The Believabliltiy of Evolution

[Bear Wild]

It is the sort of thing that meets my expectations.

You would think they would at least make some effort to learn of even basic biology before arguing on a more complex subject as evolution. Of course then the run the risk of realizing that the theory of evolution is correct. Ignorance of knowledge seems to be the only way to maintain their beliefs. Sad but true.

 

[Bear Wild]

I think I mentioned to you at some point that the scriptures definitely allow for evolution on a species level. Dogs have certainly changed over time, but, according to the scriptures, a canis has always been a canis. Ditto for the Homo genus and all other genus.

Oh my goddess! The bible actually states that canis has always been canis. I cannot wait to find this in the bible. Can you help me find that exact quote. I am so excited.

 

[Valjean]

Gooblygook.
Change in an organism does not equal evolution from one kind of creature to another with totally different body functions.

Why not? Small changes accumulate into big ones. How do these changes know when to stop to avoid becoming a different 'kind'?
What mechanism would stop mutation and sexual gene recombination?
Why has an organism in genetic stasis never been observed?

 

[Wildswanderer]

The only thing that is dishonest is your silly statements. An individual maintains its genetic compositions with possible mutations that could be passed on to offspring. The collective genetic changes and recombination is what causes the evolutionary changes.

So my system cannot mutate into something different than it was in any way? Seems to me that would rule out anyone developing resistance to anything they are exposed to.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Why not? Small changes accumulate into big ones. How do these changes know when to stop to avoid becoming a different 'kind'?

Show me a animal that's currently developing from a cold blooded creature into a warm blooded creature. Or vice versa.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You would think they would at least make some effort to learn of even basic biology before arguing on a more complex subject as evolution. Of course then the run the risk of realizing that the theory of evolution is correct. Ignorance of knowledge seems to be the only way to maintain their beliefs. Sad but true.

You would think that considering that they believe (pretend?) they are experts in subjects they haven't the first clue about. It cracks me up to see someone talking about mutations when it is clear they don't know the first thing about them.

 

[Viker]

believing everything we see in the world somehow came from the so-called primordial soup

How is it so hard to believe? You already believe something outlandish, a woman coming from a man ( a rib no less), a talking snake?

 

[Wildswanderer]

How is it so hard to believe? You already believe something outlandish, a woman coming from a man ( a rib no less), a talking snake?

Why is a snake that talks more unbelievable then everything springing from nothing?

 

[Valjean]

Show me a animal that's currently developing from a cold blooded creature into a warm blooded creature. Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunavice versa.

Warm to cold:
Naked mole-rat - Wikipedia

Cold to warm:
Tuna - Wikipedia

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How is it so hard to believe? You already believe something outlandish, a woman coming from a man ( a rib no less), a talking snake?

Be very, very quiet. I thought I saw a straw man argument.

I did! I did!

Watch out for it.

 

[Viker]

Why is a snake that talks more unbelievable then everything springing from nothing?

Both are unbelievable and neither are correct.

 

[Viker]

Be very, very quiet. I thought I saw a straw man argument.

I did! I did!

Watch out for it.

I brought a flame thrower. Don't worry, I know how to use it.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Warm to cold:
Naked mole-rat - Wikipedia

Cold to warm:
Tuna - Wikipedia

That's a mammal and a fish.
100 years from now they will still be what they are. We've been fishing for tuna for what a couple thousand years. They were tuna then and they still are. I'm not seeing a transition here.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I brought a flame thrower. Don't worry, I know how to use it.

Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark.

Good.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Both are unbelievable and neither are correct.

Well you can believe in eternal matter bringing life here or an eternal being.
Either way, you are left believing in what you can't observe or prove.

 

[cladking]

Here are some of the zany, crazy assertions you (@cladking) have made (never with even an attempt at providing evidence of any kind) on this topic:

"Most change occurs as the result of population bottlenecks arising from events that favor specific behavior"

The two primary drivers are what we call "mutation" and "population bottlenecks (resulting in the propagation of a behavior)".

"Every" population bottleneck that causes speciation in nature (not man made) is unique and results from the behavior of individuals.

"There are also localized bottlenecks which introduce (cause) a wider variety of genes. When bottlenecks occur only locally the population changes but then it interbreeds again and these changes are "lost" or at least they become invisible to cursory observation."​

For not one of those claims was evidence provided, just your assertions.

I've provided extensive evidence and logic to support my argument. You have never provided anything except irrelevant studies and opinion.

You have never shown a single instance where consciousness is irrelevant to the survival of an individual.

 

[Valjean]

That's a mammal and a fish.
100 years from now they will still be what they are. We've been fishing for tuna for what a couple thousand years. They were tuna then and they still are. I'm not seeing a transition here.

You asked a question and I replied.
100 years?! Now I see why you find evolution incredible.

 

[Viker]

Well you can believe in eternal matter bringing life here or an eternal being.
Either way, you are left believing in what you can't observe or prove.

Really? Where does that leave you?

 

[cladking]

Why not? Small changes accumulate into big ones. How do these changes know when to stop to avoid becoming a different 'kind'?

Yes, this is the belief of biologists. But it is not supported and is not supportable. I believe it is additionally untrue.

 

[Viker]

You asked a question and I replied.
100 years?! Now I see why you find evolution incredible.

Some people can't comprehend millions or billions of years.