The Irony of Creationist belief

[sayak83]

The Creationists are requested to
1) Please furnish a videographic evidence of a new species coming from thin air (or from rocks...whatever). Since, apparently, new species are not created through modification of existing populations over time, they must be arising from thin air. Please present videographic evidence of the same. Surely God can make at least one little new species from air upon request? No?
2) Explain the following set of verses from the Bible that clearly states that life emerged from nature/earth and diversified into many kinds in accordance with the will of God (no mention of God creating anything). Genesis 1
Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good.
God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.” 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

Notice that God is doing nothing himself. The natural systems (earth, water and air) are creating the creatures in accordance with the will of God. And the creatures themselves are multiplying and diversifying within their kinds (clades) by their own potential in accordance to the will and blessing of God.
And this process is defined as "God creating“ the living things.

This in Genesis 2, when God is said to create the humans and animals ..this is the methodology that is being alluded to.

There is nothing described here that is fundamentally at odds with the abiogenesis and evolutionary processes that are described by scientists as the manner in with the natural elements of the earth brought forth life and how life then diversified by its own nature. Bible merely adds that these capabilities come to the natural world through the will and blessing of God.

So .....what is the problem again Creationists???

 

[sayak83]

No responses yet from Biblical Creationists...alas

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Notice that God is doing nothing himself.

Omg...

Gen 1:
16God made two great lights:
17God set these lights in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth, 18to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness
21So God created the great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters teemed according to their kinds, and every bird of flight after its kind.
25God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that crawls upon the earth according to its kind.
26Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image,

 

[sayak83]

Omg...

Gen 1:
16God made two great lights:
17God set these lights in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth, 18to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness
21So God created the great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters teemed according to their kinds, and every bird of flight after its kind.
25God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that crawls upon the earth according to its kind.
26Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image,

I have rebutted this exact point in my post. It is clearly written that God says "let the earth make this" or "let the waters make this" and that is done by the earth and the water. God says "let living things do X" and they do X. In each case the creation itself does the action while the action is willed by God. This is what is shorthanded as God creating.
Your attempt to omit those verses in the middle is very instructive and reveals more about you than Gen1.

Let the earth put forth vegetation:...
Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures,...
Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth...

OMG indeed.

 

[Comradio251]

The Creationists are requested to
1) Please furnish a videographic evidence of a new species coming from thin air (or from rocks...whatever). Since, apparently, new species are not created through modification of existing populations over time, they must be arising from thin air. Please present videographic evidence of the same. Surely God can make at least one little new species from air upon request? No?

I know you're being insincere here and come on, man. There is no "videographic evidence" of transitional forms taking shape between two species for macro-evolution either. You can't demand something from your opponent that which you cannot do either for the proponents of evolution. You need to have a valid starting point. I'm not even a "biblical creationist" but that's not even a point of argument to begin with.

 

[Pogo]

Omg...

Gen 1:
16God made two great lights:
17God set these lights in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth, 18to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness
21So God created the great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters teemed according to their kinds, and every bird of flight after its kind.
25God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that crawls upon the earth according to its kind.
26Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image,

Not much understanding of physics? Or the follow up of mere chemistry.

 

[sayak83]

I know you're being insincere here and come on, man. There is no "videographic evidence" of transitional forms taking shape between two species for macro-evolution either. You can't demand something from your opponent that which you cannot do either for the proponents of evolution. You need to have a valid starting point. I'm not even a "biblical creationist" but that's not even a point of argument to begin with.

The expected evidence of evolutionary transition are transitional fossils which we have in spades.
The expected evidence of creationism is de novo creation of new species by a Being who is presently existing with that capability. So where is that expected evidence?

 

[McBell]

You can't demand something from your opponent that which you cannot do either

Yet creationist do exactly this at least 99% of the time.

So it is not @sayak83 setting the bar.
They are merely lowering themself down to the bar set by creationists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know you're being insincere here and come on, man. There is no "videographic evidence" of transitional forms taking shape between two species for macro-evolution either. You can't demand something from your opponent that which you cannot do either for the proponents of evolution. You need to have a valid starting point. I'm not even a "biblical creationist" but that's not even a point of argument to begin with.

Actually there are. You don't know what a transitional form is at all, do you?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The expected evidence of evolutionary transition are transitional fossils which we have in spades.

