from another, but when we find a succession of them over time with slight modifications, it is difficult to deny the appearance of evolution."

Do you see what I see? Whenever evolutionists post links to articles that supposedly "demonstrate" that evolution has "overwhelming evidence" I just have to smile because the evidence would not stand up in a court of law...it would be laughed out of the room.

I could go on for pages taking this nonsense apart but I will let the readers do that for themselves. Once you get how the language is constructed, loaded with suggestions pretending to be facts, the whole house of cards comes crashing down.

 

[Deeje]

One doesn't "believe" in the basic ToE any more than one would "believe" Earth has a moon-- either one accepts the reality based on observations and common sense or they don't-- "belief" is for theists.

That is just the point metis.....you must accept their "reality" presented in terms that are not absolute but designed to make it all sound so feasible.......until you take it apart and concentrate on what they aren't saying as opposed to the agenda that they are pushing. Assumption is not fact. It is belief.

All material items appear to change over time and genes are material items-- that's the reality that we see daily, thus "evolution" continues on and on and on....

Evidence for this "change" from a strictly scientific viewpoint (demonstrated by experiment and duplication under strict conditions) cannot be produced in the case of macro-evolution. Adaptation IS demonstrable in the lab.....but there is nothing but "suggestion" to infer that it can transform one kind of creature into another over vast periods of time, which is what evolution "suggests" with no real evidence that it is even possible.

If it is a suggestion, then teach it as an unproven theory, not a fact. School children are indoctrinated with this theory long before they reach university. Ask any university student who has chosen to study science whether they have any doubts about its validity and you will get a general consensus that it is undeniable.....but then ask them to produce substantiated evidence and they are left scratching their heads trying to find some that does not rely on "belief", "faith" implication and inference.

How can you teach something as scientific truth when you have no more real evidence than believers in ID have?

 

[Deeje]

Are you really this clueless? Have you actually convinced yourself that your religious beliefs play no role at all in any discussion of science with you?

Wow.

Can I ask you the same question? Your 'beliefs' play an equal role in you hanging onto your 'beliefs', unsubstantiated with any real evidence and peppered with personal insults designed to make your opposition look inferior to your great science gods......sorry but the "science" you promote is pathetic nonsense IMO.

I don't know how intelligent people ever accept it....but then I know what drives it.

Wow !

 

[ArtieE]

How can you teach something as scientific truth when you have no more real evidence than believers in ID have?

OK you have convinced me. The Raelians are believers in ID and are probably right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raëlism

 

[Deeje]

This is for people who are convinced that something complex and beautiful cannot come from something which is not complex and beautiful.

View attachment 19235

This is a single image (Mandelbrot Set) which I have produced using Javascript and have zoomed into various sections. The whole image is produced by the result of iterating this function:

The function is:

NOT designed
NOT complex
NOT beautiful

Yet the resulting pattern appears to be all three.

Some will say this does not count because it is produced by a computer which is designed. BUT that is irrelevant, because the computer does NOT follow a complex rule. It follows the function above, which anyone can learn to follow and is simple in comparison to the pattern it produces. The complexity derives entirely from simple mathematics.

Patterns in nature are not accidental. If something is designed, it exhibits purpose beyond being just nice to look at. We see this is the incredible beauty in nature. Why are sunsets and sunrises so beautiful? Do they have to be for the sun to rise and set as the earth rotates? Why is the sky blue, when space is black? Is there a reason why we see the sky as beautiful?

Clouds are also an awesome feature of creation, designed to lift water from the salty oceans and process and deposit it as fresh water to keep living land dwellers alive. Do clouds have to be beautiful?

What would sunsets be without clouds?

Now ask yourself what good all this beauty would be without the unique ability that humans have to appreciate it on many levels? When was the last time you saw an animal admiring the sunset? What inspires us to want to capture such images and share them with others who will also appreciate them?

What forces combine to produce these pictures? Are they just another magnificent fluke? You can believe that if you wish....to me that is to be blind to the obvious.

I see design, complexity and beauty all around me. Design involves planning and planning involves intelligence. Can you dispute that at any level? What object that you use that was designed for a purpose, had no designer and maker? When does common sense fly out the window to be replaced by something that makes no sense at all?

Who among humans would not stop to admire these scenes? They are breathtaking....but why? Science cannot answer that question....ID does......beautifully.

 

[Deeje]

OK you have convinced me. The Raelians are believers in ID and are probably right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raëlism

You will believe whatever you want to believe ArtieE......just as we all do. The truth is out there but what is it? We choose what to believe because it appeals to something inside of us....who understands this mysterious thing called "belief"?
It is after all, what separates us......just as it is designed to do.

