What's done is done, and this puppy's done. Visit me over at Pearls & Lodestones
Join...
...Conservation Club!
Help protect and own one
one of the world's oldest
and rarest trees...
..::Legend::..
Black= Mastered
Green= Learning
Orange= Struggling
Red= May never master but having fun
This list is by no means comprehensive
from the mind of... Eric | 11:54 PM
11 Comments:
So some atheist on the street who isn't a biologist finds this argument persuasive? Color me unimpressed.
Of course, the argument is hogwash. The fossil record is replete with transitional fossils. Whales with hind legs for example. And even hind leg genes in dolphins that have been turned off for millenia turning on again.
Conversely, if creation is true, we'd find fossils of modern mammals next to dinosaurs and trilobites in ancient rocks, which has never happened.
An interesting note..
The two atheists at the debate were the ones responsible for The Blasphemy Challenge website.
Yeah, that sure is a problem with the media. Find the most controversial people on either side and let them duke it out. Good for ratings, bad for the thought process.
Who else are you going to find to "debate" evolution with creationists than village atheists? No-one else would consider the activity useful or reqarding.
"Of course, the argument is hogwash. The fossil record is replete with transitional fossils. Whales with hind legs for example. And even hind leg genes in dolphins that have been turned off for millenia turning on again."
How utterly rediculous.
What POSSIBLE logical explanation could there be for "Whales with hind legs"?
That's the most idiotoc crap I've EVER heard.
What mechanism could possibly have prompted a whale to grow legs?
I know...God.
What POSSIBLE benefit could come from a whale having two legs?
Transition stage? Bullsh*t.
An extinct organism designed by an omniscient God!
Whales with legs...you DO realize how rediculous your myhtical whale-in-transition theory sounds, don't you, Sol?
"Science" has proven nothing. "Science" hopes...guesses...taking the most convenient path in order to justify utter nonsnse.
I wonder how many bones it takes to make a whale skeleton. Probably a good 75% more bones than were collected to "reconstruct" the whale skeleton fantasized in the article.
You know...like Nevada Man.
A pig bone here...a dog bone there.
Personally, I found the Christian's arguments inadequate, but then, how does one who has experienced the Grace of God explain it to those who don't believe? It is a matter of faith.
The atheists question is one I have pondered many times, and unfortunately, if one wants to convince an atheist to believe, you can't answer the question of who created God without referencing faith. He simply cannot be defined in finite human terms, and that is what the athiests want. It can't be done. One has to have faith. Simple as that. Once the unbeliever submits to the will of God, his eyes are opened, and he sees what the believer sees. That God exists. There can be no doubt of that in a believers heart, but again, how do you explain what is unbelievable to the unbeliever?
I wrote a blog entry once about a moment in my life when "the Heavens declared the beauty of His handiwork". You can find it here
.
Sol, as Daddio said, most of those "proofs" of evolution have been refuted by serious scientists who examined the evidence and found the results had been manipulated to bolster the evolutionary scientists already biased views that evolution exists.
However, there is a simple explanation why there might be evidence, if it truly exists, of legs on Whales.
God once destroyed the world with a flood. It is entirely possible, and probable, that God changed the legs to flippers so the whale could survive.
So, Sol, even if evolution was true (which I don't believe) there is no scientific evidence that God didn't create evolution too.
Have you considered the possiblility that Satan created the concept of an evolution to confuse mankind and trick man into disbelieving what God has demonstrated through His creation?
Nevermind. The truths of God are folly to the unbeliever. Good luck. Without God, you will need it.
"Sol, as Daddio said, most of those "proofs" of evolution have been refuted by serious scientists who examined the evidence and found the results had been manipulated to bolster the evolutionary scientists already biased views that evolution exists."
Actually, Mark, the reverse is true. Serious scientists refuted objections like Daddio's decades ago. Go to any real university anywhere in the world and you will find biologists and geologists who study the history of the earth and the evolution of life on earth.
"However, there is a simple explanation why there might be evidence, if it truly exists, of legs on Whales.
God once destroyed the world with a flood. It is entirely possible, and probable, that God changed the legs to flippers so the whale could survive."
You can come up with stories like this to explain anything, Mark. But at some point these stories become a little silly. If you truly look at the world around you, from DNA to fossils to biogeography, the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. In the case of whales, we see fossils progressing from large legs to smaller and smaller legs until they disappear entirely. This is true of many species, where intermediate fossils progress slowly over millions of years from one form to another. We also see fully formed whales predating any human remains. --all as we would expect under evolution, not a miraculous move to save some land animal by turning it into a whale in the blink of an eye.