We do, huh? You should have told
Stephen Jay Gould.

He wrote: “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our text- books have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.”

Excerpt from:
Evolution’s Erratic Pace - "Natural History," May, 1977

Stop with inaccurate statements.

 

[Tomef]

The Creationists are requested to
1) Please furnish a videographic evidence of a new species coming from thin air (or from rocks...whatever). Since, apparently, new species are not created through modification of existing populations over time, they must be arising from thin air. Please present videographic evidence of the same. Surely God can make at least one little new species from air upon request? No?
2) Explain the following set of verses from the Bible that clearly states that life emerged from nature/earth and diversified into many kinds in accordance with the will of God (no mention of God creating anything). Genesis 1
Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good.
God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.” 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

Notice that God is doing nothing himself. The natural systems (earth, water and air) are creating the creatures in accordance with the will of God. And the creatures themselves are multiplying and diversifying within their kinds (clades) by their own potential in accordance to the will and blessing of God.
And this process is defined as "God creating“ the living things.

This in Genesis 2, when God is said to create the humans and animals ..this is the methodology that is being alluded to.

There is nothing described here that is fundamentally at odds with the abiogenesis and evolutionary processes that are described by scientists as the manner in with the natural elements of the earth brought forth life and how life then diversified by its own nature. Bible merely adds that these capabilities come to the natural world through the will and blessing of God.

So .....what is the problem again Creationists???

Maybe whoever wrote it was thinking of creation + reproduction, as in god made the originals, which then reproduced.

 

[Twilight Hue]

We do, huh? You should have told
Stephen Jay Gould.

He wrote: “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our text- books have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.”

Excerpt from:
Evolution’s Erratic Pace - "Natural History," May, 1977

Stop with inaccurate statements.

It would be nice if people kept up with the times.

1977?

My oh my.

Science hasn't gone stagnant past the mid to late seventies. It was true then, but not now.

A lot has been discovered since the mid to late 70s including as @sayak83 put it, transitional fossils in spades.

Four Famous Transitional Fossils That Support Evolution

Paleontologists have discovered numerous transitional fossils support Darwin's theory of natural selection.

www.forbes.com

 

[McBell]

We do, huh? You should have told
Stephen Jay Gould.

He wrote: “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our text- books have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.”

Excerpt from:
Evolution’s Erratic Pace - "Natural History," May, 1977

Stop with inaccurate statements.

You do know this is the year 2024, right?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

It would be nice if people kept up with the times.

1977?

A lot has been discovered since then including as @sayak83 put it, transitional fossils in spades.

Four Famous Transitional Fossils That Support Evolution

Paleontologists have discovered numerous transitional fossils support Darwin's theory of natural selection.

www.forbes.com

Nope, sorry. If anything, it’s gotten worse….

Stasis is the name of the game.

And no one can show with certainty any fossil had offspring.

Whenever the fossil record is argued for evolutionary support, the excuse always comes down to, “Well, the fossil record is imperfect.”
(It’s more complete than you think.)

Back in 1977, and now in 2024.

 

[sayak83]

We do, huh? You should have told
Stephen Jay Gould.

He wrote: “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our text- books have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.”

Excerpt from:
Evolution’s Erratic Pace - "Natural History," May, 1977

Stop with inaccurate statements.

Sorry. This thread is for you to post videographic evidence of species being created by God.
Or explain why you are misreading Genesis 1.
Thanks

 

[Twilight Hue]

Nope, sorry. If anything, it’s gotten worse….

Stasis is the name of the game.

And no one can show with certainty any fossil had offspring.

Whenever the fossil record is argued for evolutionary support, the excuse always comes down to, “Well, the fossil record is imperfect.”
(It’s more complete than you think.)

Back in 1977, and now in 2024.

This is the worse denial of science I've seen in awhile.

 

[sayak83]

Maybe whoever wrote it was thinking of creation + reproduction, as in god made the originals, which then reproduced.

I do not think so.
When we say that an Egyptian pharaoh made the pyramids, we mean that he commanded them to be made while the engineers and the workers built it following the command.
This is the same sense of God creating that is used here. God explicitly commands earth to bring forth vegetation and the waters to bring forth the creatures. Later this is called God creating these things...in the same we say pharaoh built the pyramids.

