Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: aruanan
Operative words: If I were going to assume a created system, first of all, I would not expect adaptive changes.

This is purely ad hoc reasoning that doesn't have anything at all to do with reality or possible reality, merely taste and notion

In the creation/evolution debate, one feature I have observed multiple times is that creationists try to incorporate features of evolution (e.g. "microevolution" or "adaptation") in an attempt to make a scientific sounding "theory" of creation.

But that is dishonest. If we are to accept creation as the method by which life appeared on Earth and exists in the variety that we see, then we must accept the Biblical version of creation, not some version that has had elements of evolution mixed into it. So, since for the purpose of the discussion, I put myself into the position of a scientist trying to design my research on the basis of creation "theory", I'm making assumptions based on creation as the Bible describes it. And the Biblical account of creation makes no mention of any adaptive process or need for one.

Also, I have heard, over and over, "God is perfect," and "God does not make mistakes." Well, adaptation only occurs because of sub-optimal conditions. Sub-optimal conditions don't suggest either perfection or lack of mistakes. Therefore, I would not expect to see adaptive changes in a created system--there wouldn't be any need for them.

213 posted on 08/23/2011 7:10:51 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom
But that is dishonest. If we are to accept creation as the method by which life appeared on Earth and exists in the variety that we see, then we must accept the Biblical version of creation, not some version that has had elements of evolution mixed into it. So, since for the purpose of the discussion, I put myself into the position of a scientist trying to design my research on the basis of creation "theory", I'm making assumptions based on creation as the Bible describes it. And the Biblical account of creation makes no mention of any adaptive process or need for one.

Again, you're crafting an ad hoc situation to fit a polemical need. The Biblical account also makes no mention of blood circulation or gills versus lungs versus book lungs as means of oxygenation or oxygen or chlorophyll, but that doesn't mean the writer was denying the possibility of any of these existing.
215 posted on 08/23/2011 7:24:00 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom; tpanther; betty boop; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; Gordon Greene; Ethan Clive Osgoode; ...

God created variation within species.

Science cannot lay claim to that and Darwin’s observing it does not make it the sole domain of *science*.

The problem is that scientists have taken the observation of variation within species to speciation, which is only a conclusion reached based on forensic evidence and extrapolation, but which has never been observed. The ToE is only a philosophical construct based on a certain line of reasoning that people who reject God’s hand in thsi universe consider *logical*.

For all man’s attempts to mess with species to highlight certain desirable traits in animals, man has not yet succeeded in developing any new species.

And scientists expect us to believe that something can happen by accident that man cannot make happen on purpose? By design, dare I say?


216 posted on 08/23/2011 7:32:02 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom
I will not use any Bible or God terms. Regarding your reference to the term 'microevolution', if you disagree with that term, which simply means changes brought about in DNA resulting in a change at the cellular or subcellular level. Do you disagree with this? If you wish to discuss Gould's "punctuated equilibrium" fine, but please address this term 'microevolution'.

You seem to reject that life appeared by creation. As an evolutionist please tell us how life came to be on this planet (sounding scientific).In order to know that Biblical creation is absolutely false, you must know what is true. Please tell us.

Further, please explain how the universe came to be at singularity. What was first cause of that singularity? What existed prior to singularity and prior to what Einstein, Hawkin, and other physists reference? What caused Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago.

217 posted on 08/23/2011 7:56:09 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; tpanther; Gordon Greene; Ethan Clive Osgoode; betty boop; ...
Therefore, I would not expect to see adaptive changes in a created system--there wouldn't be any need for them.

Variety is the spice of life.

It would be a dull world if everything that existed was a clone of itself.

By allowing for variation even without the need to adapt to environmental pressure, there can be stability without stagnation.

Infinite variety makes each sunset unique and each creature recognizable from the next.

219 posted on 08/23/2011 8:07:52 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson