Do you believe in biological evolution?

[GodsGrace]

It can be a number of things. Sometimes things just aren't copied right. It isn't perfect, it is a chemical reaction. Radiation can be a big one, even sunlight. That is why you don't go drinking plutonium or stay out in the sun too long. Other environment factors include air pollution, smoking. Sometimes it just happens, which can be helpful, neutral, or harmful.

What is interesting is that bacteria did not have the ability to reproduce sexually. You know why there are virii? Bacteria sent out their own DNA to infect the plasmids of other bacteria. Early bacterial life, and to this day, is a nice little potluck of DNA.



No, me taking a baseball bat to a mailbox is a change, or me adjusting a picture is a change. There is no information added per se. With insertions yes, deletions, yes. Information is really a simple term. Kids with downs have "extra information" using that poor analogy which is why only creationist usually use it.


A mutation can be spontaneous. They are happening in your body all the time, for any number of reasons. Sometimes the cell goes CRAZY, but it has a self destruct mechanism and it works pretty well... usually.


I am not sure what you mean. If by problems you mean when you have a closed minded view of the world that rests upon a made up religious view posing as scripture and you only discuss such matters with people of similar view, I can understand that.


I am sure there is more than one Dr. Noble.

Sounds like you know a lot.
Also sounds like you're not willing to listen to what others have to say because they're not intelligent enough.

Dr. Noble explains how changes occur and how mutations come about.
I don't understand it very well because I'm not a scientist...but the general ideas come through.

For anyone interested,,,
I'm posting the following:

 

[GodsGrace]

@Chihuahua

I fail to understand why a Christian, such as yourself, would hang so tightly to macro evolution.
God can do anything He wants to any way He wants to.

But it surely does seem that the cell is so complicated as to not have been able to evolve since every part of a cell needs every other part in order to function. This would mean that it was built all together at one time...and not in parts - or even microevolution. Even microevolution would not explain it.

I also had mentioned the eye.
Did the eye evolve?
Was mankind blind for millions of years until the eye was fully formed?

It does seem to me that the universe precludes a designer.
You can disagree with this if you wish since we will not all agree on everything...

but you cannot make light of the fact that design does seem to be present...
even at the level of the cell.

 

[GodsGrace]

Evolution does not necessitate the absence of a creator. Some of us think God is powerful enough to make a universe and to bring about life without dropping animals from the sky.

But dropping animals from the sky sounds like such fun !

And you haven't attempted to explain the Cambrian Explosion.

YOU may not believe it's important....
but since it does not follow Darwin's theory - it most certainly is.

Where is the slow evolution in the Cambrian Explosion?
There is none.

It does not look as Darwin explained in his On the Origin of Speices.

 

[GodsGrace]

It can be a number of things. Sometimes things just aren't copied right. It isn't perfect, it is a chemical reaction. Radiation can be a big one, even sunlight. That is why you don't go drinking plutonium or stay out in the sun too long. Other environment factors include air pollution, smoking. Sometimes it just happens, which can be helpful, neutral, or harmful.

What is interesting is that bacteria did not have the ability to reproduce sexually. You know why there are virii? Bacteria sent out their own DNA to infect the plasmids of other bacteria. Early bacterial life, and to this day, is a nice little potluck of DNA.



No, me taking a baseball bat to a mailbox is a change, or me adjusting a picture is a change. There is no information added per se. With insertions yes, deletions, yes. Information is really a simple term. Kids with downs have "extra information" using that poor analogy which is why only creationist usually use it.


A mutation can be spontaneous. They are happening in your body all the time, for any number of reasons. Sometimes the cell goes CRAZY, but it has a self destruct mechanism and it works pretty well... usually.


I am not sure what you mean. If by problems you mean when you have a closed minded view of the world that rests upon a made up religious view posing as scripture and you only discuss such matters with people of similar view, I can understand that.

By YOU do you mean ME personally?
Or do you mean YOU in a general sense?

