I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution
(02-14-2020, 10:44 AM)Melkite Wrote: You said that God created all the kinds, and that what we call species could be from them.  So tigers and lions and jaguars and house cats can all come from the same original pair.  Who defines the kinds?  What if the kinds God created are not distinguished in the same way we distinguish them?  Is a horse from a different kind than a donkey?  A tiger a different kind from a wolf?  A tasmanian tiger a different kind from a wolf?  A whale a different kind from a hippo?  What if the kinds God distinguishes are only plants from animals, animals from fungus, fungus from bacteria?

Maybe that's what happened. That's not the traditional interpretation of Genesis, which speaks of God creating each "according to their kinds". "And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind." Maybe the evolutionists are right and it's all metaphorical. But there's no reason that God couldn't have inspired Moses to write about evolution, about one type of creature changing into another. Yet He didn't. That doesn't rule out evolution, but for the Christian, who believes that Scripture is both inspired and inerrant, it's a question that has to be considered. And if the Fathers and the Church got it wrong all these centuries, then could they be wrong about other things? The burden of proof is on the scientists, and I don't believe they're there yet.

(02-14-2020, 10:44 AM)Melkite Wrote: Is there a reason, other than inserting creationism, to think that that notch was made three different times?

If you find three different computers, from various parts of the world, and they all have some variation of Windows installed, would you think that their respective OSs were all developed from the same system, or that they were invented three different times separately?  DNA functions very much like a computer program.  I used the notch analogy for simplicity, but the marker would be better described as a particular command.  You could make each of those three computers perform a function, and because the programs are all Windows, the command will probably be either the same, or very similar.  Use that command on an Apple computer, and it won't work.  You have to make a completely different command to perform the same function.  Evolutionists think things like eyesight and sexual reproduction probably evolved multiple times, rather than just once, because the markers and the pathways aren't always the same.  The genetic command for all apes to do one thing may be the same genetic makeup, or slightly varied, but that same composition will have a completely different effect, or perhaps no effect at all, in a salamander.  And the salamander has the same trait caused by a completely different genetic code on a different chromosome. 

We don't think apes have a common ancestor only because the notch is the same.  That it is the same isn't the only evidence of common ancestry.



(02-14-2020, 10:44 AM)Melkite Wrote: Is there a reason, other than inserting creationism, to think that that notch was made three different times?


Because God, who is incapable of lying, apparently says so? But there's nothing in the evidence itself that can show whether God created the same DNA more than once, or there was a common ancestor. How you answer that depends on whether you believe one or the other is possible.

(02-14-2020, 10:44 AM)Melkite Wrote: If you find three different computers, from various parts of the world, and they all have some variation of Windows installed, would you think that their respective OSs were all developed from the same system, or that they were invented three different times separately?  DNA functions very much like a computer program.  I used the notch analogy for simplicity, but the marker would be better described as a particular command.  You could make each of those three computers perform a function, and because the programs are all Windows, the command will probably be either the same, or very similar.  Use that command on an Apple computer, and it won't work.  You have to make a completely different command to perform the same function.  Evolutionists think things like eyesight and sexual reproduction probably evolved multiple times, rather than just once, because the markers and the pathways aren't always the same.  The genetic command for all apes to do one thing may be the same genetic makeup, or slightly varied, but that same composition will have a completely different effect, or perhaps no effect at all, in a salamander.  And the salamander has the same trait caused by a completely different genetic code on a different chromosome.


Obviously the computer randomly modified the program, deleting versions that crash and keeping ones that work, until it got from Windows 95 to Windows 10. How else could they have the same code in them? Clearly there's a common ancestor of both programs that the original computer must have had. We don't know yet how the graphical interface developed, but not every version of a program is kept, so the ones in between must have been lost. Perhaps they're out there somewhere, waiting to be discovered.


(02-14-2020, 10:44 AM)Melkite Wrote: If the literal interpretation of the Bible didn't contradict evolution, would this even be a problem?  Is there any other evidence to suggest that the various kinds were created separately?  Or is it only necessary to hypothesize it because evolution and a literal Genesis are mutually exclusive?  If a literal Genesis supported evolution, is there some kind of physical evidence suggesting separate creation that fundamentalists would be screaming are just lies from the Devil?  If not, then your argument is still ad hoc.  Even if common ancestry is just one possible explanation among many, the argument of several separate creations isn't being inserted because of any actual evidence that this is what happened, but because of the cognitive dissonance common ancestry causes to one's faith in a more-or-less literal Genesis.


You can't just dismiss Genesis, and you can't accuse creationists of 'excluding science' or some such thing if you don't also accuse scientists of excluding God. It's possible people have misunderstood Genesis, but that raises real issues about what else the Church has misunderstood. Animal (and plant) evolution isn't much of a problem for the faith; human evolution is more of one, and polygenism destroys it.

And there is evidence for kinds being created separately. The "Cambrian explosion", that is, the fossils from the beginning of the Cambrian period, shows all kinds of different creatures appearing suddenly, and the fossil record now is far better than it was in Darwin's day, so the argument of an incomplete record doesn't hold up anymore. And they've found fossils of soft-bodied and microscopic creatures, so there's less evidence that the record's just missing what came before. There's also evidence that mutations only go so far, creating variation but not anything actually new, and the variation is usually less fit. Plus the odds against random mutation creating beneficial features is so low, and then we're supposed to believe that the same feature evolved multiple times? And where are the immense numbers of transitional forms? At most, they claim to have found evidence of a few, but they should be far more numerous. Most importantly, they still can't tell how life started, and for evolution to work, it has to have something to work on.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution - by Paul - 02-14-2020, 02:50 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)