Reply to recent unbiased sites/publications to read about creationism vs. evolution

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "recent unbiased sites/publications to read about creationism vs. evolution"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]OP, evolution is not the study of all life coming from a single-called organism.  If you are truly interested in this, and not just trolling, start here:

[url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent#Chromosome_2_in_humans[/url].

Then read some of the reference articles linked at the end (the one about speciation w/in drosophila is a good one).  These can explain it much better than anyone on DCUM, and in truth, it's a very complex theory that not everyone understands/can grasp.  If you are waiting for someone to come along and agree with you that you can't reproduce the lineage/all the steps that went into getting to a dog, well, let me be that person.  But I think you are being somewhat disingenuous (or perhaps just one of those people who has trouble grasping complex theories-it does seem that way from your replies attempting to reduce evolution down to 1 single repeatable experiment) to conclude that just because we can't actually observe species changing over millions of years makes it false.

If I were to ask where the hard proof is that God created every single specie on earth, what would be your answer?  Or if I asked why he's not creating a new Earth every generation or so for us to observe him repeating his past deed...how can you explain/prove that?[/quote]
Thank you. I admit I'm not a biological scientist, and I doubt many on here are. So the point is that lots of different organisms occurred spontaneously, and from those different species evolved independently? I think either way, my point hasn't been addressed. I'm not saying, nor have I said, that not being able to reproduce it makes it false. I'm saying I don't see how it is "science" if you can't test it in the way you test other sciences. I'm not saying you have hard proof that God created everything either, and whether I believe that or not, we haven't addressed how evolution is "science." It's theory, in the same way the Big Bang is a theory. There are a lot of "somehow" involved, none of which you can test. My questions have nothing to do with science vs. religion. You can prove if I throw a ball in the air, it will come down, and you can explain scientifically why. You can't prove that 13 billion years ago an infinitesimal point of light that contained all the matter in the universe and exploded into what we have today, and you can't explain scientifically that's what happened. And you can't prove that all life on earth today came from however many life forms that spontaneously arose from the beginnings of the planet, and you can't explain scientifically that's what happened. Indeed, there ARE repeatable, provable, testable experiments that you can't get matter from nothing and that life won't spontaneously erupt and that when a species reproduces it gets more of that species. So I'm just don't know why so many people call evolution and the Big Bang "science." (Sorry to introduce the Big Bang; I'm not trying muddy the waters or expand this into a religious thing. They just seem very alike to me as theories). [/quote]

You test it whenever you acquire new data.  That new data doesn't have to be created in the lab.  It can be new fossil records.  The scientific test is that it stands up whenever new data is introduced.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics