On Evolution & Creation

[F1fan]

If you disagree with the BBT you must believe in a static universe as Einstein did before it was discovered this universe is expanding.

Do you Believe the universe is eternal in existence?

Enjoy,

Since none of the many creation stories throughout history are fact based nor plausible it’s most likely that matter has always existed in one form or another.

At least we know matter exists. There are no gods to known to exist so they aren’t plausible guesses about how things are.

If you believe differently then show us evidence of any God existing and can do things.

 

[Valjean]

If it ain't lemon juice, it ain't juice.

Enjoy,

I have never said evolution or devolution didn't take place I just don't believe in the evolution talked about here as I have never seen the millions of fossils Darwin said we would see if he was correct.

A doubting icant, eh?

I've never seen the Taj Mahal, an okapi, or the Mars rovers, but I believe they exist on pretty good evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Hope you feel better soon Thank You for the information, thanks for talking to me with respect in all our conversations.

Thank you. I'm doing my best.

Really wasn't all that much I'm afraid. There are probably a lot of videos out there. I just don't know them very well. If I do think of any, I'll pass them along.

 

[Valjean]

Just verifying what you believe...
you do believe life had a beginning...on the earth, I suppose. Of course there are those scientists who think life could have been deposited by aliens in shape ships or something like that --

LOL -- that just moves the goalpost. It doesn't directly address the question of abiogenesis, does it?

...and what's a shape ship? I must have missed that Star Trek episode.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mean like the bunch of science books you have to rely on. They are nothing but myths.

If you claim to be a Christian you should not be breaking the Ninth Commandment. The sciences are based upon evidence. A concept that you are currently too afraid to even learn.

You could prove me wrong by supplying the source for the thingmabob that expanded into the universe and the energy required to form everything in the universe, and sustain it.

No, that is not how science is done. You have already been proven wrong by evidence. That you will not let yourself learn is a you problem. Do you want to know why creationists always lose in court? It is because judges have to understand the concept of evidence. There is no reliable evidence for you beliefs and only evidence against them.

Then you could explain how the first life form began to exist from non-existence of a life form.

No, once again, we do not need to know where an early settler was born and raised to know that he took a trip across the continent. You are in effect admitting that evolution is a fact when you move the goalposts to a process that evolution does not rely on. Evolution only requires that life exists to evolve. It does not matter where it came from.

I don't make that claim you do,

I do make the claim that King David did say: "The fool hath said in his heart there is no God."

Psalm 53:1 [To the chief Musician upon Mahalath, Maschil, A Psalm of David.]] The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

Nope. You are making false claims again. I need to remind you that you are willfully ignorant when it comes to the sciences. If you can get over your fears I can show you how the only way for the myths of Genesis to be literally true is if God was a liar. And again, your refusal to learn is a you problem. I do not see why knowledge scares you so much. If there is a God you will be without excuse when you have to explain why you called him a liar. Meanwhile you do not even understand the Bible verse that you quoted. Such a pity. Such a fail.

Sorry I don't frequent Starbucks.

That is good, then you still will have $5.00 and a worthless opinion. In other words you will still ahve five bucks.

You must think everything recorded in the Bible is something God said. Well it is not, as the devil speaks, demons speak, Angels speak, Kings speak, common folks speak, and even fools speak.

No, I am not that silly. I know that the Bible is the work of man. There is no record anywhere of God saying anything. You forgot that you cannot even show that any part of the Bible is the "word of God". The Bible does not even make that mistake about itself. You might quote another verse that you did not understand to attempt to refute that fact, but you will only once again demonstrate that you do not even understand your own Bible.

Enjoy,

Oh I always do. I know that I should not go after low hanging fruit, but this current election is showing us how low hanging fruit can be very dangerous.

 

[YoursTrue]

LOL -- that just moves the goalpost. It doesn't directly address the question of abiogenesis, does it.

...and what's a shape ship? I must have missed that Star Trek episode.

Oops, lol, shape up or ship out. (LOL) My typo, sorry. Scientists have addressed the idea of life coming some way from outer space. Others have played around with other ideas...Meantime, those of us alive on earth with cognitive abilities have PROOF of life in its abundance because we see it. Insofar as life developing from one, two, or a few more cells that somehow appeared "at the beginning" (of life on earth, of course) is virtually conjecture as to "how" it happened. And by that I don't mean "abiogenesis." I mean how those first cells specifically evolved. And to say that the goal was (is) to stay alive is, according to the science of evolution, ridiculous. For instance, let's take lions and humans. Are they destined by biological reasons according to the theory of evolution, to die?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hi Valjean,

Could you explain what claims has been made and debunked?

I have FAITH my God exists. I have my talks with Him, and many experiences that prove to me He exists, that is all I have ever claimed.

As to your talks with God other people in other religions do the same. The reasons that you will probably use to refute them are the same that refute you.

You on the other hand make claims that something expanded into the Universe we now have. You don't know what is was nor do you know where it came from or from what source the energy required to build this universe from came from. And they you have an earth you say life began to exist upon without any mechanism to produce that life. But you know it happened just like you were told it did.

No one has made that claim. You need to work on your reading comprehension.