I hope you don't mean ME since you have no idea what I believe
other than what I post on these threads.

I am sure there is more than one Dr. Noble.

 

[GodsGrace]

How is a religious belief based on a weird interpretation of something not meant as an empirically valid statement, but one of meaning and a deeper understanding of God a matter of preferred choice?

If God wanted a science book at the time, He did a really poor job. He left all kinds of evidence in DNA itself of something else.
OR, God wrote something that is spiritual, a revelation not of Alternative Current vs Direct Current or how to produce a nuclear reactor, but guided us with the wisdom of meaning.

The above is for Quiethinker...
but I do need to say this:

You're going way beyond what anyone on here is posting.
God did not write a science book.
He wrote a book about His relationship with the humans He created.

It cannot be ASSUMED that because someone believes that God created everything,
it does NOT mean they they are dumb.
It does NOT mean that they believe the earth is 6 thousand years old.
It means NOTHING except what they're stating.

If you would stick to this,,,your knowledge of the subject would be much more appreciated.

 

[Chihuahua]

Sounds like you know a lot.

I know somethings. My knowledge of certain things does not make me an expert at others. I think that is important. I see something dangerous at times, which is the fallacy of appeal to authority. Gordon Ramsey is a talented, smart, creative person driven by passion for what he does. Would I trust his suggestions (not pertaining to ads) certainly, I would give it a look, but carefully review what others think.

Not about you, but I'd add that the notion a person has a doctorate of whatever does not make them a genius whose views on other things has anymore weight than that of a person of similar experience or education in that particular field. Unfortunately, some will say, he has such and such... okay, but is that related? NO! But he agrees with me......
You will find an outlier, a rogue, who is talented, educated, and has all kinds of things going on, but they are not above scrutiny. It is unfortunate that people (not you) will say sure, 99.99% of people with a similar background disagree with his views... but... I like them. So shut up until...
Yeah, Bill Cosby had a doctorate in education and was a well loved person.....

Also sounds like you're not willing to listen to what others have to say because they're not intelligent enough.

Intelligence is not the issue. Do you want a guy who had 3 doctorates consisting of math, history, and East Asian LGBT culture with 800 peer review papers or a real surgeon performing on you?

Dr. Noble explains how changes occur and how mutations come about.
I don't understand it very well because I'm not a scientist...but the general ideas come through.

For anyone interested,,,
I'm posting the following:

There is nothing wrong with putting forth alternative ideas. That is what generates progress. The difference and the harm that can result is from siding with one particular view despite overwhelming evidence or the suppression of openly expressing an idea contrary to the mainstream.

 

[Chihuahua]

But dropping animals from the sky sounds like such fun !

And you haven't attempted to explain the Cambrian Explosion.

YOU may not believe it's important....
but since it does not follow Darwin's theory - it most certainly is.

Where is the slow evolution in the Cambrian Explosion?
There is none.

It does not look as Darwin explained in his On the Origin of Speices.

I have. I am about to go to sleep though. Darwin didn't explain everything any more than when humans first discovered how to consistently make fire. There is slow evolution and rapid evolution depending on environmental factors. If you throw a few bits of cat food into the yard, nothing happens. If you dump a giant bag of it every night, you'll have an animal party.

 

[Wrangler]

No "information" is lost generally.

This is false. Studies in dog breed show a progressive loss of information and the implications are staggering. What Darwin did not know and could not know is the informational content in the cell through the DNA. Yes, it is a molecule, the most complicated molecule known to exist. But it is also a language whereby information is stored. Like time, the DNA information content is one way; progressive generations of mutation contain less information. This introduces the notion of irreducible complexity; the recognition that IF life evolves through natural selection, parts of a cell, before emerging whole would actually put the organism in a competitive disadvantage.

