1. HAS EVOLUTION BEEN OBSERVED?Lansdowne5Yes. This is undeniable. We have observed Speciation (which is what most biologists call Macroevolution...and when I say most, I mean the ones who make the rather pointless distinction).
As far as we know, is it scientifically possible for animals to Evolve from one type of creature into another?Lansdowne5Yep. We've observed it.
Evolutionists have said that whales evolved from 4-legged land animals resembling cattle. Evolutionism teaches that all animals are biologically related. Birds evolved from small dinosaurs. Amphibians such as frogs evolved from fish.Well, we have observed evolution, but the reason it hasn't been observed in human history is because it happened before humanity, and that's when it's theorized to have happened. We haven't observed that directly?! REALLY?! Yes. We know this. And there isn't proof in the fossil record, but that's why it's called "evidence", and that's why it's called the THEORY, not fact. But the fossil record is ridiculously overwhelming evidence for evolution and common ancestry.However, nothing like this has ever been observed throughout human history. Nor is there proof of it in the fossil record.Lansdowne5
There are variations within the dog kind and the cattle kind, but never do dogs change into cats or cattle-like animals into whales.Lansdowne5No, they don't. If we observed that, it would probably hurt the theory of evolution more than help it. However, we have seen species arise, and we have fossil evidence from just about the whole history of the Horse's evolution. Not only species changing, but genus, too.
2. WHY DOESN'T NATURAL SELECTION PROVIDE EVOLUTION?Lansdowne5It does. End of story.
Natural selection works to insure that species, or kinds, do not greatly deteriorate and retain disadvantageous characteristics.And it allows the superior genes to survive. Yes, that is a correct description on Natural Selection, but why new species and mutations occur is a different story, all of which are part of our theory of evolution. It's not JUST natural selection.Natural selection acts as a conservation process which prevents each kind from becoming filled with weak and sickly individuals passing error-filled genetic codes onto future generations.
Natural selection is not capable of creating anything. It has nothing to do with the arrival of new basic types of animals. It works to prevent types of creatures from deteriorating.Lansdowne5
3. WHY DON'T MUTATIONS HELP EVOLUTIONISTS?First off, computers are a HORRIBLE analogy to a living thing. Mutations arise through reproduction, and a computer cannot reproduce. It's a ridiculous analogy.Imagine throwing a random change into a computer program. Will it help or hurt? There is little doubt that throwing a random instruction into a complex computer program produces problems and weakens the system.
Mutations are accidental errors in a complex biological mechanism. Mutations are dangerous to creatures, not helpful. They almost always damage animals in one way or another.Lansdowne5
Secondly, most mutations aren't harmful or helpful. Some are harmful, some are helpful. Natural Selection generally favors the helpful mutations. Often times favorable mutations depend on their environment. We have observed helpful mutations with regard to the organism's environment. Antibiotic resistance in bacteria, sickle cell resitance to malaria, Lactose tolerance, etc.
4.Flawed argument because it relies on an unproved premise, AND a certain interpretation of the Bible, too.GOD CREATED "KINDS" -- Read Genesis 1:11-25. How many times is the word "kind" used in these verses?
Answer: 10Lansdowne5
5.Well, yes you can say that...doesn't mean you're right.FOREST OF TREES. It can be said that the history of living things can best be represented by a forest of trees, rather than a single tree of Evolution. What could that mean?Lansdowne5
Creationists represent life's ancestry with many separate family trees. Each basic "kind" of animal ("baramin" is a more accurate term) was created separately. Originally, God created each animal either from the dust of the Earth or from nothing. They had no ancestors. There are no ancestral roots on these trees.Well, that's nice, but unfortunately there is no reason to believe DNA and genetic codes have "limits" to their evolution. After all, Macroevolution is really just (given time) microevolution + microevolution + microevolution + microevolution, etc.In each original animal, God placed a unique set of complex coded information -- their genetic code. This enabled them to produce more animals like themselves. And it prevented one created-kind of animal from changing into another created-kind of animal.
Not only did God provide man with all these wonderfully different kinds of animals, he built into the system something which allowed even more delights for man to discover in the future. These genetic codes were designed to allow interesting variations to develop within each "kind." From one original "kind" of butterfly, many variations have developed through the years. Each variety is a different branch on the tree of that "kind." In the same way, through one original type of dog, hundreds of variations have developed -- from poodles to dobermans.
In designing this potential for variation, God provided us with a never ending source of delight. He never meant for us to be bored with creation! Now mankind has not just one type of dog or cat or cattle, but hundreds of variations to enjoy. What a wonderful Creator we have! Lansdowne5
6.I don't see any argument here...ORIGINAL KINDS -- What do you think were some of the original created "kinds" of animals? Also, name some kinds that no longer seem to exist today (due to extinction) or have been greatly reduced in variety.
Examples of original kinds: Bears, cats, dogs, cattle, elephants, horses, serpents, frogs, etc.
Original kinds that seem to have become extinct: Dinosaurs, great flying reptiles, etc.
Kinds that once had greater variety: The elephant. Mammoths and mastodons are varieties of elephants that have become extinct. Etc. Lansdowne5
7.That's nice, but unfortunatley Evolution has a ton of evidence to support the theory, and this post relies on a premise with no evidence (the literal existence of Adam and Eve).VARIETIES WITHIN THE HUMAN RACE -- How did different races and skin colors develop from one original family (Adam's family)?
God created humans with inherent possibilities for great variation. The various traits were probably largely intensified after the Flood and the tower of Babel when family groups became separated by language barriers. As people moved away from Babel, groups became further isolated by distance, mountain ranges, and oceans. This separation of the human race into isolated groups forced procreation from among limited gene pools.
Since children acquire the physical characteristics of their parents, long-term inbreeding within these groups caused the characteristics to become more and more emphasized in following generations. These features included nose shape, eye shape and color, hair type, lip shape, skin pigmentation, body size, and skull shape.
Lansdowne5
Log in to comment