Who Created Evolution?

[The Kilted Heathen]

No, not Darwin. God created evolution.

You know what's really funny is that nowhere in all of science and the Theory of Biological Evolution does it say that a god didn't do all of those things. It just calls it like it sees it.

God created at the time of creation.

That is not any part of evolution, though. That's your wacky-weed system of "divine magic".

 

[Rinchen]

No, not Darwin. God created evolution. Darwin may have noticed some things like cross breeding and adaptation, called it evolution, and after a few puffs of the wacky weed, decided people came from monkeys. But for whatever part of evolution is true, God created at the time of creation. God created both the visible and invisible. The systems of the life cycle are a part of the creation; adaptation, survival of the fittest, luck, winning. The things people call evolution.

Collosians 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

What ignorant tool tried to convince you Darwin created evolution? Is this what many Christians are taught? No wonder why they choose creationism so much...

 

[Father Heathen]

The concept of god and the theory of evolution are not mutually exclusive. The only thing evolution conflicts with is biblical literalism, which does not hold a monopoly over the concept of god. So this petulant thread turned out to be rather pointless.

 

[Sunstone]

The concept of god and the theory of evolution are not mutually exclusive. The only thing evolution conflicts with is biblical literalism, which does not hold a monopoly over the concept of god.

^This.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

No, not Darwin. God created evolution. Darwin may have noticed some things like cross breeding and adaptation, called it evolution, and after a few puffs of the wacky weed, decided people .

Good grief. Nobody is arguing that Darwin "created" evolution. Also, we are descendants of apes, and your feelings and opinions on the matter (or your favorite holy book's) have no bearing on that fact.

 

[Milton Platt]

No, not Darwin. God created evolution. Darwin may have noticed some things like cross breeding and adaptation, called it evolution, and after a few puffs of the wacky weed, decided people came from monkeys. But for whatever part of evolution is true, God created at the time of creation. God created both the visible and invisible. The systems of the life cycle are a part of the creation; adaptation, survival of the fittest, luck, winning. The things people call evolution.

Collosians 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

Have you any scientific data to demonstrate that your god exists and that he created something, or do you only have quotes from an old collection of stories? Otherwise, you are just spinning your wheels by posting this.

 

[DavidFirth]

You know what's really funny is that nowhere in all of science and the Theory of Biological Evolution does it say that a god didn't do all of those things. It just calls it like it sees it.


That is not any part of evolution, though. That's your wacky-weed system of "divine magic".

So abiogenesis must have been a theory some atheist on LSD came up with.

 

[Rinchen]

So abiogenesis must have been a theory some atheist on LSD came up with.

I'm sure that's exactly what they meant.

 

[columbus]

So abiogenesis must have been a theory some atheist on LSD came up with.

Abiogenesis has little or nothing to do with speciation through evolution.
The fact that you cannot understand that tells me a great deal about your understanding of the science involved.
Tom

 

[DavidFirth]

Abiogenesis has little or nothing to do with speciation through evolution.
The fact that you cannot understand that tells me a great deal about your understanding of the science involved.
Tom

It has everything to do with it if you're an atheist. Atheists are stuck with trying to explain abiogenesis and fitting it in with evolution.

 

[columbus]

It has everything to do with it if you're an atheist. Atheists are stuck with trying to explain abiogenesis and fitting it in with evolution.

It's got nothing to do with it.
You have a theory of abiogenesis, magical God stuff described by ancient people in a book, Genesis. People who look at the evidence have a different one.
But the reason that life exists has nothing to do with what happened after that, so whatever theory of abiogenesis you hold to it has nothing to do with evolution after life formed.

The fact that you cannot understand that proves to me that you don't understand the subject of life.
Much less God.
Tom

 

[DavidFirth]

It's got nothing to do with it.
You have a theory of abiogenesis, magical God stuff described by ancient people in a book, Genesis. People who look at the evidence have a different one.
But the reason that life exists has nothing to do with what happened after that, so whatever theory of abiogenesis you hold to it has nothing to do with evolution after life formed.

The fact that you cannot understand that proves to me that you don't understand the subject of life.
Much less God.
Tom

The fact that you don't think the first life form has everything to do with macroevolution tells me you're just not very bright or you're so prideful that you know you're wrong and won't admit it.

What did everything evolve from? Can't you trace macroevolution back to the first life form? If not, why not?

 

[Ted Evans]

What did everything evolve from? Can't you trace macroevolution back to the first life form? If not, why not?

Good luck with getting a plausible, verifiable answer to that question.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

So abiogenesis must have been a theory some atheist on LSD came up with.

Your lack of understanding as to what constitutes a Scientific Theory is... unsurprising.

 

[columbus]

What did everything evolve from?

Nobody knows.
That's the bottom line answer.
What happened three and a half billion years ago is the subject of debate. I don't know, and neither does anyone else.
But religionists insist that they do. Some ancient people who didn't even know where babies come from told us everything important about the subject. So they put a lot of time and effort into ignoring the things people have found out since then.
Tom

 

[DavidFirth]

Your lack of understanding as to what constitutes a Scientific Theory is... unsurprising.

Oh, you mean it was heroin? I should've known.

 

[DavidFirth]

Nobody knows.
That's the bottom line answer.
What happened three and a half billion years ago is the subject of debate. I don't know, and neither does anyone else.
But religionists insist that they do. Some ancient people who didn't even know where babies come from told us everything important about the subject. So they put a lot of time and effort into ignoring the things people have found out since then.
Tom

Wait a minute. You say macroevolution is fact. Yet you also say you don't know what life forms evolved from or what they're evolving into now?

So you can't explain:
1. What did the first virus evolve from?
2. Bacteria?
3. Animal?
4. Plant?

That's really quite a theory you've got there. Basically, you don't know, well, much of anything. What you claim you do know you have to derive from assumptive premises. Hmm...

 

[columbus]

Good luck with getting a plausible, verifiable answer to that question.

"Nobody knows"(yet) is the most plausible and verifiable answer.
I know for a fact, one of the most absolutely true things I know, there's no God who cares enough about what we humans believe, do, or what happens to us, to say what that is. Sending human spokespersons is not at all the same.
Tim

 

[DavidFirth]

"Nobody knows"(yet) is the most plausible and verifiable answer.
I know for a fact, one of the most absolutely true things I know, there's no God who cares enough about what we humans believe, do, or what happens to us, to say what that is. Sending human spokespersons is not at all the same.
Tim

If you know it for a fact you're whacked because there is no way you can prove it or justify how you could know such a thing. Unless someone who was there were to tell you - but you don't believe Him.

 

[columbus]

You say macroevolution is fact.

No, I didn't say that.
The biggest problem with you religionists is that you're hard of hearing. You make up your mind, and then simply ignore the facts in front of your nose when they prove you wrong.

Speciation through evolution is the most coherent, best, explanation of the facts that are easily available to Truth seekers. You keep changing the subject to the Origins of life, when your personal theory of speciation goes into the dumpster.
But evolution and biogenesis are two different things.
Tim