• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Believabliltiy of Evolution

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Adaptations happen on a regular basis. They don't result in a different kind of animal.
And what do you think "different" implies?

So you believe the so called science over the Bible you claim to follow.
Your insulting questions are both bigoted and contrary to basic Judeo-Christian teachings in that you're positing that I'm not a "true Christian" simply because I'm open to science as a believer in Jesus.

IOW, I'm just wasting my time with your bigotry and insults.
Because we are not animals. Science has a very limited understanding of the universe because it can't allow for what it can not explain.
As explained many times, science and the ToE does not in any way negate the concept of Divine creation

I gotta better things to do and less insulting people to discuss matters with.

fini
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
It's like these insulting statements towards others that says a lot. Maybe show your pastor posts like those and ask him/her if they're compatible with Jesus' teaching of "love one another".
Anyone with half a brain can see that the universe was designed by a creator. Only those who hate the idea because of their atheistic bias find reasons to deny the obvious.

I agree. Anyone with half a brain can see that.

Yeah that's what I thought. Whatever you are smoking, I don't want any.

Just for completeness.:hearnoevil:
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
I have read other sources. Enough with looking down your nose.. it's not impressive.
And you think your empty assertions are impressive?

With all your amazing science knowledge, address this challenge that no YEC could handle:

The genotype/phenotype YEC challenge!

Or maybe address this - stuff you claimed does not exist. Go ahead, Johnny Scientist - address this:


I forget now who originally posted these on this forum*, but I keep it in my archives because it offers a nice 'linear' progression of testing a methodology and then applying it:

The tested methodology:

Science 25 October 1991:
Vol. 254. no. 5031, pp. 554 - 558

Gene trees and the origins of inbred strains of mice

WR Atchley and WM Fitch

Extensive data on genetic divergence among 24 inbred strains of mice provide an opportunity to examine the concordance of gene trees and species trees, especially whether structured subsamples of loci give congruent estimates of phylogenetic relationships. Phylogenetic analyses of 144 separate loci reproduce almost exactly the known genealogical relationships among these 24 strains. Partitioning these loci into structured subsets representing loci coding for proteins, the immune system and endogenous viruses give incongruent phylogenetic results. The gene tree based on protein loci provides an accurate picture of the genealogical relationships among strains; however, gene trees based upon immune and viral data show significant deviations from known genealogical affinities.

======================

Science, Vol 255, Issue 5044, 589-592

Experimental phylogenetics: generation of a known phylogeny

DM Hillis, JJ Bull, ME White, MR Badgett, and IJ Molineux
Department of Zoology, University of Texas, Austin 78712.

Although methods of phylogenetic estimation are used routinely in comparative biology, direct tests of these methods are hampered by the lack of known phylogenies. Here a system based on serial propagation of bacteriophage T7 in the presence of a mutagen was used to create the first completely known phylogeny. Restriction-site maps of the terminal lineages were used to infer the evolutionary history of the experimental lines for comparison to the known history and actual ancestors. The five methods used to reconstruct branching pattern all predicted the correct topology but varied in their predictions of branch lengths; one method also predicts ancestral restriction maps and was found to be greater than 98 percent accurate.

==================================

Science, Vol 264, Issue 5159, 671-677

Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies

DM Hillis, JP Huelsenbeck, and CW Cunningham
Department of Zoology, University of Texas, Austin 78712.

Molecular investigations of evolutionary history are being used to study subjects as diverse as the epidemiology of acquired immune deficiency syndrome and the origin of life. These studies depend on accurate estimates of phylogeny. The performance of methods of phylogenetic analysis can be assessed by numerical simulation studies and by the experimental evolution of organisms in controlled laboratory situations. Both kinds of assessment indicate that existing methods are effective at estimating phylogenies over a wide range of evolutionary conditions, especially if information about substitution bias is used to provide differential weightings for character transformations.



We can ASSUME that the results of an application of those methods have merit.



Application of the tested methodology:

Implications of natural selection in shaping 99.4% nonsynonymous DNA identity between humans and chimpanzees: Enlarging genus Homo

"Here we compare ≈90 kb of coding DNA nucleotide sequence from 97 human genes to their sequenced chimpanzee counterparts and to available sequenced gorilla, orangutan, and Old World monkey counterparts, and, on a more limited basis, to mouse. The nonsynonymous changes (functionally important), like synonymous changes (functionally much less important), show chimpanzees and humans to be most closely related, sharing 99.4% identity at nonsynonymous sites and 98.4% at synonymous sites. "



Mitochondrial Insertions into Primate Nuclear Genomes Suggest the Use of numts as a Tool for Phylogeny

"Moreover, numts identified in gorilla Supercontigs were used to test the human–chimp–gorilla trichotomy, yielding a high level of support for the sister relationship of human and chimpanzee."



