A Perspective on Evolution

[Cup-of-Ruin]

What on earth does evolution have to do with pantheism? You're making connections up out of your rear end.

Actually the two concepts are quite intimate.

Which is entirely not what I'm arguing for. I don't believe in blind chance; I believe God knows what he's doing.

One of the fundemental tenets of evolutionary theory is the aspect of development due to random chance, so in arguing for evolution as a theory you do indeed believe in chance, in fact great chance, the odds would be in the trillions to one, more perhaps, evolution relies or I should say defies probability, I would argue that it is beyond the laws of probability.

Yeah, because the sky is solid and the sun, moon, and stars, are attached to it.

?????.

Ever notice how the people who accuse others of being deceived by Satan never wonder if perhaps they're the ones being deceived?

I am the one who believes in the Biblical account, your the one in doubt.

Tt. Please don't try and scare me into believing your nonsense. You can barely form a coherent argument and resort to using the theories of liars and failures to argue your points.

?????

 

[Brackenzee]

Actually the two concepts are quite intimate.

No they aren't. Pantheism is related to neo-pagan ideology and eastern religions and has nothing to do with scientific theories about the origins of the universe and biosphere.

One of the fundemental tenets of evolutionary theory is the aspect of development due to random chance, so in arguing for evolution as a theory you do indeed believe in chance, in fact great chance, the odds would be in the trillions to one, more perhaps, evolution relies or I should say defies probability, I would argue that it is beyond the laws of probability.

It's only random if you're an atheist. If you believe in God then it's no stretch at all to believe that God influenced the outcomes of the evolutionary process.

?????

You claim to believe that the Genesis account is literally true, yet even you don't take its claim that the stars, sun, and moon are literally in the sky at face value.

I am the one who believes in the Biblical account, your the one in doubt.

Yes, and rather than questioning whether that account is literally true, you tell everyone else that they're deceived by Satan. As if you cannot even fathom the idea that you're wrong on the issue.

?????

You're trying to make me afraid of Satan's deceptions and thus more likely to see things you're way, but when we actually start arguing the science you often post links about failed experiments and quasi-scientific ramblings that are at best wrong and at worst disingenuous.

 

[MahogonySnail]

Evolutionary theory works in a laboratory.

 

[greatkraw]

Evolutionary theory works in a laboratory.

?????????????????????

does that mean they have come up with a repeatable experiment that proves evolution?

I imagine this was a humourous statement but I do not get it.

You come up with some subtle stuff Snail.

I especially enjoy the gentle and inoffensive way you seek to correct those in doctrinal confusion

 

[CIRBaptist]

Anyway, back to the second law of thermodynamics. I am guessing that you don't actually know much about physics. I can't say I am a physics genius either, as I've only had the opportunity to take one physics class. However, I do know enough about thermodynamics to clear up your misunderstandings.

The second law says something along the lines about how the entropy of a closed system cannot decrease. I don't think I need to explain entropy to you, so I'll just move ahead to the point...

It seems you don't even pay attention to the "closed system" part of the law. It's like you assumed that order from disorder violates the law, which isn't true. Entropy within a closed system can decrease, as long as the overall entropy of the closed system doesn't.

I can also provide some equations that help explain this, but I doubt you know much about calculus. That isn't meant to be taken as an insult, it's just that not many people know anything about calculus. I only do because I took advanced calculus in high school.

Yes i've heard from Creation scientist WE are a closed system and the Sun does not add energy at all to the Earth without haveing a highly designed focus (Photosynthesis) it creates damage like your car paint.

 

[Cup-of-Ruin]

No they aren't. Pantheism is related to neo-pagan ideology and eastern religions and has nothing to do with scientific theories about the origins of the universe and biosphere.

Well lets talk about that. If I read Philo Byblius from Phoenicia approx 100 B.C. who was a Pagan and collected and compiled earlier pagan theological writings, I can see that the theory of 'evolution' is very ancient indeed, for example; "The beginning of all things was a dark and stormy air, or dark air and a turbid chaos resembling Erebus; and these were at the first unbounded, and for a lond series of ages had no limit. But after a while this movement of dark air - wind, became enamoured of it's own self, it's own first principles, and a intimate union took place between them, a connection that was called Desire (Pothos); and this was the beginning of the Creation of all things. But it (the Desire) had no concoiusness of its own creation. Hoever from its embrace with the wind was generated Mot, which some call slime (primeval mixture), and others putrescence of watery secretion. And from this sprang all the seed of creation, and generation of the universe." and "And there were certain simple animals without conciousness or sensation, from which intelligent animals were produced." and then it goes on how the Pagans connected these unconcious primary forces with gods, which were just impersonal natural elements.