The language of DNA is written in 4D and no language known occurs naturally but is always a product of a mind. A mind that writes a language in living cells in 4D is far superior to human intelligence. Once you understand what you are reading, the product of a vastly superior mind, your world opens up. For more information, see Dr. Stephen C. Meyer's Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. From Amazon:

“Signature in the Cell is a defining work in the discussion of life’s origins and the question of whether life is a product of unthinking matter or of an intelligent mind. For those who disagree with ID, the powerful case Meyer presents cannot be ignored in any honest debate. For those who may be sympathetic to ID, on the fence, or merely curious, this book is an engaging, eye-opening, and often eye-popping read” — American Spectator​

​

Named one of the top books of 2009 by the Times Literary Supplement (London), this controversial and compelling book from Dr. Stephen C. Meyer presents a convincing new case for intelligent design (ID), based on revolutionary discoveries in science and DNA. Along the way, Meyer argues that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution as expounded in The Origin of Species did not, in fact, refute ID. If you enjoyed Francis Collins’s The Language of God, you’ll find much to ponder—about evolution, DNA, and intelligent design—in Signature in the Cell.​

You may also be interested in "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences." From wiki, this is a 1960 article written by the physicist Eugene Wigner, published in Communication in Pure and Applied Mathematics.[1][2] In it, Wigner observes that a theoretical physics's mathematical structure often points the way to further advances in that theory and to empirical predictions. Mathematical theories often have predictive power in describing nature.

Those educated in science, like me, understand math is not an invention but a discovery. The theoretical existence of numbers pre-date the human mind discovering them. Since all theories emerge from a mind, it begs the question of what mind invented math that so unreasonably causes the universe to obey its application?

I ask because your faith is listed as a Christian but your posts don't seem to give testimony to that faith. Mathematics, in the words of Galileo, is the language of God.

 

[Chihuahua]

This is false. Studies in dog breed show a progressive loss of information and the implications are staggering.

I am off to sleepy time land so... I'll get back in more detail. You understand that dogs are inbred wolves? If you compared wolves to dogs, they are like normal humans compared to severely intellectually disabled people. Selective Inbreeding causes all kinds of genetic and biological issues. It is not evolution.

Noble families inbred like crazy. The Habsburgs made their own Empire by incest.

 

[GodsGrace]

I know somethings. My knowledge of certain things does not make me an expert at others. I think that is important. I see something dangerous at times, which is the fallacy of appeal to authority. Gordon Ramsey is a talented, smart, creative person driven by passion for what he does. Would I trust his suggestions (not pertaining to ads) certainly, I would give it a look, but carefully review what others think.

I understand what you're saying.
I think Gordon Ramsey will know more about how to make the perfect steak than I do....
however, I might end up liking mine more. In any case, he most certainly will know more than I ever will about cooking...
and I think we should at least give a listen to those that know more.

Not about you, but I'd add that the notion a person has a doctorate of whatever does not make them a genius whose views on other things has anymore weight than that of a person of similar experience or education in that particular field. Unfortunately, some will say, he has such and such... okay, but is that related? NO! But he agrees with me......

A person has a world pardigm.
They'll usually follow this paradigm.
I personally, believe something/someone caused the BB.
That someone has to be God - however one wishes to describe Him.

I listen to different opinions (I think I posted a talk between Noble and Dawkins) and I come out of it believing one more than the other because it is MY world paradigm...but it's based on facts, whether or not the person agrees with those facts or not.

ANY scientist will always know more than I do...
whether or not I agree with him is a different matter.
Science does not even agree with itself.

You will find an outlier, a rogue, who is talented, educated, and has all kinds of things going on, but they are not above scrutiny. It is unfortunate that people (not you) will say sure, 99.99% of people with a similar background disagree with his views... but... I like them. So shut up until...
Yeah, Bill Cosby had a doctorate in education and was a well loved person.....

Agreed.
I think I explained this above.

Intelligence is not the issue. Do you want a guy who had 3 doctorates consisting of math, history, and East Asian LGBT culture with 800 peer review papers or a real surgeon performing on you?

LOL
Agreed again.
But I would hope the surgeon IS intelligent !!
Smart would be of help too.

