Evolution disproved by 11 year old niece (page 14)

Aussie Oz

That was real bad explanation in the OP.

happy to say, i dont care for either side of the debate!

oz

Tec - is it not stupid to post on a topic you know little about , admit to having done no research from very easy sources where the information has been made accessible and then stonewall from that point on with statements about listening only to those who know ( code for fundamentalist Christians / a god .) if that isn't stupid behaviour what is it?

You also say that there is no conflict between your god and evolution. What Cofty and others have tried to do for you ( since you - like so many - refuse to ) is frame your argument with evidence, if god did a creation what would it look like? Well the primary source of the story is the creation myths especially the bible one. You've said you don't see the bible as infallible so I suspect you reject te seven day creation story * 2 as presented by the bible ( a story that is diametrically opposed to evolution as it has all species already formed at creation. ) The odd thing is that having rejected the story you still hold onto creation ( or do you accept abiogenesis!?) but now you have no cards other than evolution plus an initial creation on the table. Since evolutionary evidence shows us a time when only simple life forms existed this makes your god a creator of basic replicating machines and nothing else ( certainly no crowning glory of creating man as per the bible ) so god turns up and makes one self replicating machine then bogs off to watch. Not only does this destroy the Garden of Eden story and creation myth it also handily does away with your need for an atonement. Oops no need for Jesus to die. While we are at it the flood story also disappears ( creation had to be done a second time since evolution isn't quick enough a process to handle the variety of species in the world observed currently .)

So evolution pretty much destroys the OT and the need for a NT. Lets not get too bogged down in that though and look back at what a deistic creator plus evolution says about that god:

1 - hands off. Either through impotence, laziness or curiosity ( add additional terms as you see fit ) this being is no longer involved.

2 - cruel. To design death via predation and illness is to have been sadistic. Design solves problems and makes things easier.

3 - haphazard. Taking no interest in the results of evolution ( allowing adaption to exist as opposed to design so forcing life to use what is there and laboriously adapt it to provide functionality is not the sign of a methodical god. You end up with stupid results like windpipes and gullets in the same place and the all too common phenomenon of choking)

4 - heartless. Evolution produces a large number of offspring who are less fit for an environment. Having DNA that can have copy errors leads to babies born with genetic defects and dying horribly or living on in constant pain or discomfort. The deistic god is responsible for every genetic illness and the brute force approach of survival of the fittest. Trillions of mini genetic life forms ill suited to their environment or genetically damaged all consigned to an early death normally via predation.

5 - liar. Deist god is willing to allow charlatans to write books ascribing him a greator role than he took and to enslave people on the basis of that misrepresentation. One of the more successful mendicants enslaves people in his name and has them waiting for a second coming thats overdue by 2000 odd years. Deist god is apparently unconcerned that women have been treated as second class citizens based upon this central lie of the book.

6 - wasteful. Evolution requires death. God supposedly promises eternal life. Death and replication cannot coexist with eternity ( an infinitely reproducing system will rapidly fill all available space .) Evolution requires death through age or predation to make room for offspring and to allow change to occur. Eternal life is anti evolution. Deist god could have cut to the chase and just created a group of eternal , physically perfect beings and not bothered with the whole fall, death, evolution mess you propose.

7 - illogical. The fall is supposed to have somehow de-evolved us allowing what was perfect become imperfect. Evolution shows that no prior perfect state existed ( DNA is shared by all life showing common ancestry and there are key areas of DNA that show the accumulation of copy errors that take hundreds of thousands of years to accrete ). If we are the result of evolution then recognisable humans have been around far longer than the bible and the bible story. Deist god has a 'plan ' to save humans ( where is the cut off point where Grandma is just too primate to make people heaven ?) but doesn't bother telling humans till its almost all over. Most humans have never had a bible and then the few who have lived in modern times rarely get to see it and when it finally gets mass printed its full of lies ( garden of Eden and creation ).

Evolution destroys the credibility of a Jehovah god and makes deist god pretty much a simple bio chemical scientist who is now on permanent holiday. Tec :)

smiddy

This is the type of bullshit thread,that gets so much attention,that I just dont understand. Over 1400 times ? I just dont get it .

smiddy

still thinking

Qcmbr...I agree, the more you look at evolution, the less viable existance of a God becomes....unless he is a completly hands off god with an attitude of, here's the earth....lets see what you do with it. And here's a book that may have some truths in it...but you figure it out. That just doesn't make sense to me.

PYRAMIDSCHEME

plasma? PLASMA? Dont talk about plasma. You kidding me? Plasma?

still thinking

My plasma TV is great...are you having problems with yours PYRAMIDSCHEME?

Flat_Accent

Good morning everyone, I am back.

tec - I understand the argument that you are trying to make, but as others have said, Evolution, and God by proxy, is very wasteful. 99% of all animals that have walked on this earth are extinct - they have not adapted. They are dead. Then consider the daily struggle most animals have to survive in very harsh conditions. Why would a loving God make things so difficult for his own creation? What about the rather brutal way he wiped out the dinosaurs, using a giant meteor to either burn or suffocate them?

If you regard humans to be a special intervention in the evolutionary process, then you must account for the obvious flaws in our own design. Things like the brain having to do extra work to process the images from the eye, because the retina is the wrong way round. The appendix, back/hip problems, all the unique diseases to humans etc.

N.Drew - Yes, Evolution does include chance factors. But it is a misconception to think Evolution is ONLY about chance. As we've already said, it is random mutation followed by a selective process which is not random at all. That is why WT's arguments fall flat.

I honestly don't know where you're going with your arguments. You again say you're open to change your mind, despite having never read an evolutionary textbook, and refusing to look at answers to your questions because scientists can't be trusted. You then formulate your own idea of what happened, and ignore valid critisism. You also seem to think you've got a bigger brain than everyone else because you can 'understand infinity'. Either be willing to learn, get your head down and do some research, or do not bother posting in these kind of threads.

cofty - thanks.

GromitSK

It can be very difficult to engage in meaningful discussion on topics like this when one of the parties refuses to do any reading on the subject and so removes the opportunity for informed discussion. Some folks seem to like debating issues based on 'cut and paste' and references to the opinions of others. IMHO there is no substitute for reading the research on a subject before forming an opinion and entering into debate surely?

This is perhaps one reason why such discussions go round-and-round and never reach a conclusion.

Oh yeah, and what the hell is 'plasma' in this context?

N.drew

You also seem to think you've got a bigger brain than everyone else because you can 'understand infinity'. Either be willing to learn, get your head down and do some research, or do not bother posting in these kind of threads. Flat_Accent

Good point Flat. I hadn't of thought of that. You get infinity understood, then I will understand evolution. Howbouthat?

Q you have me agreeing.

Did you know that the way I understand "everlasting life" is different than you? Why not go find yourself I book about it, then come argue. K?

Everlasting life means all of it. So then it is true that the Creator had his OWN children in mind when He created. One "type" was the son of destruction. That is why the story looks bad. Thank god I'm a girl! But that's just me kidding. It is possible that I am the "son of destruction". Go read the book! Oh, there isn't one? Too bad, so sad. Just stop calling my friends stupid.

N.drew

You'll doing that poofy thing. Which is not knowing what your talking about but claiming that I should. I say that is not fair.

Evolution disproved by 11 year old niece

Share this