A Case FOR Evolution?

by pmouse 39 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  ellderwho

  This is a great point, and reminds me of an interesting thought experiment for theist/deists:

  'God' is presumed by believers to exist outside of the known universe. God created the universe. In order to create the universe, there must be space to create it in, at a minimum there needs to be as many dimensions as we have in our universe, in order for our universe to be created in this space. And in order to enact the act of creation there must be the potential for change, i.e. time. God needs time in which to create the universe. The question is, who created the space and time, the universe, in which God exists. According to the logic of God-believers, it must be another god. If it's another god, outside of this god's space-time, the same applies again. Ad infinitum.

  cool man...

  Almost as cool as dead things coming to life..
• 

  skeptic2

  Dead things don't come to life, as far as I know. That's just plain silly.

  However, some initially simple self-organizing systems might experience a growth in complexity over time, and at some point pass the criteria for what we define as 'life'.
• 

  skeptic2

  ...I should clarify, that's not a transition from death to life, as death by definition requires life as a precursor. E.g. a brick isn't dead.
• 

  ellderwho

  You want to know how to stop a Creationist dead in his tracks?

  Make him explain DINOSAURS!

  Wow, Terry with the silver bullet.

  Show your not stuck in your tracks while explaining the issue of whether cold blooded reptiles evolved into warm blooded dinosaurs, or cold-blooded dinosaurs evolved into warm blooded birds.
• 

  skeptic2

  Cold-blooded reptiles also evolved into warm-blooded mammals, don't forget. If they hadn't, I wouldn't be talking to you now.

  This is as good a primer as any on the history of mammal evolution from cold-blooded reptiles: The Evolution of Mammals
• 

  stevenyc

  If God is responsible for all life, then why did He create all bacteria, viruses, and parasites?

  steve
• 

  ellderwho

  Cold-blooded reptiles also evolved into warm-blooded mammals,

  Cold-blooded into warm-blooded, you realize this is a very complex transition with no support. Unless of course you have something to share?
• 

  Deputy Dog

  From: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/species/

  Species

  The nature of species is controversial in biology and philosophy. Biologists disagree on the definition of the term ‘species.’ Philosophers disagree over the ontological status of species. A proper understanding of species is important for a number of reasons. Species are the fundamental taxonomic units of biological classification. Environmental laws are framed in terms of species. Even our conception of human nature is affected by our understanding of species. In this entry, three philosophical issues concerning species are discussed. The first is the ontological status of species. The second is whether biologists should be species pluralists or species monists. The third is whether the theoretical term ‘species’ refers to a real category in nature. Don't feel bad Tetrapod, You're not the only one that has a problem here. But I wouldn't tell your freinds at Standford that they are playing domb.
• 

  skeptic2

  DD - what is the point you are trying to make?
• 

  skeptic2

  This might help to elucidate the matter:

  From http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB801.html:

  Claim CB801:

  Complaints about creationists not defining "kind" are unfair since evolutionists can't define "species" consistently.

  Response:

  1. Species are expected often to have fuzzy and imprecise boundaries because evolution is ongoing. Some species are in the process of forming; others are recently formed and still difficult to interpret. The complexities of biology add further complications. Many pairs of species remain distinct despite a small amount of hybridization between them. Some groups are asexual or frequently produce asexual strains, so how many species to split them into becomes problematical.
     
     Creation, defining things as kinds that were created once and for all, implies that all species should be clearly demarcated and that there should be a clear and universal definition of kind or species. Since there is not, creationism, not evolutionary theory, has something to explain.
  2. Different definitions of species serve different purposes. Species concepts are used both as taxonomic units, for identification and classification, and as theoretical concepts, for modeling and explaining. There is a great deal of overlap between the two purposes, but a definition that serves one is not necessarily the best for the other. Furthermore, there are practical considerations that call for different species criteria as well. Species definitions applied to fossils, for example, cannot be based on genetics or behavior because those traits do not fossilize.

  Further Reading:

  Schilthuizen, Menno., 2001. Frogs, Flies, and Dandelions: the Making of Species, Oxford Univ. Press. See especially chap. 1.
  
  Cracraft, Joel, 1987. Species concepts and the ontology of evolution. Biology and Philosophy 2: 329-346.
  
  Cracraft, Joel, 2000. Species concepts in theoretical and applied biology: A systematic debate with consequences. In Species concepts and phylogenetic theory: A debate, edited by Q. D. Wheeler and R. Meier. New York: Columbia University Press, 3-14.
  
  Hull, David L., 1997. The ideal species concept -- and why we can't get it. In: Species: The units of biodiversity, M. Claridge, H. Dawah and M. Wilson, eds., London: Chapman and Hall, 357-380.
  
  Kottler, Malcolm J., 1978. Charles Darwin's biological species concept and theory of geographic speciation: the Transmutation Notebooks. Annals of Science 35: 275-297.
  
  Mayden, R. L., 1997. A hierarchy of species concepts: the denoument in the saga of the species problem. In: Species: The units of biodiversity, M. F. Claridge, H. A. Dawah and M. R. Wilson eds., London: Chapman and Hall, 381-424.
  
  Mayden, R. L., 1999. Consilience and a hierarchy of species concepts: advances toward closure on the species puzzle. Journal of Nematology 31(2): 95-116.
  
  Wilkins, John S., 2003. How to be a chaste species pluralist-realist: The origins of species modes and the Synapomorphic Species Concept. Biology and Philosophy 18:621-638.