Putting the JW Stand on Evolution in Perspective

[Jose Fly]

Why beat a dead horse, dialoguing with those who won't reason? You haven't reasoned on any evidence I've presented, just spout that my explanation is wrong.

Now you're just lying. Why? All I did was ask what your point was in posting the article, and you've done nothing but dodge and evade since. But now you say the above, even though it's not at all true?

Would you like me to dredge up some of our recent exchanges where you bailed after I asked you to substantiate some of your claims? How about the flood thread where I asked you repeatedly to describe the specific conditions of specific mountain ranges and explain how your flood ideas better explained those conditions? How about when I asked you about the orientation of the Himalayan strata? How about when I asked how you account for the long-standing agreement among paleontologists about the fossil record supporting evolutionary common descent, then you responded with the Raup quote and asked "You want to change your statement?", but when I asked what statement you thought I should change, you ran away from that too.

See that pattern? You're the one running away from things, not me. Yet here you are accusing me of your own sins. Have you no honor?

There are others here who read the evidence we OEC's post, the unbiased, who are undecided. Just giving them the information that's usually ignored.

What specific evidence have you posted to me that I subsequently ignored? Or are you just going to blow this off as well, thereby continuing your pattern of behavior?

(I have yet to find a CD-evolution supporter, voluntarily bring up the Cambrian Radiation. Lol.)

There are quite comprehensive books written on the subject by highly qualified individuals. Have you read any of them?

I've posted a sampling of some of the precursors to Cambrian life forms here before. Why didn't you respond?

Planning on running away from this post too?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Let's go back to the original post on this subject:


So, Hockeycowboy, now that you've been educated in 6th-grade Newtonian physics (Grades 6, 7 and 8 | Science | Middle School | Physics - Newton's Three Laws of Motion), you must realize that gravity does have an effect at distances of 500,000 miles.

If you apply that knowledge to the analogy you gave, you have just proven to yourself that evolution is real.

Congratulations.

I said (which, apparently, you didn't comprehend) that someone's body, 500,000 miles away from Earth, wouldn't be affected by the Earth's gravity.

And I know evolution is real....changes within species occur. (I'll grant even within the family taxon.) But evolutionary mechanisms cannot provide acceptable explanations for life's diversity "exploding" at the Cambrian event. Oh, yeah..."there was more oxygen in the oceans and atmosphere", lol.

And how's that lab-controlled "40,000-generation" E. coli experiment going?
Ask Lemski, but I think it's still E. coli.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Quote mining is perhaps one of the most common reasons I've seen for people concluding that professional creationists are nothing more than hucksters and con men. It takes deliberate effort to take parts of one sentence and mash it up with parts of another to make it seem as if the author is saying the opposite of what they actually said; it takes deliberate effort to hide the full context of a quote.

The fact that creationists have to resort to this outrageously dishonest tactic to support their position exposes creationism for the fundamentally dishonest position that it is.

It's a simple remedy. Prove the quotes are wrong, then.

All I ever hear is, "those scientists still support evolution." What a no-brainer!
Of course they do! What's the alternative? But they've been honest at times as to how the evidence does not agree with current explanations.

 

[Jose Fly]

And I know evolution is real....changes within species occur. (I'll grant even within the family taxon.)

So maybe you can answer a question your fellow Jehovah's Witnesses have avoided at all costs.....

If you agree that, 1) the earth is ancient (you describe yourself as an old-earth creationist), 2) life has existed on the earth for a very long time, and 3) populations evolve even to the point of generating new species.....then how does a species know at any given point in time to not generate a new species, lest that new species be in a different taxonomic family than its ancient ancestors? IOW, how is any species aware of its taxonomic status relative to its ancient ancestors?

But evolutionary mechanisms cannot provide acceptable explanations for life's diversity "exploding" at the Cambrian event.

Why, because you say so? I got news for ya....things aren't so just because you say they are.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What specific evidence have you posted to me that I subsequently ignored?

The next sentence I wrote, mentions it. Did you not read the next sentence, about the Cambrian?

And at this instance I was speaking in generalities, not you per se.

Most do not want to discuss it.

 

[Jose Fly]

It's a simple remedy. Prove the quotes are wrong, then.

That's been done countless times. There are entire websites dedicated to doing just that (CLICK HERE or CLICK HERE for one specific to Jehovah's Witnesses)

All I ever hear is, "those scientists still support evolution." What a no-brainer!

