PART 1
The Creation myth in Genesis makes more sense to you, because it is simple and easy to understand, "God did it". That's it, just by magic.
Yes, it is simple, but no, that's not the reason it makes more sense to me. It goes much deeper than that. In fact, true, honest science is confirming the immense intelligence and design behind Gods creation.
“Just by magic”? No, by his power! He is demonstrating his intellect and design and his power by all that we see in existence from the universe to the micro universe.
Since no one can disprove a fantasy,
Fantasy? Are you claiming that all God said he made is imaginary? Are the words you used below "all time, space, physics, galaxies, stars, planets, and all living things(according to their kind), was all made possible. All fully functional and all fully formed." Which of these descriptions do you feel is make-believe and unreal?
then with a wave of His hand and the utterance of His words, all time, space, physics, galaxies, stars, planets, and all living things(according to their kind), was all made possible. All fully functional and all fully formed.
Yes, the plain text of Genesis states exactly that and the world we belong to is subject to these laws he established.
Once we have convinced ourselves that "God did it", cognitive dissonance starts to takes over. It insulates us from any inductive and deductive reasoning. Only the top-down logic is permitted to discourage any form of self-scrutiny, biblical scrutiny, or the ability to laterally think.
No it doesn't
Just because "God did it" doesn't stop us from exploring and thinking and experimenting and learning about his creation whether in the vastness of the cosmos or the vastness of the microscopic universe. He has given us a brain to think critically, to achieve all that science has achieved to help benefit mankind, advance in the knowledge of our world, how it works and, unfortunately, advance in better ways to kill to the point of global destruction.
You don't really believe that somewhere an interspatial, interdimensional workshop exists, where a white bearded old man is creating the blueprints of what all of reality will look like, do you? Surely, you can see why this explanation should only exist in the world of the imagination, not in the world of science? Is this the kind science you really want your kids to learn?
I absolutely agree with you! Your description is a classic one of fantasy! And you are right, science would not validate this kind of nonsense. One of my sons graduated cum laude majoring in Bio-Chemistry. My youngest is majoring in Chemistry. So science is a huge part of their education, and this is what my boys are learning. Nothing wrong with the sciences, they are awesome! I love science! HOWEVER! When you make the mistake of inferring from what science is NOT revealing to you, you have now stepped outside of science and into fantasy to proclaim anything you like.
We learn from our mistakes and our successes. Life itself learns and evolves from its mistakes and its successes. Everything begins as simple, and through many stages become more complex. Complexity is always based on simplicity, and comes with its own inherent problems. The human body began as two simple cells, and eventually differentiates into an interdependent complex organism. "Which parts of the body developed first?". I would say that the "Embryonic Stem Cells were developed first. Without these cells, regeneration, colonization, and multicellularity would be impossible. Many Biological scientists agree that stem cells is a necessary prerequisite for Evolution. Of course, without these stem cells the embryo would spontaneously abort anyway.
I had to laugh at your first sentence
Not what you said but the fact that some people I know never learn from their mistakes!
I don't remember the name of the man who said this, but it was at a conference 25 years ago, he said, "I dont measure my success by the things I did right, I measure my success by the things I did wrong." I like this one, "No one ever learned anything by doing it right the first time." Real world experience I think we all have had were the brain-twisting problems that we struggled with in certain situations, are always the ones you remember!
When you say, "Life itself learns and evolves from its mistakes and its successes", could you be a little more specific?
"Complexity is always based on simplicity, and comes with its own inherent problems." This too is vague and I'd like to understand what you mean.
"The human body began as two simple cells, and eventually differentiates into an interdependent complex organism. "Which parts of the body developed first?". I would say that the "Embryonic Stem Cells were developed first. Without these cells, regeneration, colonization, and multicellularity would be impossible. Many Biological scientists agree that stem cells is a necessary prerequisite for Evolution. Of course, without these stem cells the embryo would spontaneously abort anyway.
Yes it did, one from your father, and one from your mother. Second part of that sentence is correct also. Due to the immense information in those two cells, they divided and set out to build the model of you in a manner that makes good sense. For example, a home builder begins with plans (genetic information). The foundation is first, then framing, electrical, plumbing, windows etc., etc., in a progressive manor that ends up being a beautiful well built home. During the development period in your mothers womb, this same kind of things are taking place in an orderly fashion. The interesting thing about your statement above is that when you say, "Without these cells, regeneration, colonization, and multicellularity would be impossible" the genetic information for these things to take place didn't come about by themselves. Honest science agrees. Again, scientists who generalize from observance what they want to believe took place, have left science and gone down the road leading to made-up hypotheses to fit their liking. When these highly educated scientists who leave science to encourage others to follow them and their unscientific reasoning, this is bad science, false science.
"Of course, without these stem cells the embryo would spontaneously abort anyway"
Right, without any intelligent plans by which a fetus develops in a systematic way into a fully formed human being as marvelous as that is, the wrong sequence of events in development would lead to a non-survivability condition which is the ability to remain alive or continue to exist. This is the point I have been trying to make with the evolutionary simple to complex to human beings. It takes intelligence and design for these cells to carry out all of functions needed to produce offspring of all living things from fish, birds, animals, reptiles, insects and human beings.
Regarding random mutations, be specific. There are many different types of mutations. Some species did not survive because of these mutations. But enough did survive to compensate for their error coding. Some mutated genes are just not expressed(recessive). Some are in the form of vestigial organs, and non-functional. Some mutations are only beneficial to the organism under certain environmental conditions. We can still see these mutations in our genes, since nature has a problem with getting rid of any adverse and superfluous genes. These random mutated genes ARE passed onto the next generations, but are usually not expressed(recessive). So think of it as Nature adjusting genes to fit a changing environment, over vast periods of time, through trial and error. Sometimes it works, but 99.99% of the time it doesn't.
I generally agree with what you are saying here. One thing to remember though, mutation are never good. Mutation always are downward, never upward. So, in the sense of mutations moving upward and causing better things to happen and evolve in an evolutionary sagacity, is just not possible. Variation is possible within the kind, we see this all the time in dogs for example. However, other species do not associate. Crows don't breed with vultures, who dont breed with owls, you get the idea. Why? because the information of variation does not exist in the DNA for them to do so.
"So think of it as Nature adjusting genes to fit a changing environment, over vast periods of time, through trial and error. Sometimes it works, but 99.99% of the time it doesn't."
Well, I understand variation in the sense that a dog from a litter with short hair verses its sibling with long hair will die of quickly in a freezing environment only allowing the preceding generation will be long haired dogs.
"Nature adjusting genes to fit a changing environment"
What we see here is variation built into the genetic make-up. Nature cannot make decisions, however these things do happen in nature because they are allowed to by the genetic variety instructions.