I could trace this all the way back to Babylon and Egypt if you would like, concepts about intelligent beings evolving from simple slime, "there is nothing new under the sun"...

It's only random if you're an atheist. If you believe in God then it's no stretch at all to believe that God influenced the outcomes of the evolutionary process.

Not according to the Bible, the theory of Evolution is in total contradiction to the Bible.

You claim to believe that the Genesis account is literally true, yet even you don't take its claim that the stars, sun, and moon are literally in the sky at face value.

firmament, I am happy to explain the meaning of this word for you.

 

[greatkraw]

Sure, evolution goes back to Lucifer.

He can't get past the question, 'So God, where di d you come from?'
Lucifer witnessed the beginning of everything else.
He knows he had a beginning.. So God must have too.

 

[MahogonySnail]

Well as far as I know they have only been able to simulate it in laboratories but no one yet has done a real-world experiment.

 

[CIRBaptist]

Well as far as I know they have only been able to simulate it in laboratories but no one yet has done a real-world experiment.

Macro or Mirco Evolution?

 

[MahogonySnail]

macro and micro are the same thing really when you think about it, I don't think either?

 

[CIRBaptist]

macro and micro are the same thing really when you think about it, I don't think either?

Macro is like one species becoming another...a whale evovles over millions of years to become a horse for example

Micro evolution is one kind, a species (i.e.) dog, from breeding becomes many types of dogs. But the species does not change into a new species...

 

[Cup-of-Ruin]

Macro is like one species becoming another...a whale evovles over millions of years to become a horse for example

Micro evolution is one kind, a species (i.e.) dog, from breeding becomes many types of dogs. But the species does not change into a new species...

Actually dog breeding does not produce new species, just more dogs using existing genes, you are not creating new genes by cross-breeding.

 

[MahogonySnail]

Yeah I don't call cross-breeding evolution. Just as I don't say a brown baby is evolved when black man and white woman come together.

 

[superdave5221]

Evolutionary theory works in a laboratory.

Neo Darwinism has NEVER been proven in a lab. There is NO evidence of evolution between phyla. There IS microevolution WITHIN phylum, but no evolution between phyla. It doesn't exist anywhere on the earth, unless scientists impose it with their minds. There is no evidence of the tree of life anywhere in the fossil record, even though theorists have been searching for it for hundreds of years. Since Neo Darwinism cannot be proven in a lab, or under any type of natural conditions, it doesn't qualify as science. Therefore it, like Creation, is a religion, and can only be accepted by faith. Creation has a lot more circumstantial evidence in it's favor however. If the supernatural is allowed, it is quite plausible. Evolution on the other hand, is mathematically impossible, defies every philosophical and logic reasoning concept, and abrogates every means that we have learned for determining truth.

 

[Cup-of-Ruin]

Neo Darwinism has NEVER been proven in a lab. There is NO evidence of evolution between phyla. There IS microevolution WITHIN phylum, but no evolution between phyla. It doesn't exist anywhere on the earth, unless scientists impose it with their minds. There is no evidence of the tree of life anywhere in the fossil record, even though theorists have been searching for it for hundreds of years. Since Neo Darwinism cannot be proven in a lab, or under any type of natural conditions, it doesn't qualify as science. Therefore it, like Creation, is a religion, and can only be accepted by faith. Creation has a lot more circumstantial evidence in it's favor however. If the supernatural is allowed, it is quite plausible. Evolution on the other hand, is mathematically impossible, defies every philosophical and logic reasoning concept, and abrogates every means that we have learned for determining truth.

Yes this is correct, 'Evolution' defies probability, even for one case alone, one example of Evolution would be statistically impossible, let alone for it to happen time and time again perpetually, that is a absurd proposition, it's a mathematical impossibility, however what is possible is that if you repeat a false concept often enough the human mind tends to accept it as being true, this seems to be due to some type of social psyhcology whereby if something is repeated often by a general group of humans on mass, then idividuals are more likely to accept and repeat the same thing, no matter how illogical it is, this has been proven, you can get individuals to say such stupid things as 2+2=5, and they will actually believe it, even though it is illogical, evolution is the same, it's just a lie that's taught on mass, usually to children, with the hope that they will just go along with it, repeating for the rest of their lives, and more often than not they do.

