Creation vs. Evolution

[DFT_Dave]

You seem to be conflating established theory with tentative hypothesis. The rejection of hypotheses is how science works. Didn't you know that?

In any case, how would having rightly rejected hypotheses form over a century ago possibly cause us to reject what remains in the theory which wasn't rejected?

That upright walking is what is the cause of an increase in brain size, as we shall see, is not proven by the fossil record.

This change is not the first change or is it the last.

There will be three major changes, not because the fossil record shows this but because the fossil record refutes the first two theories. The final change in theory simply explains why we will not find fossil evidence for the evolution of man, or anything else for that matter. The fact of evolution has come by fiat, not evidence of fossils.

You know the fiat argument, you and Alwight use it all the time.

--Dave

 

[gcthomas]

Complexity over time is exactly what the theory of evolution is.

That is clearly not true. Evolution is the trens towards a better fit to the demands of nature for living and reproducing. Increased complexity or size is only produce if it increases fitness. Most creatures would not benefit from bigger brains.

(And for neanderthals, a larger brain does not imply greater complexity, if indeed they did have greater brain size after you allow for the larger eyes.)

That upright walking is what is the cause of an increase in brain size, as we shall see, is not proven by the fossil record.

I wouldn't expect bipedalism to cause larger brains necessarily, just look at t. rex and birds. Small brains and bipedal.

 

[noguru]

I wouldn't expect bipedalism to cause larger brains necessarily, just look at t. rex and birds. Small brains and bipedal.

1.) Predatory animals tend to be more intelligent than herbivores, but in primates the social functioning placed demands on intelligence which might have left due to the omnivorous diet.

2.) With extremely exothermic animals like mammals the metabolism allows for greater brain function.

3.) The degree of nurturing that developed in mammals in general (and especially primates) is also a precursor to greater intelligence.

4.) With these other factors satisfied, bipedalism is more likely to produce greater intelligence.

5.) Manual dexterity (opposing thumbs) seems to be another precursor to the intelligence we see in humans. The ability to use the hands to manipulate things around them (in more advanced species tool making) is the real factor here. The mental foundations for language seem to be rooted in this, then add vocal chords and we have a new and more effective way to make symbols.

 

[bybee]

1.) Predatory animals tend to be more intelligent than herbivores, but in primates the social functioning placed demands on intelligence which might have left due to the omnivorous diet.

2.) With extremely exothermic animals like mammals the metabolism allows for greater brain function.

3.) The degree of nurturing that developed in mammals in general (and especially primates) is also a precursor to greater intelligence.

4.) With these other factors satisfied, bipedalism is more likely to produce greater intelligence.

5.) Manual dexterity (opposing thumbs) seems to be another precursor to the intelligence we see in humans. The ability to use the hands to manipulate things around them (in more advanced species tool making) is the real factor here. The mental foundations for language seem to be rooted in this, then add vocal chords and we have a new and more effective way to make symbols.

Could we say that love between mother and child sparks intelligence?

 

[noguru]

Could we say that love between mother and child sparks intelligence?

Absolutely.

 

[6days]

Evolution is the trens towards a better fit to the demands of nature for living and reproducing. Increased complexity or size is only produce if it increases fitness. Most creatures would not benefit from bigger brains.

You are providing evidence of an Intelligent Designer. Various creatures have brains suited to their needs. Innate intelligence along with brain size and abilities matched to needs is one of many indicators of our Designer.
Romans1:20 from God's Word "For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God."

 

[alwight]

Complexity over time is exactly what the theory of evolution is.

The ToE isn't about complexity since evolution can also evolve away unrequired traits but generally speaking there has been a distinct tendency toward greater complexity, but that doesn't mean it always will.

If atheism is true then of course we're not special.

No, atheism is a non-belief rather than a belief, it isn't a claim to know that gods don't exist. We may all be surprised by the real truth, but atheists less so perhaps if they're not expecting anything specific to begin with.