 

[ArtieE]

You will believe whatever you want to believe ArtieE......just as we all do. The truth is out there but what is it? We choose what to believe because it appeals to something inside of us....who understand this mysterious thing called "belief"?

Evolutionists are beginning to get a grasp on it. The Origins of Religion: How Supernatural Beliefs Evolved

 

[Deeje]

Evolutionists are beginning to get a grasp on it. The Origins of Religion: How Supernatural Beliefs Evolved

You do realize that this whole scenario is based on the premise that our ancestors were primitive cavemen......?

I don't believe that for one moment, the rationale for evolution being that this explanation must be true because all early humans must have been cavemen....right?
There are primitive cave dwellers even in this day and age, co-existing with new age technology. What does that prove?

The Kalahari bushmen were a prime example of primitive peoples living in total harmony with their land, completely removed from the modern world. Sadly now they have been displaced from their land after living in this desert region for perhaps millenniums. The result for them and other displaced people has been catastrophic.

How the Kalahari bushmen and other tribespeople are being evicted to make way for ‘wilderness’

I believe that science is responsible for providing the data that made these evictions possible and even seem necessary.
All hale science!

 

[Hockeycowboy]

In Wells' Icons of Evolution, there is a section entitled "Peppered Moths Don't Rest on Tree Trunks". That's simply not true, as the data from Majerus' work on peppered moths shows....

Wells is lying on a very basic, fundamental level.

This critique you've provided on Wells' statement....how does this bolster macro evolution? Fortunately, there's more involved to his critique! @Jose Fly , wouldn't it always be better to hear the entire context of a matter, right from the "horses mouth", as they say, and not second-hand? (Maybe he's probably thinking he has to fight fire with fire, i.e., lying with lying [which, if that's what is happening, I wouldn't approve of, truth should stand on its own]):

(28:12 into video.

 

[Sapiens]

This critique you've provided on Wells' statement....how does this bolster macro evolution? Fortunately, there's more involved to his critique! @Jose Fly , wouldn't it always be better to hear the entire context of a matter, right from the "horses mouth", as they say, and not second-hand? (Maybe he's probably thinking he has to fight fire with fire, i.e., lying with lying [which, if that's what is happening, I wouldn't approve of, truth should stand on its own]):

(28:12 into video.

I just suffered through the entire video, I'd estimate that half of everything said was an outright lie and most all of the remainder was, at best, a half-truth skewed either to support a predetermined position or evidencing an abysmal lack of logical and scientific sophistication.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I just suffered through the entire video, I'd estimate that half of everything said was an outright lie and most all of the remainder was, at best, a half-truth skewed either to support a predetermined position or evidencing an abysmal lack of logical and scientific sophistication.

That’s sorta funny, you talking about “a predetermined position”.

I’m more aware of the lies being promoted by scientists on your side of the issue.

They take what in court would be considered circumstantial evidence, and parade it as fact. Watching ‘Perry Mason’ taught me how easy it is for evidence to seem to support a certain “theory”, but then in the end, it has no bearing on the truth.

You and I are just going to have to agree to disagree.

Hope you have a good evening!

 

[Sapiens]

That’s sorta funny, you talking about “a predetermined position”.

I have no predetermined positions, only current positions.

That’s sorta funny, you talking about “a predetermined position”.
I’m more aware of the lies being promoted by scientists on your side of the issue.

Then you are little aware of anything.

They take what in court would be considered circumstantial evidence, and parade it as fact. Watching ‘Perry Mason’ taught me how easy it is for evidence to seem to support a certain “theory”, but then in the end, it has no bearing on the truth.

There's nothing wrong with circumstantial evidence, but there is something wrong with belief in things for which there is NO EVIDENCE. You got your education from TV, I got mine from two of the best universities in the world. I wonder which of us would qualify in court as an expert in the biological sciences and evolution, don't you?

You and I are just going to have to agree to disagree.

We do not have to, you might actually examine the evidence with an open mind ... nah.

Hope you have a good evening!

'night.

 

[scott777]

Patterns in nature are not accidental. If something is designed, it exhibits purpose beyond being just nice to look at. We see this is the incredible beauty in nature. Why are sunsets and sunrises so beautiful? Do they have to be for the sun to rise and set as the earth rotates? Why is the sky blue, when space is black? Is there a reason why we see the sky as beautiful?

Clouds are also an awesome feature of creation, designed to lift water from the salty oceans and process and deposit it as fresh water to keep living land dwellers alive. Do clouds have to be beautiful?

