evolution or creation? lets talk...

by Sam87 537 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Deputy Dog

  Steve

  I don't know what else to add. I'm not playing games, I just don't think I can answer in a meaningful way.

  You used the term first, what did you mean?

  In Washington two NEW species evolved about 50 years ago. They did this through naturally occurring hybridization between the newly derived tetraploid species. Go back 100 years ago, and this species did not exist on the planet.

  I'm not sure that the term means anything at least in science. Does it refer to a real category in nature?

  That's why I asked the question about my Bloodhound and my Field Spaniel.
• 

  dido

  fts- brown nose?
• 

  freetosee

  Dido, I dont know what that means. English is not my first language. Please explain. Thank you.
• 

  AuldSoul

  AlanF: I'm not sure what you're getting at. Please elaborate.

  Evolution does not address the source of life on earth, i.e. its origin. Creation does.

  The answer to the three questions I asked being "trivially" yes, allows for the possibility of a designer, a Creator, a God. There is no burden to externally prove the existence of God in order to observe the evidence in favor of design. I am comfortable with referring to the Creator as an alien intelligence.

  I only ask that I not be burdened with having to overthrow the arguments in favor of or opposed to Intelligent Design, the religion, in order to argue in favor of intelligent design, the concept. In other words, I am not supporting other people's arguments, I am NOT cutting and pasting, and I refuse to answer to challenges presented by others against thoughts not my own, as though I must adhere to a certain ID creed simply because I believe there is evidence of intelligent design.

  Similarly, I also refuse to be bound by the beliefs of Creationists (religionists) simply because I believe there is evidence of a creative process.

  I don't measure the quality of my views by the degree of their agreement with the views of others. My father frequently used the old, "If you get 100 people together in a room and asked them whether they agree with you, do you think they would?" My response from age 14 on was consistently, "I wouldn't care if the whole world had a different opinion." I only ask, don't hold me to the opinions of others. Those clothes don't fit well.

  I believe can show strong evidence of the process of creation, that is creative process, by comparison to known creative processes.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Alan

  If you have to talk down to everyone you disagree with maybe you shouldn't post to them at all. That gets old real fast.
• 

  AuldSoul

  AuldSoul- so how do you explain people that have one less chromosome, like `downs syndrome`. Surely if they can be born with one less, then they can be born with one more? Freak of nature.

  dido,

  Did you marry and have offspring with someone who had Downs Syndrome? If not, why not?

  There is a real, very pertinent reason for this question. It is NOT a facetious question. In the answer lies part of what you seem to be missing comprehension of: A working knowledge of common practicalities involved in natural selection.

  AuldSoul
• 

  dido

  fts- `i think steve is honest in his postings`- that`s a clue.

  DD- didn`t you know that Alanf classes himself as the `Daddy` of evo?
• 

  stevenyc

  D Dog,

  using your example of your Bloodhound and my Field Spaniel, these would not be classed a separate species in the evolutionary scope, as these breeds of dog can procreate together. Producing another dog. (of coarse the copulation process would be quite amusing to watch).

  With the plants I mentioned, it was observed that naturally occurring hybridization created a plant that WILL ONLY pollinate with the same new type of plant. That new plant, is a new species.

  The definition of species used is the broad definition used by most.

  In the reviewed link you posted you will see that the definition of 'new species' given to these plants holds.

  In the classical creationist definition, a species is known as 'type' or 'kind'. That being that each animal and plant alive now and through-out history, have always been the same, unchanged, plant or animal, as created by God (and Jesus). What these new plants observably demonstrate is that they were not created by God, but naturally evolved.

  I hope my definition and explaination helps.

  steve

  steve
• 

  Deputy Dog

  dido

  Maybe he thinks he can shame people into agreeing with him. That won't work here.
• 

  dido

  DD- i think he`s taken too many wts habits with him!