One could be either one or the other or both.
Both would be good.

There is nothing wrong with putting forth alternative ideas. That is what generates progress. The difference and the harm that can result is from siding with one particular view despite overwhelming evidence or the suppression of openly expressing an idea contrary to the mainstream.

C...I don't SEE the overwhelming evidence.
I see Darwinism dwindling.
I see very intelligent and smart scientists that are losing faith in Darwinistic evolution.

Of course I'm going to post THOSE and not the others.
IOW,,,the others are not making much sense to me anymore.
I believe I mentined a couple of reasons why...
the cell
the eye

Beher talks about the mouse trap.
same idea.

 

[GodsGrace]

I have. I am about to go to sleep though. Darwin didn't explain everything any more than when humans first discovered how to consistently make fire. There is slow evolution and rapid evolution depending on environmental factors. If you throw a few bits of cat food into the yard, nothing happens. If you dump a giant bag of it every night, you'll have an animal party.

Slow evolution - microevolution - is factual.
No problem there.

Have a good sleep!

 

[GodsGrace]

This is false. Studies in dog breed show a progressive loss of information and the implications are staggering. What Darwin did not know and could not know is the informational content in the cell through the DNA. Yes, it is a molecule, the most complicated molecule known to exist. But it is also a language whereby information is stored. Like time, the DNA information content is one way; progressive generations of mutation contain less information. This introduces the notion of irreducible complexity; the recognition that IF life evolves through natural selection, parts of a cell, before emerging whole would actually put the organism in a competitive disadvantage.

The language of DNA is written in 4D and no language known occurs naturally but is always a product of a mind. A mind that writes a language in living cells in 4D is far superior to human intelligence. Once you understand what you are reading, the product of a vastly superior mind, your world opens up. For more information, see Dr. Stephen C. Meyer's Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. From Amazon:

“Signature in the Cell is a defining work in the discussion of life’s origins and the question of whether life is a product of unthinking matter or of an intelligent mind. For those who disagree with ID, the powerful case Meyer presents cannot be ignored in any honest debate. For those who may be sympathetic to ID, on the fence, or merely curious, this book is an engaging, eye-opening, and often eye-popping read” — American Spectator​

​

Named one of the top books of 2009 by the Times Literary Supplement (London), this controversial and compelling book from Dr. Stephen C. Meyer presents a convincing new case for intelligent design (ID), based on revolutionary discoveries in science and DNA. Along the way, Meyer argues that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution as expounded in The Origin of Species did not, in fact, refute ID. If you enjoyed Francis Collins’s The Language of God, you’ll find much to ponder—about evolution, DNA, and intelligent design—in Signature in the Cell.​

You may also be interested in "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences." From wiki, this is a 1960 article written by the physicist Eugene Wigner, published in Communication in Pure and Applied Mathematics.[1][2] In it, Wigner observes that a theoretical physics's mathematical structure often points the way to further advances in that theory and to empirical predictions. Mathematical theories often have predictive power in describing nature.

Those educated in science, like me, understand math is not an invention but a discovery.

MATH IS NOT AN INVENTION BUT A DISCOVERY.
Isn't this just too grand ??!!

It blew my mind when I finally understood it quite some years ago.

(the discovery I mean....not the math. I STILL don't understand math).

The theoretical existence of numbers pre-date the human mind discovering them. Since all theories emerge from a mind, it begs the question of what mind invented math that so unreasonably causes the universe to obey its application?

I ask because your faith is listed as a Christian but your posts don't seem to give testimony to that faith. Mathematics, in the words of Galileo, is the language of God.

 

[Taken]

Do you believe in biological evolution?

Never heard the “phrase”…
“biological evolution”.

Evolve means to change or develop gradually.

That Mankind is actually a species of ape?

LOL, No.

man, IS a KIND of being.

animal, IS another KIND of being.

man, IS a person.

ape, IS an animal.

That all species come from fundamental forms that have evolved?

That God directed somehow evolution?