 

[wellwisher]

The Creationists are requested to
1) Please furnish a videographic evidence of a new species coming from thin air (or from rocks...whatever). Since, apparently, new species are not created through modification of existing populations over time, they must be arising from thin air. Please present videographic evidence of the same. Surely God can make at least one little new species from air upon request? No?
2) Explain the following set of verses from the Bible that clearly states that life emerged from nature/earth and diversified into many kinds in accordance with the will of God (no mention of God creating anything). Genesis 1
Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good.
God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.” 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

Notice that God is doing nothing himself. The natural systems (earth, water and air) are creating the creatures in accordance with the will of God. And the creatures themselves are multiplying and diversifying within their kinds (clades) by their own potential in accordance to the will and blessing of God.
And this process is defined as "God creating“ the living things.

This in Genesis 2, when God is said to create the humans and animals ..this is the methodology that is being alluded to.

There is nothing described here that is fundamentally at odds with the abiogenesis and evolutionary processes that are described by scientists as the manner in with the natural elements of the earth brought forth life and how life then diversified by its own nature. Bible merely adds that these capabilities come to the natural world through the will and blessing of God.

So .....what is the problem again Creationists???

The main problem with the current version of the theory of evolution, it this current version still uses the same math as gambling casinos, where the House always wins. The irony is gambling casino math is supposed to be random, so how can the house always win? Does anyone see the irony and the cheat? Like the weather man, houses the same math, there is no science accountability; House still wins and he is never fired for being wrong, often.

For example, it is well established that some aspects of the DNA are very conservative and rarely change; foundational.There are also other aspects of the DNA that are more pliable and active and much more subject to change. The black box random approach is dealing from the bottom of the deck. How can you claim random assumptions when half the cards are not being dealt by nature? Is this cheat how house of evolution always wins? Nature and evolution does not use all 52 cards in the DNA deck, so why assume that that random rules of legitimate cards apply? Nature, loading the genetic dice, is a key part of the evolutionary dynamics.

How does nature play poker with its marked cards? This would need a modified random model that can accommodates logic loads that reduce the randomness, toward sure things. DNA evolved very close to that.

Since you cannot ethically use a purely random approach for evolution; no more cheating, what is the foundational logic behind the current science theory and can it make predictions without dealing from the bottom of the deck? The answer is no. Creationist have a valid concern, based on the saying that house always wins; by cheating. Use your theory, with the cheat, to predict an evolutionary event in the future, even dealing from the bottom of the deck? You cannot just alway win, like the Casino House, without having to try the test and have consequences if your theory is wrong. No more free ride.

Scientific testing involves figuring out what we would expect to observe if an idea were correct and comparing that expectation to what we actually observe.

Don't get me wrong. I believe in the spirit of evolution; change and natural selection. Challenging casino math does not make me anti-science. Casino math cheating males you anti-science.

I believe there needs to be a rational explanation and not just casino loaded slot machine, treated as legitimate. The answer, to me, is connected to water. Evolution is a function of the cellular water, as the water continuum, within cells and life, advances to higher entropic states. The second law states that the entropy of universe has to increase. This is the foundation of evolution. Evolution also move forward with the entropy changes in the environment around it; entropic selective pressure.

Energy is conserved, so evolution is not about energy or else life would stop evolving; conserve energy. But since entropy has to increase; higher and higher complexity, life follows suit and evolves.

Unlike a rock, which is frozen within its fixed entropic state, and only changes slowly with time, often by water, life is in a constant dynamic state, where entropy is always increasing. This is mostly done through metabolism, which converts larger molecules into smaller gases and water.

Neurons are the cells of the body that take metabolism to the extreme. The extreme entropy increase, connected to neurons have a connection to consciousness. From the entropy increase of cellular metabolism, there is entropy increasing cascade all the way to the DNA and also throughout the brain, into consciousness, with water the integrating variable.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I do not think so.
When we say that an Egyptian pharaoh made the pyramids, we mean that he commanded them to be made while the engineers and the workers built it following the command.
This is the same sense of God creating that is used here. God explicitly commands earth to bring forth vegetation and the waters to bring forth the creatures. Later this is called God creating these things...in the same we say pharaoh built the pyramids.

Yeah , but the difference is we already know who and what pharaohs are , and what they do, and how they command their workers. It's already established.