If the world did evolve or if it is clear that the trend toward complexity is not possible by the laws of physics then atheism is not true.

See how logic works, you all would agree, yes?

--Dave

Greater complexity is only what typically has happened up to now, but that isn't what evolution is about, it doesn't have any intent for greater complexity. If there was/is an intent then that is not clear to me anyway and probably would require a higher power of some kind. Show any such intent and you are well on your way to a god imo, can you do it Dave?

 

[noguru]

The ToE isn't about complexity since evolution can also evolve away unrequired traits but generally speaking there has been a distinct tendency toward greater complexity, but that doesn't mean it always will.

No, atheism is a non-belief rather than a belief, it isn't a claim to know that gods don't exist. We may all be surprised by the real truth, but atheists less so perhaps if they're not expecting anything specific to begin with.

Greater complexity is only what typically has happened up to now, but that isn't what evolution is about, it doesn't have any intent for greater complexity. If there was/is an intent then that is not clear to me anyway and probably would require a higher power of some kind. Show any such intent and you are well on your way to a god imo, can you do it Dave?

Complexity in the biological world is attached to biodiversity. They both will increase, given a niche, until an equilibrium is reached in that niche. If you want to isolate such complexity to an individual species, then complexity becomes dependent on multi cellular life, and is mimicked when stem cells transform into specialized cells. We certainly do not need a supernatural event for stem cells to transform into specialized cells.

 

[6days]

"Charles Darwin never mentions the 1856 fossil discovery in the Neander Valley limestone quarry located in Germany in The Origin of Species in 1859 nor in any of the six subsequent editions. Even in The Descent of Man, Darwin did not endorse the Neanderthals as a potential ancestral transitional link to humans.

In fact, the discovery was a problem since the Neanderthal skulls are larger than human skulls. Darwin had argued that the advancement of evolution proceeded through “slight, successive changes”.

The Neanderthal fossils created a dilemma for Darwin, how could a larger brain precede a smaller brain? Darwin cautiously noted, that “it must be admitted that some skulls of very high antiquity, such as the famous one of Neanderthal, are well developed and capacious [large]”. For Darwin, the Neanderthal skulls were too large to have preceded humans."

Seems for Darwin size mattered.

--Dave

Dave, perhaps you know this but one interesting aspect of this for Christians is that Neandertals were named after being found in the Neander valley.

The valley was named after a young German, Joachim Neander who wrote 60 Christian hymns including one that" is generally regarded as one of the greatest hymns of praise of the Christian church".... Praise to the Lord, the Almighty, the King of Creation (German: 'Lobe den Herren, den mächtigen König der Ehren')

I suspect that Neander would be pleased that Neandertals humanity helps to confirm the Biblical account of God creating humans distinct from animals.

 

[noguru]

Dave, perhaps you know this but one interesting aspect of this for Christians is that Neandertals were named after being found in the Neander valley.

The valley was named after a young German, Joachim Neander who wrote 60 Christian hymns including one that" is generally regarded as one of the greatest hymns of praise of the Christian church".... Praise to the Lord, the Almighty, the King of Creation (German: 'Lobe den Herren, den mächtigen König der Ehren')

I suspect that Neander would be pleased that Neandertals humanity helps to confirm the Biblical account of God creating humans distinct from animals.

I suspect they might be pleased if you stopped speaking for them about "praising God" as an attempt to compensate for your own stubborn willful ignorance.

 

[DFT_Dave]

The ToE isn't about complexity since evolution can also evolve away unrequired traits but generally speaking there has been a distinct tendency toward greater complexity, but that doesn't mean it always will.

No, atheism is a non-belief rather than a belief, it isn't a claim to know that gods don't exist. We may all be surprised by the real truth, but atheists less so perhaps if they're not expecting anything specific to begin with.

Greater complexity is only what typically has happened up to now, but that isn't what evolution is about, it doesn't have any intent for greater complexity. If there was/is an intent then that is not clear to me anyway and probably would require a higher power of some kind. Show any such intent and you are well on your way to a god imo, can you do it Dave?