I believe by FAITH but you KNOW you are right. If you are put up your evidence that supports your position.

He can, I can we have. Your inability to understand is once again a "you problem". And it is disingenuous to demand evidence when you refuse to learn what is and what is not evidence.

You sitting there with that smug growl on your face accusing me of doing what you do in every post.
You know you are right and dare me to prove you wrong.

Please, when you act in a foolish manner you cause that sort of reaction. You refuse to learn. No one can force you to learn, we can only point out your errors and offer you help.

I only have FAITH that my God is real and my experiences with Him.
I am not going to try to prove to you that my God exists. You have already decided in your mind that He does not exist and His History Book is just a bunch of myth stories.

And faith is not a pathway to the truth. A Muslim will have faith. A Hindu will have faith. You need to show why your faith is right and theirs is not and you cannot do that. And we know that stories of the Bibles are myths. All that you have to do is something that is not even banned in your Bible. Does the Bible ban rational thought? Perhaps I am wrong. But I am betting that you will at best only misinterpret your Bible again.

But when Jesus returns we will know who is right and who is wrong. Let me rephrase that, if you are right we will know nothing at all.

Since you call God a liar it does not look good for you.

Enjoy,

It is always a joy!

 

[YoursTrue]

LOL -- that just moves the goalpost. It doesn't directly address the question of abiogenesis, does it.

...and what's a shape ship? I must have missed that Star Trek episode.

Oops, lol, shape up or ship out. (LOL) My typo, sorry. Scientists have addressed the idea of life coming some way from outer space. Others have played around with other ideas...Meantime, those of us alive on earth with cognitive abilities have PROOF of life in its abundance because we see it. Insofar as life developing from one, two, or a few more cells that somehow appeared "at the beginning" (of life on earth, of course) is virtually conjecture as to "how" it happened. And by that I don't mean "abiogenesis." I mean how those first cells specifically evolved. And to say that the goal was (is) to stay alive is, according to the science of evolution, ridiculous. For instance, let's take lions and humans. Are they destined by biological reasons according to the theory of evolution, to die?

A doubting icant, eh?

I've never seen the Taj Mahal, an okapi, or the Mars rovers, but I believe they exist on pretty good evidence.

Right now I have no interest in visiting Nepal either, but I have no doubt it exists. I see pictures of it (quite interesting) and can read about it. I have no doubt Mars exists. Or Jupiter. I do, however, not KNOW the mechanisms that made cells supposedly that first came about on the earth to replicate themselves. Do you?

 

[YoursTrue]

LOL -- that just moves the goalpost. It doesn't directly address the question of abiogenesis, does it.

...and what's a shape ship? I must have missed that Star Trek episode.

The goalposts are real. They are there. They have not moved. I still don't want to visit Nepal, however. It seems, however, like a pretty popular place, and seems people KNOW, or should know that they're risking their lives climbing Mt. Everest, but they do it anyway. When I read of such excursions, I think: how stupid. But then there are people who like doing things like that.
Now if I were a scientist in that field, however -- of expanding lungs due to atmospheric pressure, I might want to visit Nepal. And it's an interesting thought as to what would happen if they had relations with those with lungs not developed they are now. In a different climate. But it's not particularly a subject of interest to me, if I were a scientist, I think I'd rather work in a lab.
Soooo, with that all in mind, have a good evening.

 

[YoursTrue]

You do. Everytime you trot out your faith you are demanding it. I am in a juice bar at the moment. What have you got against fruit juice?



First demonstrate that there is a creation.

Can you demonstrate abiogenesis as science definitely, absolutely say it happened, please?

 

[ppp]

Can you demonstrate abiogenesis as science definitely, absolutely say it happened, please?

Convince me that you are not a bad faith actor. Convince me that you are worth my time and energy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can you demonstrate abiogenesis as science definitely, absolutely say it happened, please?

Probably not. I mean he could to someone that was willing to learn, but if a person is not willing to learn then it would be an exercise in futility. I kindly offered many times to go over the basics of science because you continually demonstrate that you do not understand them only to have you endless claim that you understand them and then within a page or so provide proof that you do not.

 

[Valjean]

Hi Valjean,

Could you explain what claims has been made and debunked?

That would take a small book. You like videos, though, so scroll to 2:40

I have FAITH my God exists. I have my talks with Him, and many experiences that prove to me He exists, that is all I have ever claimed.

I understand that, but faith is, by definition unjustified or poorly evidenced belief. Your personal experiences may be convincing to you, but unless you can recreate them in others they're useless as arguments.

You on the other hand make claims that something expanded into the Universe we now have. You don't know what is was nor do you know where it came from or from what source the energy required to build this universe from came from.

I echo the conclusions of the experts in this field, drawn from the best available empirical evidence, and I acknowledge that very little is yet known about this event.

And they you have an earth you say life began to exist upon without any mechanism to produce that life. But you know it happened just like you were told it did.

Now that I never said.
Yes, life began on Earth. A great deal is known about the mechanisms needed for such an event, but the entire process has not yet been worked out.
I do not claim it happened just as I was told it did. Noöne's told me how it happened. Noöne knows yet all the steps involved. I'd wager, though, that a lot more is known about it than you realize.

