On Evolution & Creation

[YoursTrue]

What evidence do you have for this?

So what is life? You talk about it as if it were some kind of stuff that can be added to inanimate matter to make it alive. No such stuff has ever been found.

and the thing that gives life to so-called "inanimate" objects may never be replicated by scientists, since I believe (I don't believe you believe) that life given to anyone or anything comes from God.

 

[Valjean]

So you believe the universe is all that exists and time is a dimension of it. Therefore you conclude that since time is a part of the universe there is no outside of the universe.

That being the case you will never figure out where the universe came from, until you run out of time as the duration between your birth and death will have expired.

Enjoy,

That doesn't follow...

 

[Valjean]

Thanks for that. I understand that life forms mutate. I am pretty sure they cause variations within the gene pools. But -- while the philosophy may be there in reference to the theory of evolution, I do not see the real evidence that fish became apes in the long run. Tiktaalik doesn't do it as far as I am concerned. Be that as it may, however, thank you for your response which was respectful, and that is where I close right now.
P.S. When I say that I believe lifeforms mutate, I am talking about things like dogs interbreeding, and humans interbreeding and producing populations of some with characteristically long or short limbs within the general population, sometimes tribal characteristics.

Do you see the evidence of small changes? If you can see the small changes, why is it so hard to extrapolate?

 

[Valjean]

Yah. Psalm 90 has some very good points about this.

starting v. 3
"You return man to dust,
saying, “Return, O sons of mortals.”
4For in Your sight a thousand years
are but a day that passes,a
or a watch of the night.
5You whisk them away in their sleep;
they are like the new grass of the morning—
6in the morning it springs up new,
but by evening it fades and withers.

What are the very good points? Can you state them in plain language, and demonstrate them?

 

[YoursTrue]

That doesn't follow...

I understood what icant said. In line with that, Psalm 90 also alludes to that thought --
"You return man to dust,
saying, “Return, O sons of mortals.”
4For in Your sight a thousand years
are but a day that passes,a
or a watch of the night.
5You whisk them away in their sleep;
they are like the new grass of the morning—
6in the morning it springs up new,
but by evening it fades and withers."

The in-between from birth to death isn't really that long in any case.

 

[Valjean]

I find it difficult to understand your posits here. But to set some matters clear perhaps about my thinking, no, I do not think that every time something moves or changes or happens it's the hand of God manipulating things. So let's try to set that matter straight if possible. For instance, I do not think that if someone is born with a debilitating illness or mutation it is the hand of God performing it.

So why do you see the hand of God in the creation of different species, or in changes over time? How are these any different from water freezing, or a thunderstorm?

 

[YoursTrue]

Do you see the evidence of small changes? If you can see the small changes, why is it so hard to extrapolate?

One reason in reference to what you call small changes is that humans remain humans with characteristically longer or shorter limbs by genetic passage in some tribes than in the general population. In my opinion there is no direct evidence to show that humans are evolving to anything than humans right now. And I believe I can safely say the same thing for finches. Despite the fact that finches may intermingle and change to an extent, at a certain point I believe they cannot intermingle with others. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I think now.

 

[YoursTrue]

So why do you see the hand of God in the creation of different species, or in changes over time? How are these any different from water freezing, or a thunderstorm?

Excellent question! Because -- I believe God created/instituted all those circumstances. And can control them when He wants to. Later...

 

[Valjean]

I am just really finding out about viruses. Which I find interesting. I did not know that viruses cannot live (for long) without a host. But now from what I read, viruses cannot live for long without a host. So now my question is, and you don't have to answer if you don't want to (it's ok), how long do viruses live without a host and exactly how is a virus formed? I'm not asking for the parts of a virus formation, but rather how an individual virus would be formed from the onset of a virus cell. I am pretty sure I can look that up though, but I wanted to let you know about my fascination about viruses right now.

A virus is a snippet of nucleic acid coding for its own replication, wrapped in a protein shell. It's like a piece of paper with typed instructions to copy the typed instructions.
Neither does anything but sit there unless it's fed into a copying mechanism like a computer or a cell.
Mutation? Mutations are just copying errors -- typos.

How are they formed? Remember the DNA replication lesson from high school biology? DNA replication - Wikipedia

 

[Valjean]

I wonder if scientists know precisely how eyes really evolved, if that's what they think, from the light-sensitive cell to bees' eyes and also human eyes. They can offer their thoughts, but do you think they really KNOW for sure?

There are different kinds of eyes, with different evolutionary sequences. Bees' eyes evolved very differently from our eyes.
If I linked to a video about the stages of vertebrate eye evolution, would you actually watch it?

 

[icant]

Where do you think physicists came up with the idea? Did they just pull it out of their hats? Are you not aware of the observations that led to this hypothesis?
There is evidence of the Big Bang. We do not understand the mechanisms involved, but it's pretty clear the event occurred.
Q: What alternative do you imagine?

I have a whimper that produces the same results.
Day one of creation was a light period that had existed eternally in the past, until God created the darkness of Genesis 1:2. When the dark period of Genesis 1:2 ceased to exist, ended with the following morning God declared day one ended

I don't have a problem with what science says happened from about 500 million years after expansion began. My problem is with the bang and what banged and where it came from.