"So, Sol, even if evolution was true (which I don't believe) there is no scientific evidence that God didn't create evolution too."
My point exactly! That's why I don't understand why Daddio is so threatened by evolution.
"Have you considered the possiblility that Satan created the concept of an evolution to confuse mankind and trick man into disbelieving what God has demonstrated through His creation?"
Yes, and I've dismissed it long ago. If anything we observe could be a trick of Satan, why trust our senses at all? And creationists have to go through too many gyrations like this to make their view fit the evidence. At some point, you've just got to go with the simpler explanation- life evolved over billions of years through natural selection. All the evidence- molecular, fossil, biogeographic, geological- is consistent with that simple explanation.
If you want to believe God set the process in motion, that's fine with me. That's what most rational Christians do (like most of the Republican presidential candidates). I've never claimed to have any evidence to the contrary.
And Daddio, we've been through this before. Sorry, I can't take you seriously anymore.
I've seen skeletons of whales and seals before and their flippers/fins have the same basic bone structure as our hands and feet, and because of this I think we tend to presuppose that since we have fingers on hands whales and seals must have also at some distant point on an evolutionary timeline.
But there's something I do ever summer that makes me wonder at the complexity and versatility of the human hand. When it gets hot, and since I don't have an airconditioner in my car, I am forced to hang an arm out the window to stay cool-- for some reason the air blowing across my skin gives the rest of my body a sense of coolness... especially if the air is cool. I'll cup my hand and feel the air racing over it. A slight tip up and the air will catch my whole hand and lift it up much like an airplane's wing, or a gull's. I see people do this all the time, so I know I'm not the only one who does this. I will also move my hand about in various positions to maximize the amount of surface area the air passes over as I'm driving. Much of what I do with my hand while I'm driving in summer months is made possible by the complex structure of the bones in my hand and wrist.
The same is true of swimming, but the bones in the wrist and hand take on new purpose: to propel me through the water, or shift my position as I tread water, or move about in a line or change directions under water. These bones then become very important.
Naturally, since I have fingers, and not a fin or flipper, I have to cup my hands to move through or under the water, which puts me at a disadvantage to whales and seals. I'm not "Designed" to move about in the water. I can, thanks to the bone structure in my hands and wrists, but I am not as capable as a whale or seal.
It is natural, I believe, to presuppose that because I have hands and not flippers, that a similar bone structure in whales and seals must therefore denote a vestigial purpose akin to our own at some point in the distant past, that they once had hands and feet... of a sort. But that, I believe, would be a mistake.
I also think it's disingenuous to argue (especially to atheists) that whales may have had legs that miraculously became flippers to survive the flood. One would have to argue as well that the whale's nose miraculously migrated from just above it upper lip to the top of its head-- because every mammal I've ever heard of has its nose at the forefront of its face. Only on whales and dolphins are their "noses" at the top of their heads.
The simplest answer, then, is often the best, that being: whales and seals and dolphins were designed this way... to live and move with fluidity through the water. Furthermore, as large as some of these creatures are, hands and feet are impractical-- fingers and toes would slow them down. Instead they were created with flippers and fins with the necessary bone structure to move through the water, much as I manipulate the air on a hot summer day while driving, with nuance and deliberate purpose.
These creature are designed to move through the water. Period. I do not believe they were once created to walk on all fours. I do believe that if they have 'hind leg genes' that switch on and off every other millenia or so, that its an aberration, and not the norm. Were it the norm, whales and dolphins with hands and feet would not be a remarkable sight for modern science.
This whole evolution/creation discussion will likely go on until the 2nd Coming. It would take something on that level to convince many who presently don't believe.
Most of what I've seen regarding transitional species (and I admit it isn't a ton) seems to suggest a deep hope that these are indeed links between species, not a true proof. As suggested, it is just as likely, if not more so, mere deformities. But the evolutionist, after wiping the drool, spits out a proclamation of discovery. They really want it to be true.
But it has occurred to me that it is equally possible, if not more so, that because we are all creatures of the same planet, that similarities exist between the species. We can be only so different. So it's no big deal that we may have much in common biologically with apes or dolphins or whatever. But beyond that, it means nothing. It's nothing but similarities. With all we DO have in terms of a fossil record, I can't buy into the notion that there are any "links" already discovered without there being both many more examples, as well as something more than "possibilities" of links.
Personally, I believe there's plenty to trumpet in terms of micro-evolution, or within a species, but very little to support macro-evolution, changes from one species to another. For that, one needs as much faith as a Christian believer, because the evidence is no more convincing than the evidence for God. Less so, I'd say.
Post a Comment
<< Home