A Molecular Phylogeny of Living Primates

"Once contentiously debated, the closest human relative of chimpanzee (Pan) within subfamily Homininae (Gorilla, Pan, Homo) is now generally undisputed. The branch forming the Homo andPanlineage apart from Gorilla is relatively short (node 73, 27 steps MP, 0 indels) compared with that of thePan genus (node 72, 91 steps MP, 2 indels) and suggests rapid speciation into the 3 genera occurred early in Homininae evolution. Based on 54 gene regions, Homo-Pan genetic distance range from 6.92 to 7.90×10−3 substitutions/site (P. paniscus and P. troglodytes, respectively), which is less than previous estimates based on large scale sequencing of specific regions such as chromosome 7[50]. "




No presuppositions there - just tests of a method followed by applications of the method.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
Because we are not animals.

ANIMAL:

noun
  1. a living organism that feeds on organic matter, typically having specialized sense organs and nervous system and able to respond rapidly to stimuli.
ANIMAL:
An animal (plural: animals) refers to any of the eukaryotic multicellular organisms of the biological kingdom Animalia. Animals of this kingdom are generally characterized to be heterotrophic, motile, having specialized sensory organs, lacking a cell wall, and growing from a blastula during embryonic development. Etymology: Latin animale (neuter of animalis). Synonym: fauna.

You fail even on trivial foundational definitions.
 

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
Yet experts in science with whole brains don't "see" this. So you with your half brain without expertise in any science knows more than experts in science?


Inaccurate. It is the lack of evidence that would allow objective and ethical minds to "see" your religious belief in the universe.

You are referring to an interpretation of Genesis, not following facts to a conclusion.
Nope... the majority or people everywhere forever have believed in Gods, whether they read genesis or not. "Experts" are usually educated out of their common sense.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Nope... the majority or people everywhere forever have believed in Gods, whether they read genesis or not.
You mean that the majority of people have believed in gods. And that is probably false unless you stretch the meaning of "god" pretty far.

But what the hell? Let's assume, for the moment, that what you say is true.

The majority of people have also believed in the validity of astrology and and the morality of slavery. Far, far more than have believed in all the gods. Does that make astrology valid and slavery moral?
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Nope... the majority or people everywhere forever have believed in Gods, whether they read genesis or not.
What a m majority of people believe is not a credible way to argue, as it is a fallacy. People don't believe in gods because thy came to a rational conclusion via facts. People believe in gods because they learn religious behaviors from their social experience.

"Experts" are usually educated out of their common sense.
Really? Prove it. And give us some examples so we can know you didn't just make this up to try to impugn the good reputation of experts, a common right wing tactic.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
The bible written by healers medical humans who care. Warnings.

Were rational. Observant of natural life. Did not lie. Was the best sort of human.

Versus brotherhood. Leader theist of first science by human said thoughts. Followers. Agreement by group. Group bully beginnings cult and enforced cult indoctrination. Peers. Fake.

Who as designers built civilization by tribal innocent families slavery. Technology enforced when most human population owned no agreement or choice. You killed us all.

You rich liars are included in origin earth destruction.

Science used by men to become rich high priest then King history.

Everyone knew rich men life's were our destroyers by enforced choices as bully murdering tactics our known past.

So two types of innocent humans lived.

Tribal family spiritually innocent loving not egotists. Who men said our destroyer tactics won versus child like behaviours.

Innocent of knowing burning science in the statement first human scientist.

As father asked him in memory how does he conclude science was innocent when it thought information total destruction. Of form in mass.

It was visionary cold where he reviewed how to achieve machine science by mind status.

To his mind a machine static is first the cold moment. Controlled.

Is his science belief I was innocent.

So in fact science never was innocent. Part of his satanic theist lying today.

Innocent of knowing what evil is by type a humans non experience.

And as we all are the same one human he ought to rethink his status liar.

As he says by his terms he knows how one thing changed into another yet he looks at both things as objects first.

First position the human teaching.

As if he created creation. And as if he caused the adaptation by thinking about it.

So before he pressed I created creation button three times observation says everything he observed discussed as natural was in its owned body.

Yet his mind made a creator agreement I know. Why he is termed a liar. It's only ever an argued belief. Peer group decides what belief is close enough as ideas

AI always says...close enough. What I learnt.