 

[greatkraw]

Yes this is correct, 'Evolution' defies probability, even for one case alone, one example of Evolution would be statistically impossible, let alone for it to happen time and time again perpetually, that is a absurd proposition, it's a mathematical impossibility, however what is possible is that if you repeat a false concept often enough the human mind tends to accept it as being true, this seems to be due to some type of social psyhcology whereby if something is repeated often by a general group of humans on mass, then idividuals are more likely to accept and repeat the same thing, no matter how illogical it is, this has been proven, you can get individuals to say such stupid things as 2+2=5, and they will actually believe it, even though it is illogical, evolution is the same, it's just a lie that's taught on mass, usually to children, with the hope that they will just go along with it, repeating for the rest of their lives, and more often than not they do.

The germans perfected propoganda and concluded that the rate of dissemination of a lie is proportional to its magnitude.

I went to primary school in the 60s and was indoctrinated there and in year 7.
Before we ever studied science in high school I had been indoctrinated with dinosaurs(old earth), fornication instead of marriage(social studies) and 2 million year old missing links(social studies). I do not blame my teachers, they just taught the curriculum.

This was all before I was officially taught scientific method.

 

[Cup-of-Ruin]

The germans perfected propoganda and concluded that the rate of dissemination of a lie is proportional to its magnitude.

I went to primary school in the 60s and was indoctrinated there and in year 7.
Before we ever studied science in high school I had been indoctrinated with dinosaurs(old earth), fornication instead of marriage(social studies) and 2 million year old missing links(social studies). I do not blame my teachers, they just taught the curriculum.

This was all before I was officially taught scientific method.

Yes I was indoctrinated with all the worst, secular state, public school, atheist anti-God lies and propaganda, one can possibly imagine as well. Our 'education' system, is a system of indoctrination, to prepare a slave for duty and service, in a satanic world, that's all it is. It's like being born into Plato's Cave allegory, in fact it's rather Platonic in design overall, very well established and ancient, and very evil. God saves, He really does, he can deliver from all the lies.

 

[Brackenzee]

Not according to the Bible, the theory of Evolution is in total contradiction to the Bible.

The Bible is not a science book. If you're trying to take your scientific view of the world from the Bible, you're Doing It Wrong (tm).

Neo Darwinism has NEVER been proven in a lab. There is NO evidence of evolution between phyla. There IS microevolution WITHIN phylum, but no evolution between phyla. It doesn't exist anywhere on the earth, unless scientists impose it with their minds.

This is untrue. Obviously we can't observe evolution between phylla in a human life-span, but the fossil indicates that birds evolved from reptiles; we see what are believed to be late dinosaurs with feathers and what appear to be early birds with reptile-like features.

Yes i've heard from Creation scientist WE are a closed system and the Sun does not add energy at all to the Earth without haveing a highly designed focus (Photosynthesis) it creates damage like your car paint.

Well yes, but most of the planet's land is covered in photo synthetic organisms, and we either eat photosynthetic organisms or we eat animals that have eaten photosynthetic organisms, which is how the entire system is provided with new energy.

Macro is like one species becoming another...a whale evovles over millions of years to become a horse for example

Not quite how it goes. The theory is that some reptiles evolved into proto-mammals which both horses and whales descend from.

 

[greatkraw]

The Bible is not a science book. If you're trying to take your scientific view of the world from the Bible, you're Doing It Wrong (tm).

This is untrue. Obviously we can't observe evolution between phylla in a human life-span, but the fossil indicates that birds evolved from reptiles; we see what are believed to be late dinosaurs with feathers and what appear to be early birds with reptile-like features.

Well yes, but most of the planet's land is covered in photo synthetic organisms, and we either eat photosynthetic organisms or we eat animals that have eaten photosynthetic organisms, which is how the entire system is provided with new energy.

Not quite how it goes. The theory is that some reptiles evolved into proto-mammals which both horses and whales descend from.

Not true not true not true.

No missing links have been found. (Then they would become found links)

Genesis 1

21And God created great whales and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind; and God saw that it was good.


22And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply on the earth."

23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

24And God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth after his kind"; and it was so.
25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind; and God saw that it was good.

 

[Brackenzee]

There are multiple missing links, but moreover, if evolutionary theory as we understand it is correct, every species is a transitional species because there's no obvious 'endgame', no 'perfect' biological organism currently extant.