Prove creationism...I'll shut up!

Started by Ordo63 pages

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Oh sorry I got that wrong I meant to type.

Is it not possible our understanding of Natural Selection is wrong and that a Designer does play a roll in the process? Admittedly he would be playing a role that he is trying to conceal but he could be doing it...

Like if someone was throwing dice you would say it is beyond their control to make them land on certain numbers...but what if someone was controlling the way the dice fell?

If you dropped a ball 1000 times and one time it flew up and turned blue....this is what you are referring to.

Thus, its not a natural process because the laws are not innate or based on cause-effect relationships, they're based on the whim of a divine being.

The two are innately opposed to eachother.

With the dice, if there was divine interference they would not roll statistically random numbers. We'd know somethign was up.

Should I try to explain it better/another way?

Originally posted by Ordo
If you dropped a ball 1000 times and one time it flew up and turned blue....this is what you are referring to.

Thus, its not a natural process because the laws are not innate or based on cause-effect relationships, they're based on the whim of a divine being.

The two are innately opposed to eachother.

With the dice, if there was divine interference they would not roll statistically random numbers. We'd know somethign was up.

Should I try to explain it better/another way?

I understand what you are saying, but what if he planned every single eventuality in evolutionary history which has led us to the current human being...it can all be "natural" but he can surely have been behind it all?

Thats telological....theological.

Its logical validity depends on the magnitude.

If humans were the end result (and we are not a result, mind you as 1. we are continuously changing and 2. we did not get here in a straight line) god had very very very good predictive skills.

However, ther could not be "shaping" of our destiny, because god would have had to alter something (our gene pool, mating, environmental characteristics, disasters). To our knowledge, this has not happened. One of the points of science is to find universially constant laws and theories so that given A we can determine B, meaning the mechanism from A to B is always the same. Divine intervention would alter this mechanism. Maybe 4 billion years ago god poked an ameoba, but our ability to test and predict that is null, so ultimately I cant say either way. But, it is likely with the mechanisms we know today and the record we observed, God would have had to poked a lot to get Humans and Ferraris. This would likely disrupt science's precious A to B process of evolution and evolutionary biology would die as a sciece (in face all science would die, because how can we predict god?

Blatherous (sorry).

If you want to keep god in the equation and Natural selection, look at the beginning. You could say God could forsee every natural consequence of his creation and started things off so perfectly and precise that humans came about exactly in his image. (Personally, I wish God was a lot hotter) When you start getting into shaping destiny and intervention though, things get iffy and you basically get Intelligent design because natural selection is invalid, or at least only applicable part of the time.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I understand what you are saying, but what if he planned every single eventuality in evolutionary history which has led us to the current human being...it can all be "natural" but he can surely have been behind it all?

The Bible contradicts evolution.

only if you believe everything in the bible verbadum... and belief man was capable of understanding gods methods and plans from the beginning instead of how some believe it is just a simplified explanation for man who couldnt begin to fanthom gods power or knowledge of creation.

...or know how to treat mildew.

Originally posted by Ordo
Thats telological....theological.

Its logical validity depends on the magnitude.

If humans were the end result (and we are not a result, mind you as 1. we are continuously changing and 2. we did not get here in a straight line) god had very very very good predictive skills.

However, ther could not be "shaping" of our destiny, because god would have had to alter something (our gene pool, mating, environmental characteristics, disasters). To our knowledge, this has not happened. One of the points of science is to find universially constant laws and theories so that given A we can determine B, meaning the mechanism from A to B is always the same. Divine intervention would alter this mechanism. Maybe 4 billion years ago god poked an ameoba, but our ability to test and predict that is null, so ultimately I cant say either way. But, it is likely with the mechanisms we know today and the record we observed, God would have had to poked a lot to get Humans and Ferraris. This would likely disrupt science's precious A to B process of evolution and evolutionary biology would die as a sciece (in face all science would die, because how can we predict god?

Blatherous (sorry).

If you want to keep god in the equation and Natural selection, look at the beginning. You could say God could forsee every natural consequence of his creation and started things off so perfectly and precise that humans came about exactly in his image. (Personally, I wish God was a lot hotter) When you start getting into shaping destiny and intervention though, things get iffy and you basically get Intelligent design because natural selection is invalid, or at least only applicable part of the time.

Hmm OK...

As I understand it evolution is the reaction of species to the environment combined with random mutation...what if God shaped the environment to provide the species he wanted? He isn't actually interfering with natural selection itself but rather the outside environment...

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Hmm OK...

As I understand it evolution is the reaction of species to the environment combined with random mutation...what if God shaped the environment to provide the species he wanted? He isn't actually interfering with natural selection itself but rather the outside environment...

