Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ex-robot · 07-12-2002, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shadowy Man:
What I mean is this:

Assume that the universe is only 6000 (or your favorite number) years old and that a supernatural god created all the species of the Earth as they currently are, and they did not develop over time from common ancestors through evolution by natural selection. Can natural selection cause changes in animal species for the future (if not the past)??

Do Creationists believe that evolution can take place at all? Whether or not evolution has taken place, the scientific ideas behind evolution, i.e. survival of the fittest, should still be valid, right?

So, to discount an "old Earth" theory, do you have to discount even the possibility of evolution?

Depends on what you mean by "evolution". Most informed creationists believe that organisms change and adapt over time. If you say that is "evolution", then they do. Will they agree, no. Of course, there are the backwoods, hands over eyes, ignorant, preacher-loving creationists who believe "all" animals were created in the beginning despite the fact there are varieties of humans like caucasians and pygmies.

xr

tgamble · 07-12-2002, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shadowy Man:
What I mean is this:

Assume that the universe is only 6000 (or your favorite number) years old and that a supernatural god created all the species of the Earth as they currently are, and they did not develop over time from common ancestors through evolution by natural selection. Can natural selection cause changes in animal species for the future (if not the past)??

Do Creationists believe that evolution can take place at all? Whether or not evolution has taken place, the scientific ideas behind evolution, i.e. survival of the fittest, should still be valid, right?

So, to discount an "old Earth" theory, do you have to discount even the possibility of evolution?

Of course, if YECs said evolution was possible over the next millions of years they would have to abandon many of their arguments such as

1) evolution violates the 2LOT

2) no good mutations/ no mutations that add information.

3) probability arguments.

4) only limited variation within a kind is possible.

That would be a serious problem. Once they admit it's possible, there's a lot less bullshit to get through.

ps418 · 07-12-2002, 03:14 PM

Xrobot:
Of course, there are the backwoods, hands over eyes, ignorant, preacher-loving creationists who believe "all" animals were created in the beginning despite the fact there are varieties of humans like caucasians and pygmies.

Xrobot,
What is the genetic/paleontological evidence that living caucasians and pygmies share a common ancestor, and are not simply the descendents of the first, 'created' caucasians and pygmies? Why would someone be "backwoods" and "ignorant" for believing that such varieties are original rather than derived via descent with modification from common ancestors?

Patrick

ex-robot · 07-12-2002, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ps418:
Xrobot:
Of course, there are the backwoods, hands over eyes, ignorant, preacher-loving creationists who believe "all" animals were created in the beginning despite the fact there are varieties of humans like caucasians and pygmies.

Xrobot,
What is the genetic/paleontological evidence that living caucasians and pygmies share a common ancestor, and are not simply the descendents of the first, 'created' caucasians and pygmies?

My point is not to defend adam and eve, etc. Creationists believe there was Adam and Eve and nobody else. Thus, there had to be quite a bit of change/adaptation occuring to get the different varieties of humans, which is my point.

Quote:

Why would someone be "backwoods" and "ignorant" for believing that such varieties are original rather than derived via descent with modification from common ancestors?
Patrick

Good point. They could be from LA, NYC, etc. and be ignorant as well.

If someone believes that all animals were originally created with no change, natural selection, mutation, etc. happening to produce different varieties, they shouldn't believe God created just two humans with all the different varieties we have today. Hope that clears it up.

xr

ps418 · 07-12-2002, 03:44 PM

Good point. They could be from LA, NYC, etc. and be ignorant as well.

No argument there!

If someone believes that all animals were originally created with no change, natural selection, mutation, etc. happening to produce different varieties, they shouldn't believe God created just two humans with all the different varieties we have today. Hope that clears it up.
xr

Yes, that clears it up. You're saying that the "backwoods" people your refer to are ignorant NOT because they are ignoring any empirical evidence that causcasians and pygmies share a common ancestry, but simply because they do not understand implications of the text of Genesis (that all varieties of humans descend from A and E).

Patrick

ex-robot · 07-12-2002, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ps418:
Good point. They could be from LA, NYC, etc. and be ignorant as well.

No argument there!

If someone believes that all animals were originally created with no change, natural selection, mutation, etc. happening to produce different varieties, they shouldn't believe God created just two humans with all the different varieties we have today. Hope that clears it up.
xr

Yes, that clears it up. You're saying that the "backwoods" people your refer to are ignorant NOT because they are ignoring any empirical evidence that causcasians and pygmies share a common ancestry, but simply because they do not understand implications of the text of Genesis (that all varieties of humans descend from A and E).

Patrick

Correct.

xr

GeoTheo · 07-13-2002, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth:
Better to know a fact than believe a fiction.

You forgot to say "NA na na na na nah! and give me a raspberry.

GeoTheo · 07-13-2002, 08:06 AM

Starboy:
Do you know that you sound like a right wing conspiracy nut?
Why is it that Rigt wing Whackos think the Godless liberals are taking over the world and meanwhile the left wing whackos think it's Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell that are poised to take it over?
They both seem to believe it with equal conviction. Are you ever curious about such things? Do you even see it?

Starboy · 07-13-2002, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
Starboy:
Do you know that you sound like a right wing conspiracy nut?
Why is it that Rigt wing Whackos think the Godless liberals are taking over the world and meanwhile the left wing whackos think it's Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell that are poised to take it over?
They both seem to believe it with equal conviction. Are you ever curious about such things? Do you even see it?

GeoTheo,

Get help.

Starboy

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-12-2002, 03:14 PM	#33
ps418 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Louisville, KY, USA Posts: 1,840	Xrobot: Of course, there are the backwoods, hands over eyes, ignorant, preacher-loving creationists who believe "all" animals were created in the beginning despite the fact there are varieties of humans like caucasians and pygmies. Xrobot, What is the genetic/paleontological evidence that living caucasians and pygmies share a common ancestor, and are not simply the descendents of the first, 'created' caucasians and pygmies? Why would someone be "backwoods" and "ignorant" for believing that such varieties are original rather than derived via descent with modification from common ancestors? Patrick

07-12-2002, 03:44 PM	#35
ps418 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Louisville, KY, USA Posts: 1,840	Good point. They could be from LA, NYC, etc. and be ignorant as well. No argument there! If someone believes that all animals were originally created with no change, natural selection, mutation, etc. happening to produce different varieties, they shouldn't believe God created just two humans with all the different varieties we have today. Hope that clears it up. xr Yes, that clears it up. You're saying that the "backwoods" people your refer to are ignorant NOT because they are ignoring any empirical evidence that causcasians and pygmies share a common ancestry, but simply because they do not understand implications of the text of Genesis (that all varieties of humans descend from A and E). Patrick

07-13-2002, 08:06 AM	#38
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	Starboy: Do you know that you sound like a right wing conspiracy nut? Why is it that Rigt wing Whackos think the Godless liberals are taking over the world and meanwhile the left wing whackos think it's Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell that are poised to take it over? They both seem to believe it with equal conviction. Are you ever curious about such things? Do you even see it?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.