Unlike God which is just a concept and nothing is proven already beforehand about God remains completely unestablished in the same vernacular as pharaohs are.

So a person can't really say God commanded something in the same way comparatively as one would do using Egyptian Pharaohs or whatever examples are provided and used.

There's a big difference by the way comparisons are structured and of course how the devil is always going to be in the details. ;0)

 

[wellwisher]

The Creationists are requested to
1) Please furnish a videographic evidence of a new species coming from thin air (or from rocks...whatever). Since, apparently, new species are not created through modification of existing populations over time, they must be arising from thin air. Please present videographic evidence of the same. Surely God can make at least one little new species from air upon request? No?
2) Explain the following set of verses from the Bible that clearly states that life emerged from nature/earth and diversified into many kinds in accordance with the will of God (no mention of God creating anything). Genesis 1
Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good.
God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.” 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

Notice that God is doing nothing himself. The natural systems (earth, water and air) are creating the creatures in accordance with the will of God. And the creatures themselves are multiplying and diversifying within their kinds (clades) by their own potential in accordance to the will and blessing of God.
And this process is defined as "God creating“ the living things.

This in Genesis 2, when God is said to create the humans and animals ..this is the methodology that is being alluded to.

There is nothing described here that is fundamentally at odds with the abiogenesis and evolutionary processes that are described by scientists as the manner in with the natural elements of the earth brought forth life and how life then diversified by its own nature. Bible merely adds that these capabilities come to the natural world through the will and blessing of God.

So .....what is the problem again Creationists???

The main problem with the current version of the theory of evolution, it this current version still uses the same math as gambling casinos, where the House always wins. The irony is gambling casino math is supposed to be random, so how can the house always win? Does anyone see the irony and the cheat? Like the weather man, who uses the same math, there is no science accountability. The house still wins and he is never fired for being wrong.

It is well established that some aspects of the DNA are very conservative and rarely change; foundational.There are also other aspects of the DNA that are more pliable and active and much more subject to change. The black box random approach is dealing from the bottom of the deck. How can you claim random assumptions when half the cards are not being dealt by nature? Is this cheat how house of evolution always wins? Nature and evolution does not use all 52 cards in the DNA deck, so why assume that random rules of a full deck of legitimate cards apply? Nature, loading the genetic dice, is a key part of the evolutionary dynamics.

How does nature play poker with its purposely marked cards? This would need a modified random model that can accommodate logic loads, that reduce the randomness, toward sure things. DNA evolved very close to that.

Since you cannot ethically use a purely random approach for evolution; no more cheating, what is the foundational logic behind the current science theory and can it, alone, make predictions without dealing from the bottom of the deck? The answer is no. Creationist have a valid concern, based on the saying that house always wins; by cheating. Use your theory, with the cheat, to predict an evolutionary event, in the future, dealing from the bottom of the deck. You cannot just alway win, like the Casino House, without having to try the test and have consequences if your theory is wrong. No more crooked nose free ride.

Scientific testing involves figuring out what we would expect to observe if an idea were correct and comparing that expectation to what we actually observe.

Don't get me wrong. I believe in the spirit of evolution; change and natural selection. Challenging the legitimacy of casino math does not make me anti-science. Casino math cheating, without accountability, makes you anti-science.

I believe there needs to be a rational explanation and not just casino loaded slot machines, treated as legitimate. The answer, to me, is connected to water. Evolution is a function of the cellular water, as the water continuum, within cells and life, advances to higher entropic states. The second law states that the entropy of universe has to increase. This is the foundation of evolution. Evolution also move forward with the entropy changes in the environment around it; entropic selective pressure.

Energy is conserved, so evolution is not about energy or else life would stop evolving; conserve energy. But since entropy has to increase; higher and higher complexity, life follows suit and evolves.

Unlike a rock, which is frozen within its fixed entropic state, and only changes slowly with time, often by water, life is in a constant dynamic state, where entropy is always increasing. This is mostly done through metabolism, which converts larger molecules into smaller gases and water.

Neurons are the cells of the body that take metabolism to the extreme. The extreme entropy increase, connected to neurons have a connection to consciousness. From the entropy increase of cellular metabolism, there is entropy increasing cascade all the way to the DNA and also throughout the brain, into consciousness, with water the integrating variable.