Really? That's all anyone has ever said to you on the subject?

How does what you said above mesh with our exchange last month over your quote of Raup?

Of course they do! What's the alternative? But they've been honest at times as to how the evidence does not agree with current explanations.

Funny.....that brings us back to our earlier exchange that you predictably bailed from.

So let's try again. How do you account for the long-standing agreement among paleontologists about the fossil record supporting evolutionary common descent, and life scientists in general agreeing on common descent via evolution? Incompetence? Conspiracy? Magic spell?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The next sentence I wrote, mentions it. Did you not read the next sentence, about the Cambrian?

And at this instance I was speaking in generalities, not you per se.

Most do not want to discuss it.

No one is ignoring the Cambrian explosion. What about it? How is that supposed evidence for your beliefs?

 

[Jose Fly]

The next sentence I wrote, mentions it. Did you not read the next sentence, about the Cambrian?

Yes. Are you saying that the quote constitutes "evidence"?

And at this instance I was speaking in generalities, not you per se.

Most do not want to discuss it.

Like I said, scientists have been discussing pre-Cambrian and Cambrian fauna for many decades, even to the point of writing very comprehensive books on the subject. So why you think it's something "evolutionists" avoid is a mystery.

And I take it that you're going to just ignore the other items in my post?

 

[John53]

I've never read anybody more pessimistic, nihilistic, or misanthriopic than you. How can you be happy when all you can see is failure and corruption? All you have to offset that is unjustified hope for happiness some day in an imagined paradisiacal afterlife. But not today. Today, you are just biding your time, awaiting the end of life in the hope of something better.

I'm glad it's not just me that gets that impression. What a waste of life when all you do is wait for death and try to convince others to be part of your misery.

 

[Jose Fly]

I'm glad it's not just me that gets that impression. What a waste of life when all you do is wait for death and try to convince others to be part of your misery.

It is indeed a sad worldview that makes me wonder about the psychological well-being of those who willingly adopt it.

 

[John53]

I think they see the word explosion and think instant. The Cambrian period was 55 million years....

 

[savagewind]

I'm glad it's not just me that gets that impression. What a waste of life when all you do is wait for death and try to convince others to be part of your misery.

She isn't waiting for her death. She is waiting for OUR deaths.

 

[savagewind]

It is indeed a sad worldview that makes me wonder about the psychological well-being of those who willingly adopt it.

You should know that she is definitely not waiting for her own death. They have been promised that they will never die.

 

[savagewind]

I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

 

[metis]

But evolutionary mechanisms cannot provide acceptable explanations for life's diversity "exploding" at the Cambrian event.

That simply is not true.

First of all, this period went on for 53 million years which is plenty of time for events to happen and organisms to evolve. Secondly, the increase in oxygen levels is part of what triggered this event for what should be obvious reasons. Thirdly, the fact that exoskeletons make an appearance with many of them getting fossilized, whereas there's a lower percentage of single-celled organisms that get fossilized, makes finding therm much more likely. Etc.

Common sense suggests that evolution has taken place because all material objects appear to change ("evolve") over time, and life forms and genes are material objects. And not only does the fossil record reflect this, so does the d.n.a. mapping confirm it.

The only real obstacle to accepting these realities is the literal interpretation of the Creation accounts, whereas there's a much more viable and logical alternative.

 

[oldbadger]

LOL. Say, what? If telling the truth is trashing a person, then that person is in real trouble. Don't you think?

What is the truth?

 

[oldbadger]

So, maybe you are saying I can really know something about what is written that THEY do not know? LOL. You are so much fun, sir.

No Savage, I was suggesting that you have spent a lifetime in learning.......... a university of living. That's not an invitation to chew my hand.

 

[savagewind]

What is the truth?

Are you one who thinks that there is no truth?

 

[oldbadger]

Who knows? @Hockeycowboy is once again doing his usual routine where he comes into a thread, says a few things, dodges follow-ups, and eventually just leaves.

That he's so predictable in that way says a lot.

He probably gets bored when all the big-heads, supposedly on the same side of the discussion, start correcting each other.

 

[savagewind]

No Savage, I was suggesting that you have spent a lifetime in learning.......... a university of living. That's not an invitation to chew my hand.

Chew my hand is as whist which is something spell check recognized. Today, I have been amazed.