The ID movement’s large-scale view of evolution: America is at stake

[St.Roymond]

@RichardG

TOE clams that life adapts to change and by the law of averages and necessity produces the right creatures.

There’s no such thing in ToE as “the right creatures”.

@RichardG

It is not that God has to build every thing ex-nilo, but there are parameters

And your view boils down to thinking that God is not smart enough to have built the parameters into the system.

@RichardG

Things that science cannot see or define. Why bipedal is the goal. Why horses cannot have wings.

It would help if you would actually talk about the theory of evolution when you criticize ToE.

@RichardG

God’s hand . . . is only invisible because Scientists do not want to consider it. They cannot measure it.

The first is false, the second is true.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Bill_II

Tell that to the baby birds that fall out of the nest and die because they can’t fly

Give it a rest. Those babies have not fledged!

I have no idea why this is so controversial.

Richard

[St.Roymond]

@RichardG

@Bill_II

So why can He not likewise control evolution?

He does, but science cannot identify where and so the theory is flawed. It assumes no interference.

Science can’t identify God’s hand in geology or chemistry, either. You just put biology into the same basket as all the rest.

@RichardG

There is no such relationship possible with the inanimate.

Really? Where is that written?

@RichardG

Example? Are you kidding? They show it can be done! Not how to do it.

Example is a potent method of teaching.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@St.Roymond

Science can’t identify God’s hand in geology or chemistry, either. You just put biology into the same basket as all the rest.

I have explained myself more than once. Cearly you did not bother to read it.

And I do not lump other sciences together, you do!

@St.Roymond

@RichardG

here is no such relationship possible with the inanimate.

Really? Where is that written?

No common sense then.

@St.Roymond

Example is a potent method of teaching.

generalised to the nth degree.

Perhaps birds have a more complex communication system

“Look at what I am doing!”

Richard

[St.Roymond]

@Bill_II

Tell that to the baby birds that fall out of the nest and die because they can’t fly.

I watched a wildlife video where when finally nudged out of their nest on a cliff, one young bird just fell and crashed. It was the one which had not paid attention to the parents as they took off from the nest and returned. All the others had learned from example; the one had not bothered with watching the examples of its parents and paid the price. It had the instincts, it had the musculature – but it hadn’t paid attention and so did not learn.
It wasn’t killed by the crash. It landed over halfway down the cliff and was shocked, but recovered and sat there watching its siblings as they worked out the finer points, then finally managed to imitate them and achieve a clumsy flight to the bottom. To get back to the nest required climbing and trying to fly up, but in the end it had to have the assistance of its parents. It eventually learned, after having gotten the lesson that paying attention was necessary.

[St.Roymond]

@RichardG

And I do not lump other sciences together, you do!

You just did.
You’ve done it before, and fail to see it.
But yes, I “lump all sciences together” for the simple reason that science does nothing but discover and describe how God runs things.

@RichardG

No common sense then.

Ah, so your innate feelings about things trump the scriptures.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@St.Roymond

so your innate feelings about things trump the scriptures.

No.

Just tell me how anyone can have a relationship with an inanimate object, other than owning or using it. It cannot give anything back, it has no way of doing so.

So give up now while you are losing.

Richard