Life happened. We have observed and tested much of the chemistry that might account for it. We have no evidenced or rational alternative mechanisms other than chemistry.

I believe by FAITH but you KNOW you are right. If you are put up your evidence that supports your position.

Belief without evidence has never been very productive.
There are whole libraries of "evidence" for various biological processes. Your question is very broad. What position, specifically, would you like me to address?

You sitting there with that smug growl on your face accusing me of doing what you do in every post.
You know you are right and dare me to prove you wrong.

Apologies for any smug growls. What, exactly, am I doing that I accuse you of doing. I'm honestly at a loss, here.
I know I'm right about what? If we're talking about biology I do understand the basics, and have evidentiary support. If we're talking theology, it's you making the claims, and I have no burden.

I only have FAITH that my God is real and my experiences with Him.
I am not going to try to prove to you that my God exists.

Understood, and I have no problem with that. But when you're posting God-claims in a debate forum we kinda expect you to offer some objective evidence or logical support. If you don't defend your position we have nothing to debate.

You have already decided in your mind that He does not exist and His History Book is just a bunch of myth stories.

I have not decided He does not exist. I'm simply not convinced of this extraordinary claim. I have yet to see any convincing evidence, so I defer belief, pending same.
As for His History Book, that I have problems with. It's full of demonstrable, factual errors. It's full of contradictions, edits. &c. The morality it seems to advocate is inconsistant and often infare, unjust, monstrous, or barbaric. Many of it's claims are fantastical and hearsay, which that noöne would believe if they read it in today's paper.
The Bible is no better evidenced than many other religion's scriptures, or many books of mythology. Equal evidence, equal confidence level.

But when Jesus returns we will know who is right and who is wrong. Let me rephrase that, if you are right we will know nothing at all.

Enjoy,

Yikes! Doesn't sound very enjoyable at all.

Peace out.

 

[Valjean]

Oops, lol, shape up or ship out. (LOL) My typo, sorry. Scientists have addressed the idea of life coming some way from outer space. Others have played around with other ideas...Meantime, those of us alive on earth with cognitive abilities have PROOF of life in its abundance because we see it. Insofar as life developing from one, two, or a few more cells that somehow appeared "at the beginning" (of life on earth, of course) is virtually conjecture as to "how" it happened.

What are the reasonable possibilities? Is magic poofing reasonable?

And by that I don't mean "abiogenesis." I mean how those first cells specifically evolved.

How they evolved, or how they came to be. Abiogenesis is how they came to be. How they evolved is evolutionary biology.

And to say that the goal was (is) to stay alive is, according to the science of evolution, ridiculous.

What evidence is there that life has any abstract purpose, goal, or meaning? What we observe it doing is surviving, by various stratagems.

For instance, let's take lions and humans. Are they destined by biological reasons according to the theory of evolution, to die?

Destiny is not a claim of evolution. Biology can describe and explain observed phenomena. It knows nothing of destiny.

 

[YoursTrue]

What are the reasonable possibilities? Is magic poofing reasonable?

How they evolved, or how they came to be. Abiogenesis is how they came to be. How they evolved is evolutionary biology.

What evidence is there that life has any abstract purpose, goal, or meaning? What we observe it doing is surviving, by various stratagems.

Destiny is not a claim of evolution. Biology can describe and explain observed phenomena. It knows nothing of destiny.

Right now I just want to address the idea of "magic poofing." That we cannot see how life was formed on the earth by God does not mean life came about by magic poofing.

 

[walt]

..

Thanks for the video, still taking in information.

 

[Valjean]

Right now I just want to address the idea of "magic poofing." That we cannot see how life was formed on the earth by God does not mean life came about by magic poofing.

Yet no plausible mechanism is adduced, just an invisible agent.
What we do know is that life is a chemical phenomenon. Chemistry accounts for everything we know about it. What reasonable alternative origin should we be looking for?

Goddidit! explains nothing. We have no rational evidence of any god. Ergo: There is currently no rational reason even to investigate God as a possible factor, nor do I see any way of doing so.
Open to suggestions, though.

 

[Pogo]

That did not take long. Okay, this is not a scientist, but that does not mean that he cannot refute a scientist that is speaking outside his area of expertise. Dr. Marco Fasoli is not an evolutionary scientist so I have no problem refuting him with a person that is not a scientist:

What the heck, I haven't seen this complete a PRATT list in years and this guy seems to be new, he even has a podcast that came out in June, Walt needs to discover Talk Origins but I sense a very strong desire to insist on two sides cuz I have a video,

An Index to Creationist Claims

 

[Valjean]

Thanks for the video, still taking an information.

It's not the most interesting video, but I'd run across it earlier today and it seemed relevant to your question.
I am interested in apologetics, though, if you'd like to discuss any particular claim.

 

[Pogo]

I doubt he ever said or wrote that. We do, however have thousands of fossils supporting the ToE. It's a really fascinating 'deep dive' if you're interested. It's at your fingertips or down the way at a library/museum. Have some fun.

If you want millions of fossils, go get a few pieces of chalk and a microscope.