God “CREATED” (according to Gods Idea, plan, pleasure, will, By His Word, His Power, His Hand,) what was Not…”

And THEN God, “MADE” His Particular “CREATIONS”, Have Life, Have Communication Abilities, Have Reproduction Abilities of “Their Same KIND of “thing”.

If you believe in evolution, how do you concile this scientific theory with the biblical story of creation?

I absolutely Do Believe man “EVOLVES”…
Slowly Develops, approx. (0 to 25 years)
and
Gradually Changes.(Examples)
Ages,
Gets sight, loses sight
Gets hearing, loses hearing,
Gets taste, loses taste,
Gets hair, Loses hair,
Gets teeth, loses teeth,
Gets knowledge, loses knowledge
Gets strength, loses strength
Etc. Etc. Etc.

Or do you believe in the genesis creation? That God has created all the universe immediately?

Not “OR”. I believe IN Both IN proper “Context”…
God “CREATED specific KINDS of Things”…
Each “Specific KIND of Thing” Evolves within its own “specific Perimeter of its specific KIND of thing.”

* men do not become animals, plants.
* animals do not become men, plants.
* plants do not become men, animals.

If you believe in creation, what do you think of the scientific discoveries?

All discoveries are broadly categorized as “Science”, per Scripture.

I believe God Himself “Created” an immeasurable plethora of “things” FOR the “express purpose” of man to discover…and Desired men to “USE” discoveries For a Good benefit For man.

(Some men do, Some men do Not.
Some discoveries Are Used for Good,
Some discoveries are Not used for Good.)

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

MATH IS NOT AN INVENTION BUT A DISCOVERY.

Agree.

(the discovery I mean....not the math. I STILL don't understand math).

Math is simply using “numbers” to symbolize an exact as possible, “measurement” … or “probably degree”…
Of an Amount, Weight, Height, Width, Circumference, Angle, Arc, Distance, etc. of a particular thing.

Some people get “pleasure” from The “Figuring / Calculating”.
Some people have “a seeming special gift” to instantly Visualize without the painstakingly process of “figuring”.

Ditto…
Not my “cup of tea, so to speak”.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[GodsGrace]

Agree.



Math is simply using “numbers” to symbolize an exact as possible, “measurement” … or “probably degree”…
Of an Amount, Weight, Height, Width, Circumference, Angle, Arc, Distance, etc. of a particular thing.

Some people get “pleasure” from The “Figuring / Calculating”.
Some people have “a seeming special gift” to instantly Visualize without the painstakingly process of “figuring”.

Ditto…
Not my “cup of tea, so to speak”.

Glory to God,
Taken

Hi Taken....
I didn't mean that I don't know what math IS
I mean that it's much too complex for my little brain.
Couldn't get past algebra.

I have to say that I admire persons that do understand math ---
My niece has a masters, although I sometimes have to do simple arithmatic for her!
(I'm sure she knows how but is a little lazy - she's into computer engineering).

Yeah. Definitely not my cup of tea either.

I wanted to comment on your post re the difference between man and animal.
So glad you brought that up.

Man has the NATURE of a man.
Animal has the NATURE of an animal.
God has the NATURE of God.

Man is not animal, God is not man, etc.

Great point.

 

[quietthinker]

How is a religious belief based on a weird interpretation of something not meant as an empirically valid statement, but one of meaning and a deeper understanding of God a matter of preferred choice?

If God wanted a science book at the time, He did a really poor job. He left all kinds of evidence in DNA itself of something else.
OR, God wrote something that is spiritual, a revelation not of Alternative Current vs Direct Current or how to produce a nuclear reactor, but guided us with the wisdom of meaning.

It is HOW you see which determines WHAT you see.
Be careful HOW you hear. Luke 8:18

 

[Wrangler]

Selective Inbreeding causes all kinds of genetic and biological issues. It is not evolution.

ROFLMAO. Evidence against what you say is not evidence. Evidence against evolution is not evolution! Brilliant.