Button pusher then claimed now I invent create it all. Just because he believes by thought his idea is close enough.

So how is he outside and beyond earths created creation?

He places thought as if he is UFO radiation entering heavens himself. Really believed he is a cooled volcanic masses radiation held.

As observation rational spiritual humans taught no man is any God object.

Spiritual human versus irrational human theist. Why the bible was written.

Is really named insanity.

I know his coded word use claim A DAM is A MAD. Claiming science is a mental health mind himself.

Yet that assessment is a condition. As science a practice is an applied human choice. Were never mad they were destroyer theists. A human assessment is a mad man's choice.

By defined inference angry man...self destructive personality...spiritual yet self deceitful. Of mind to theory.

A mad human mind chemical imbalanced biological expressed. Cannot act in life by feelings thoughts behaviours to be a scientist.

So his modern day coded use thesis is fake just like he is. Peer human enforced history does not own a claim a human scientist is the only correct human. In fact history says your claim.

He is just an equal human only first and your peer group historic a bunch of egotists. Actually if you tell human truth as humans.

The history science said Muslim men wanted to continue and rebuild temple of Egyptian technology. It had re emerged in healing conscious memory as maths wisdom in men's minds.

So the Muslim father had to try to assert a teaching of spirituality warning which was Baha'i. As it is human man's scientific karma to stop his own self.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Standard mantra of the uneducated.
Make you feel better about not being able to understand things?

Also waiting for your totally scientific response TO THIS.
Men say a sun is such and such. O a body.

Earth O another body owns such and such.

It's heavens owns such and such.

You are a human you own just yourself.

Somehow human advice doesn't compute in your thoughts.

Science a way humans agreed to define presence without owning it.

As you are just a human first.

Look at the review

A human said I want to be the owner of what I claim I will own.

So you had to establish the means to exact your human will.

And you did

Innocent family like children compared to a developing human ego.

So agreed men egotists had a leader first. Who theories for its occurrence.

Science by practice. Design. Civilization owned controlled built buildings like God earths cities. Mountains virtually.

What you believed

Is not reality

Bullies murdering liars who applied the theme my will be asserted. The scientists own human history. Who gained the peer position by life threats themselves.

Is not human truth.

You theoried about what you never owned first.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Nope... the majority or people everywhere forever have believed in Gods, whether they read genesis or not. "Experts" are usually educated out of their common sense.
Only because humans evolved believing in tribal concepts, and early concepts were superstitious and assumed a supernatural. Since human biology evolved this trait it still exists in about 85% of people today. This is why religious belief is still prevalent, not because it is true or factual. Look at how many religions there are, and how they are geographical. That is because cultures evolved with our biology to be believers.

Science deals with facts, and this is why religious concepts have no place in science. Religion is a social phenomenon and behavior. No one believes in God because they came to a rational conclusion via facts. They believe due to genes, and they believe specific religious concepts due to social learning.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Memory says adult first father's human life after the ice age not a theist.

Science is was a chosen human practice.

Pre advice always tell the truth.

Men science babies man inherited an adult ego that grew formed by increased self development.

Was by amassing increasing atmosphere. DNA changed. Memory in DNA changed you stated hierarchy as sons. Father grand father great grand father wise human ignored.

Six generations of adult men state American Indian said the baby man scientist was lying. Advised.

Wise men were old men.

Real.

You are liars.

Said by ego I know everything. Did the science designed science.

By man. Not Mr know it all.

Science proved him wrong.

Natural man said to science man as natural is first you are wrong.

Spiritual.natural said science AI is proven wrong. Man's designed machine causes only.

Correct man.

As science never learns. Science wasn't learnt it was sought by identifying mass in matter can convert Into a gas.

By Heavenly living conscious advice.

Where a gas came from.

Liars.

You never learn as you are already proven wrong.

You won't listen to father's natural man advice was the teaching.

Liars.

A volcano hot dense burning mass is owner string of a gas. On earth.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
History religious social law against science written evidence concluded.

No man is God.

God inferred in science only. Human belief.

About states in creation.

Church founded on sealed rock. Healing venue first. No preaching science statements existed.

Science as a branch took back control over religious practice that was medical.

Proven by how evil science became...medical procedures emerged by irradiated minds of scientists in the dark ages. Liars.

Who did not allow herbal remedies.

Only the scientist is the liar.

Invention meant trade and greed.

Is not medical. Was not natural processes of brain entrainment used as religious practice first.

Science changed religion.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
I figgered' it was about time for wilds to suddenly have other things to do.... that is his usual antic.
 
Top