Species don't really react to the environment. While genetic changes happen on the individual level, what changes is an individuals ability to survive. If you can survive (treating this simply: eat, fight, mate etc) you probably will have more offspring, increasing the likelihood that your genes are passed on. The idea goes that since you survived well, you're offspring are going to have a lot of those same characteristics. This goes on and on and eventually certain genes/characteristics become more prevalent in the POPULATION of organisms. This is the basic level of evolution.

On to the point. God influencing the environment is a more tenable position, but it is still a bad one. Starting recently, weather patterns are fairly static. They repeat themselves in annual cycles. Granted there is variation, but that variation is minimal. Even broader, perhaps non-cyclical changes (take rising CO2 levels) have determined causes (climate change, human involvement). I'm not a climatologist, but I dont know of many climate phenomenon that we currently can't explain.

Things get harder (naturally) as we go to other environmental factors (geologic activity, solar activity, etc...things we know less about) and as we go farther back into the historical record. We can use the geologic record to measure CO2 content and other mineral concentrations and measure how they changed and we can come up with logical reasons why such changes happened, but they can never really be tested. Nonetheless, some are very good explanations. Example: CO2 in the atmosphere disappeared into Calcium carbonate shells of invertebrates in ancient oceans and O2 was introduced into the atmosphere as a byproduct of algae etc. (Forgive me this is not my strong suit). Things like meteor impacts also drastically alter environments and create species bottlenecks, which many scientists think might leat to periods of rapid evolution. There are some great hypothesis on how primordial cells and etc developed from naturally occurring amino acids (of many which are naturally derived).

Philosophical wrap up: Things like our observation of current and geologic records indicate that changes in climate are more cyclical and logical rather than supernatural/random. Electricity still works the same way today and tomorrow. So, such interference isn't with natural selection, but its still interfering with other natural processes. This is also going outside of my league lol. I guess its more of a debate you have to have with yourself.

As a bonus: I'd caution against telelogy: a Final design. Humans have superfluous and redundant organs. Birds see in more colors and have sharper vision. Other animals have better night vision and hearing. We need to eat certain vitamins and minerals we can't make ourselves. Humans are not perfect, not the watchmaker's watches. We were not designed (well). We are not the linear end of a process. If there is a direction to the process, its not really natural selection and slips into Intelligent Design.

You're altering the environment question is not really natural selection, but its not mainstream Design either mainly because its indirect design, which really gives you no benefits but just an extra step. I dont know what that means and I've never really studied this particular direction. My ace is that this is divine intervention thus unscientific and unproven, but even being flexible I think you'd still have a hard time passing it off as anything other than intelligent design.

lol. So my stream of consciousness has brought me here. This is still intelligent design and contrary to natural selection. While the mechanism of natural selection is still intact, since the environment is directed, natural selection is still artificially directed, thus Intelligent design.

I think that ended up being a cleaner answer than I thought. No. lol

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The Bible contradicts evolution.
Exactly, evolution must be wrong.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The Bible contradicts evolution.

Eh... not a particularly strong argument twoard those who don't believe in the bible...

and besides... it can be argued that the bible doesn't completely contradict evolution.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The Bible contradicts evolution.
How come God couldn't write a book that wouldn't be confusing and could answer all the questions man has? I mean come on his is all knowing and all, if an all knowing God can't explain it how are you supposed to?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
How come God couldn't write a book that wouldn't be confusing and could answer all the questions man has? I mean come on his is all knowing and all, if an all knowing God can't explain it how are you supposed to?
angrymob

Don't question your God. 😒

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The Bible contradicts evolution.

No, Evolution contradicts the bible. 😉

Originally posted by lord xyz
angrymob

Don't question your God. 😒

My god makes scene 😄

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, Evolution contradicts the bible. 😉

Evolution contradicts Science. So where are we now 😛

Originally posted by Lycanthrope
Evolution contradicts Science. So where are we now 😛

😕 No! 😛

Originally posted by Da Pittman
How come God couldn't write a book that wouldn't be confusing and could answer all the questions man has? I mean come on his is all knowing and all, if an all knowing God can't explain it how are you supposed to?

He never wrote the Bible...man did ergo it must be imperfect in parts surely?

Platonic!

Originally posted by Lycanthrope
Evolution contradicts Science. So where are we now 😛

Yes it does yet people for some strange reason still believe it.

Yes. Its very strange to believe something so blatantly factual. Damnit I swear that sky is orange and is actually the underside of God's testicles.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Yes it does yet people for some strange reason still believe it.

You cannot back that up because it is not true.