It has so many applications:

• Evidence against rape is not rape.
• Evidence against a hypothesis is not that hypothesis.

Have you ever considered what a reasonable rejection criteria would look like against the hypothesis of evolution? Obviously, you present a mind only open to acceptance criteria.

 

[GodsGrace]

ROFLMAO. Evidence against what you say is not evidence. Evidence against evolution is not evolution! Brilliant.

It has so many applications:

• Evidence against rape is not rape.
• Evidence against a hypothesis is not that hypothesis.

Have you ever considered what a reasonable rejection criteria would look like against the hypothesis of evolution? Obviously, you present a mind only open to acceptance criteria.

LOL
You're an interesting member.
Sometimes I don't know what you're talking about!
(a bit over my head).


(but I do when it comes to theology!).

 

[Taken]

Hi Taken....
I didn't mean that I don't know what math IS
I mean that it's much too complex for my little brain.
Couldn't get past algebra.

I have to say that I admire persons that do understand math ---
My niece has a masters, although I sometimes have to do simple arithmatic for her!
(I'm sure she knows how but is a little lazy - she's into computer engineering).

Yeah. Definitely not my cup of tea either.

I wanted to comment on your post re the difference between man and animal.
So glad you brought that up.

Man has the NATURE of a man.
Animal has the NATURE of an animal.
God has the NATURE of God.

Man is not animal, God is not man, etc.

Great point.

Hi. i got your point, but I elaborated a bit.

My dad was a genius, particularly math and music was his passion and had a photograph memory.

He easily could and had conversations with anyone from all walks of life on any subject.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Chihuahua]

I understand what you're saying.
I think Gordon Ramsey will know more about how to make the perfect steak than I do....
however, I might end up liking mine more. In any case, he most certainly will know more than I ever will about cooking...
and I think we should at least give a listen to those that know more.

Yes - when it comes to a person's area of expertise. A famous and well respected physicist ought not to be seen as an expert of medical issues.

A person has a world pardigm.
They'll usually follow this paradigm.
I personally, believe something/someone caused the BB.
That someone has to be God - however one wishes to describe Him.

I listen to different opinions (I think I posted a talk between Noble and Dawkins) and I come out of it believing one more than the other because it is MY world paradigm...but it's based on facts, whether or not the person agrees with those facts or not.

ANY scientist will always know more than I do...
whether or not I agree with him is a different matter.
Science does not even agree with itself.

As long as that is their respected field, sure. Is it worthwhile to consider a contrary opinion to your own by a respected person in that field? Absolutely And I think it is important for people not to be swindled by someone who runs contrary to other experts of their field. They may have a valid point, but the credibility is less

C...I don't SEE the overwhelming evidence.
I see Darwinism dwindling.
I see very intelligent and smart scientists that are losing faith in Darwinistic evolution.

It doesn't matter if they are 'scientists' the question is are they in anyway involved in that field. If you had a doctorate in physics, it means nothing to speak of evolution. On Darwin I do not see it at all. I suppose there are folks out there that poke holes at Darwin, which is pretty easy to do. He is not a god or anything. You can laugh at the first airplanes and say, see how stupid they are. No jet engines, no stealth. Darwin knew nothing of DNA.

Of course I'm going to post THOSE and not the others.
IOW,,,the others are not making much sense to me anymore.
I believe I mentined a couple of reasons why...
the cell
the eye

Beher talks about the mouse trap.
same idea.

RNA forms naturally. We are talking loads of it moving very, very fast. Over time, the strands could create similar strands, acting as information and like an enzyme. Membranes formed making very early cells and the rest is history.

Generally creationist arguments utilize lack of understanding or created parallels that are in no way related for the purpose of knocking them. For example, take a bunch of toy blocks with random letters on each side, drop them on the ground and proclaim - this is how evolution works. You see, you cannot get a sentence. I did some calculations and it would take one quadrillion roles before all of the blocks formed words, much less a real sentence. Evolution is proven impossible!