That intent would be DNA as we will see.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

That is clearly not true. Evolution is the trens towards a better fit to the demands of nature for living and reproducing. Increased complexity or size is only produce if it increases fitness. Most creatures would not benefit from bigger brains.

(And for neanderthals, a larger brain does not imply greater complexity, if indeed they did have greater brain size after you allow for the larger eyes.)

I wouldn't expect bipedalism to cause larger brains necessarily, just look at t. rex and birds. Small brains and bipedal.

Human evolution is about an increase in brain size and the development of upright walking.

The brain of Neanderthal was considered to advanced to tell us anything about the evolution of man in Darwin's day as it is in ours.

--Dave

 

[alwight]

That intent would be DNA as we will see.

--Dave

Can you show that genetic information doesn't just evolve naturally over time without resorting to personal incredulity? :think:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I suspect they might be pleased if you stopped speaking for them about "praising God" as an attempt to compensate for your own stubborn willful ignorance.

I suspect you'd be wrong.


REV XIX
5 And a voice came out of the throne, saying , Praise our God,

all ye his servants, and ye that fear him,

both small and great.

6 And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying , Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth .

7 Let us be glad and rejoice , and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come , and his wife hath made herself ready .

8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

9 And he saith unto me, Write , Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Can you show that genetic information doesn't just evolve naturally over time without resorting to personal incredulity? :think:

Can we say that "useful information" does evolve by chance mutations? If I were to agree, for the sake of argument, that nature is selective, any mutation that occurs without purpose/chance would still fulfill a purpose which is a contradiction. It would be arguing that chance mutations serve a purpose. Any mutation that serves a purpose would not be by chance, and if not by chance then by design.

--Dave

 

[Tyrathca]

Can we say that "useful information" does evolve by chance mutations? If I were to agree, for the sake of argument, that nature is selective, any mutation that occurs without purpose/chance would still fulfill a purpose which is a contradiction. It would be arguing that chance mutations serve a purpose. Any mutation that serves a purpose would not be by chance, and if not by chance then by design.

--Dave

If a tree randomly falls over a ravine or river it would still fill a purpose as a "useful" bridge for animals. But this would be a contradiction, it would argue that chance tree falling serve a purpose. Any tree that falls would not be by chance, and if not by chance then by design.

Definitive proof of the intelligent tree tipper!


Please tell me you can figure out where this argument (and therefore your) goes wrong...

 

[Tyrathca]

Double post

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear 6days and DFT_Dave,

You are on the right track. Bummer for those who aren't. God has hidden His existence of man so that man would not be biased in whom they believe; in other words, Free Choice. God seeks those who search Him out and by their faith in Him. Faith is believing what you haven't seen. We cannot see the wind, but we know that it exists because we feel it. This is like God. Jesus told us this. It's up to people to make their own decisions then. For those of you who don't, it is a shame.

God Be With You In Your Deadly Choice,

MichaelC

 

[noguru]

I suspect you'd be wrong.


REV XIX
5 And a voice came out of the throne, saying , Praise our God,

all ye his servants, and ye that fear him,

both small and great.

6 And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying , Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth .

7 Let us be glad and rejoice , and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come , and his wife hath made herself ready .

8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

9 And he saith unto me, Write , Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

Nope, you are wrong and you misuse scripture again. Just because you quote scripture does not mean you are using accurately. Though I don't expect you to understand this either. To use scripture as an attempt to cover your own ignorance, and remain proud of it, is not proper use.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Nope, you are wrong and you misuse scripture again. Just because you quote scripture does not mean you are using accurately. Though I don't expect you to understand this either. To use scripture as an attempt to cover your own ignorance, and remain proud of it, is not proper use.

This would include Neandertals wouldnt it?

Revelation 5:9 KJV
And they sung a new song, saying , Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain , and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;