What would sunsets be without clouds?

Now ask yourself what good all this beauty would be without the unique ability that humans have to appreciate it on many levels? When was the last time you saw an animal admiring the sunset? What inspires us to want to capture such images and share them with others who will also appreciate them?

What forces combine to produce these pictures? Are they just another magnificent fluke? You can believe that if you wish....to me that is to be blind to the obvious.

I see design, complexity and beauty all around me. Design involves planning and planning involves intelligence. Can you dispute that at any level? What object that you use that was designed for a purpose, had no designer and maker? When does common sense fly out the window to be replaced by something that makes no sense at all?

Who among humans would not stop to admire these scenes? They are breathtaking....but why? Science cannot answer that question....ID does......beautifully.

All due respect, but you are consistently avoiding the blatantly obvious, which I have made very clear, that the patterns appear to be designed but were not. You still haven’t addressed that fact, which is a mathematical proof by the way.

And here (5th paragraph):

Mandelbrot set - Wikipedia

Wikipedia states "The Mandelbrot set has become popular outside mathematics both for its aesthetic appeal and as an example of a complex structure arising from the application of simple rules."

Yes, design does involve planning. My patterns were not designed and not planned. Your post in no way answers that, so are you conceding?

 

[ArtieE]

All hale science!

How do Jehovah's Witnesses view science? "We respect the achievements of science and believe in scientific findings that are supported by evidence." How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses View Science? Except when the evidence doesn't support your beliefs of course.

 

[Deeje]

All due respect, but you are consistently avoiding the blatantly obvious, which I have made very clear, that the patterns appear to be designed but were not. You still haven’t addressed that fact, which is a mathematical proof by the way.

All due respect back to you, but you keep going on about fractals as if they connect in some way to evolution. We are not talking about fractals here......we are not including mathematical design, which is as appealing as a kaleidoscope was to me when I was a kid. What are you trying to prove? That pretty things can exist without being designed? Can mathematics be explained without being designed? Aren't fractals based on mathematics?

"Pretty" is not at issue here.....its functionality....deliberate purpose to something that cannot be explained away as something "accidental". There is purpose to design which involves planning....you do understand this?

Wikipedia states "The Mandelbrot set has become popular outside mathematics both for its aesthetic appeal and as an example of a complex structure arising from the application of simple rules."

What has this got to do with anything? The "simple rules" are mathematical are they not? Did mathematics invent itself? Did the human brain just accidentally "get" math? Did Fibonacci numbers, evident in so many things in nature, just happen for no apparent reason? I'm sure that science thinks they did. Good 'ol Mr Nobody....what a clever fellow.....pity he will never be recognized for the genius that he is.......

Yes, design does involve planning. My patterns were not designed and not planned. Your post in no way answers that, so are you conceding?

No one said your patterns had to be planned. What purpose do they serve apart from their aesthetics? I am speaking about the reasons why humans appreciate beauty in nature in a completely different way to animals. Why are there flowers of every color?....what is color anyway? Why does it exist?.....why do birds sing songs that make us feel good?......why do scenes of waterfalls take our breath away? Why would we find the sight of falling water so attractive? What is water? How did it come to be?

What about the air we breathe? Was it just a fortunate accident too? Is it a co-incidence that trees breathe out what we breathe in and vice versa? If I keep going will I run out of fortunate coincidences....?
How many coincidences are too many to be believable?

 

[Deeje]

How do Jehovah's Witnesses view science? "We respect the achievements of science and believe in scientific findings that are supported by evidence." How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses View Science? Except when the evidence doesn't support your beliefs of course.

Not at all......there is a big difference between provable science and theoretical science. We appreciate true science that is supported by real evidence.....evidence that is demonstrable.....provable.....not evidence that is merely suggestions.....about what "might have" happened when no one was around to document anything. ....except the Creator of course.

 

[ArtieE]

What about the air we breathe? Was it just a fortunate accident too? Is it a co-incidence that trees breathe out what we breathe in and vice versa? If I keep going will I run out of fortunate coincidences....?
How many coincidences are too many to be believable?

There are "around 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in our observable Universe." How Many Planets Are In The Universe?
Deeje is trying to convince logical and rational people that not a single one of them could be like Earth by chance. I wonder how many buys that...

 

[ArtieE]

What is water? How did it come to be?

Waves of energy from a black hole make water by literally knocking hydrogen and oxygen atoms together. No god involved. Scientists Discover The Oldest, Largest Body Of Water In Existence–In Space | Fast Company