I also have a problem with life beginning to exist from a non-life form.
I don't have a problem with evolution as I know things can change by natural means or by selective breeding.
I do not believe that a single cell amoeba can evolve to the point he ceases to be an amoeba, or that a human will evolve into a higher being. He create a semblance of one but he will never put life into that form.

Enjoy,


.

 

[Valjean]

One reason in reference to what you call small changes is that humans remain humans with characteristically longer or shorter limbs by genetic passage in some tribes than in the general population. In my opinion there is no direct evidence to show that humans are evolving to anything than humans right now. And I believe I can safely say the same thing for finches. Despite the fact that finches may intermingle and change to an extent, at a certain point I believe they cannot intermingle with others. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I think now.

And yet small changes accumulate over time, do they not? Why is it hard to understand that lots of small changes can add up to big changes.

Q: French or Spanish evolved from Latin, no? Was there ever a child born who spoke a language different from her parents? Is French still Latin?

Think about it.

 

[Valjean]

I have a whimper that produces the same results.
Day one of creation was a light period that had existed eternally in the past, until God created the darkness of Genesis 1:2. When the dark period of Genesis 1:2 ceased to exist, ended with the following morning God declared day one ended

Where did you learn this? Can you link to the studies?
How does this relate to the formation of light emitting stars?

I don't have a problem with what science says happened from about 500 million years after expansion began. My problem is with the bang and what banged and where it came from.

Physicists have the same problem. They can see the products of and path of the expansion. They can follow these back to a single point billions of years ago. But the mechanism by which this expansion happened remains a mystery, a is the early sequence of steps.

I also have a problem with life beginning to exist from a non-life form.

What do you imagine life to be composed of, if not lifeless chemical elements? At least, that's all anyone's ever found.
You sound like a vitalist?

Vitalism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I don't have a problem with evolution as I know things can change by natural means or by selective breeding.
I do not believe that a single cell amoeba can evolve to the point he ceases to be an amoeba, or that a human will evolve into a higher being. He create a semblance of one but he will never put life into that form.

I can sympathize with your incredulity, but what would prevent the myriad small, naturally selected changes from continuing on forever, with each generation? How would the accumulating change know when to stop, so as to avoid becoming something recognizably different from the prototype?

I can imagine someone walking to the kitchen. I can picture someone walking to the post office. So why would I find a trek from Point Barrow to Tierra del Fuego inconceivable?

 

[Valjean]

Excellent question! Because -- I believe God created/instituted all those circumstances. And can control them when He wants to. Later...

So God created the physical laws and constants by which all these processes operate, but can cancel them and do some magical manipulation when He wants to? Am I following correctly?

Q: Why do you believe god created/instituted these circumstances? Does admitting "I don't know" discomfit you?

 

[John53]

Genesis 2:19 "And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;..."
That does not say they came from dirt. It says they were formed out of the ground, and just like the form of the man in Genesis 2:7 had to be given life so did the all of the animals that were formed from the ground. All life belongs to God, and He can remove it at anytime He chooses.

So no, the Biblical account of the work done on the forms of the animals and fowl and every other living creature had to have life supplied as the forms had no life of their own. They were just like a statues.

Enjoy,

You missed the nit about him making man from dust....

While you're here can you define "kinds". I would enjoy that more.

 

[metis]

Thanks for that. I understand that life forms mutate. I am pretty sure they cause variations within the gene pools. But -- while the philosophy may be there in reference to the theory of evolution, I do not see the real evidence that fish became apes in the long run. Tiktaalik doesn't do it as far as I am concerned. Be that as it may, however, thank you for your response which was respectful, and that is where I close right now.
P.S. When I say that I believe lifeforms mutate, I am talking about things like dogs interbreeding, and humans interbreeding and producing populations of some with characteristically long or short limbs within the general population, sometimes tribal characteristics.

If one studies human evolution, which is my area of specialization [physical anthropology], one can VERY clearly see where in general human apes appear to come from around 6-7 million years ago. Even 3-4 million years ago, an Australopithecus walking down the street would certainly get attention as there's lotsa differences as compared to today's humans but yet were still very much human. Back then, no one ever yet found looks largely like we do today.

It's an older book but let me recommend "The Naked Ape" by Desmond Morris. It so much influenced me that I eventually got a graduate degree in Anthropology and taught it for 30 years. I'm not patting myself on the back here but merely saying that Morris' book so impressed me so as to follow in his footsteps, although mine are a lot smaller than his.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do not doubt that there is no "consciousness" there about the mutations, etc. of viruses. Do you have anything to offer, however, that viruses become something other than viruses?

Why would they? You keep asking for events that would refute evolution as 'evidence". This is how we know that you do not understand it.

 

[YoursTrue]

There are different kinds of eyes, with different evolutionary sequences. Bees' eyes evolved very differently from our eyes.
If I linked to a video about the stages of vertebrate eye evolution, would you actually watch it?

I can't promise but maybe.

 

[YoursTrue]

It's an older book but let me recommend "The Naked Ape" by Desmond Morris. It so much influenced me that I eventually got a graduate degree in Anthropology and taught it for 30 years. I'm not patting myself on the back here but merely saying that Morris' book so impressed me so as to follow in his footsteps, although mine are a lot smaller than his.

I respect that. I might even take a look at the book from the library.

 

[YoursTrue]

@metis - I worked for a publishing firm associated with Desmond Morris. NYC. Not in an editorial capacity but knew some of the editors well enough.