That is true! And in fact it was a real problem for evolutionists at first back when there was convincing evidence (in the 1800s) that the earth was only tens of millions of years old (courtesy of Lord Kelvin - a devout Christian and leading physicist himself). And yet the physics just couldn’t be gainsayed at the time … until radioactivity (as a new heat source) was discovered! That blew the doors wide open and eventually abled much better measurements of the actual age of the earth, which turned out to totally vindicate what the evolutionists and paleontologists had already suspected but had been stymied by! The evolutionists turned out to be right! A feather in their cap early on. And the early paleontologists (who already were already convinced of great age long before evolutionary theory itself was around - contrary to what creationist organizations have led you to believe - they desperately need you to believe it’s all only because of Evolutionism - but those of us who don’t join you in willful blindness know better) - they already suspected great ages too - and were totally vindicated. It’s wonderful what God’s creation shows to us when we don’t put on blinders or desperately ignore massive mountains of evidence!
As regard’s Hoyle’s remark about the 747 in the junkyard, I haven’t looked up the context of what he was talking about as he said it, but I’m glad you reject it, because nobody (including evolutionary scientists) would ever or have ever bought into such a scenario. It’s just not how evolution has ever worked - and is one of those lies told about evolution that you’ve been asking to see (if it is repeated as somehow being an accurate analogy for any evolutionary claims).
God bless you, and may he open your eyes to see beyond what [you have been fed]. Wouldn’t you rather worship a God of truth rather than a god of lies? I hope you’ll eventually be able to see through the agenda of those who have kept you in the dark, and can then renew a spirit of true curiousity and learning from the many here who could help you see truth again once you escape the web sites who are more attuned to ideology than truth.
Of course nature knows nothing. You asked how nature knows that such a heart will do for a worm; if you use the wording of nature knowing things you should not be so critical of it in a reply. If such a heart works for a worm and the worm has such a heart, it survives. That’s how evolution works, just as gravity works by masses warping spacetime. You are right that evolution cannot anticipate a specific need. But lots of features of organisms are useful for various functions, and mutations are constantly mixing and tweaking the details of the directions. Anything new that works, survives, anything new that doesn’t work doesn’t survive. God does work particular goals through such unpredictable processes, but that is not scientifically detectable.
I understand you believe a very nice neat story that allows you to be completely convinced that evolution is real, that is certainly your prerogative, but that does not give you free licence to point out the speck in your brothers eye when you have a log in your own.
Yes, I have faults, I make mistakes as do other Christians who believe the Bible and accept that what is written plainly as history, is indeed history.
The accusations flying around on this website make my eyes water.
I am not exempt from at times going too far either, but as Christians we all should be more careful with our words.
The problem is that evolution has never worked, it is a myth, despite the many and varied claims of evidence, that really amounts to nothing more than confirmation bias, deduced from completely within the evolution paradigm that is so plastic it is essentially unfalsifiable and therefore does not even qualify as science in the strict operational scientific method sense.
When you look up the junkyard jumbo jet analogy from British scientist Sir Fred Hoyle who was for many years the director of Cambridge University’s Institute of Astronomy. You may as well look up where he calculated the odds against a simple functioning protein molecule originating by chance in some primordial soup as being the same as if you filled the whole solar system shoulder-to-shoulder with blind men and their Rubik’s cubes, then expected them all to get the right solution at the same time.
Remember, children are being taught that not only such a non-living molecule, but all the other complicated machinery needed to make a living thing, arose by chance once upon a time.
Sir Fred Hoyle once believed this story, but now says it is ‘nonsense of a high order’.
As far as I know, Fred Hoyle was not a creationist but was a highly intelligent man who could see the plain obvious reality about belief in chemical evolution!
Such shocking falsehood you have claimed points to a need for you to please consider 2 Peter 3:3-7.
As no one else on this website has even attempted to answer these two honest, clear straightforward questions, numbered 1 & 2, perhaps you can:
ALSO as I hope you are aware and more importantly believe, the Holy Scriptures reliably tell us in Genesis 9:11 that God promises to never again cause a flood to destroy the Earth:
2.) So the second question that no one on this site has even attempted to answer is can you please explain to me the glaring anomaly that exists here; i.e., on one hand we have God promising He will NEVER again send a FLOOD to DESTROY ALL FLESH, and on the other hand (if what you say is true and the Flood was only LOCAL), why do we STILL OBSERVE LOCAL FLOODS regularly all over the Earth today?
Evaluating the Argument: Evolution vs. Creationism
The core argument presented is a critique of evolutionary theory, primarily focusing on the improbability of beneficial mutations occurring and the geological evidence supporting a catastrophic event.
Key Points and Counterarguments:
Probability of Beneficial Mutations:
The argument: The odds of a beneficial mutation are incredibly low, making it unlikely that complex life could have evolved through random mutations.
Counterargument: While individual mutations might be rare, the vastness of time and the diversity of organisms provide ample opportunities for beneficial mutations to occur. Additionally, genetic drift and other factors can play a role in fixing beneficial mutations.
Geological Evidence:
The argument: The lack of soil horizons and bioturbation in rock strata suggests rapid catastrophic burial, consistent with a biblical flood.
Counterargument: Geological formations can be influenced by various factors, including sedimentation rates, tectonic activity, and erosion. While some geological features might be consistent with a catastrophic event, they do not necessarily rule out other explanations.
The Role of Worldview:
The argument: A person’s worldview can influence their interpretation of evidence.
Counterargument: While worldview can influence perception, it is important to critically evaluate evidence and consider multiple perspectives. Scientific inquiry aims to be objective and based on empirical evidence.
Additional Considerations:
Complexity of Evolution: Evolution is a complex process involving various mechanisms, not solely reliant on random mutations.
Scientific Consensus: The overwhelming majority of scientists support the theory of evolution based on a vast body of evidence.
Falsifiability: Scientific theories must be falsifiable, meaning they can be tested and potentially disproven. While creationism often relies on faith-based beliefs, evolutionary theory is constantly being tested and refined.
In conclusion, while the argument presents valid concerns about the complexities of evolutionary theory, it does not provide conclusive evidence to refute it. The debate between evolution and creationism often involves philosophical, religious, and scientific considerations. It is important to approach such discussions with an open mind, critically evaluate evidence, and consider multiple perspectives.
Remember my question to you was about theglaring anomaly that exists here; i.e., on one hand we have God promising He will NEVER again send a FLOOD to DESTROY ALL FLESH, and on the other hand (if what you say is true and the Flood was only LOCAL), why do we STILL OBSERVE LOCAL FLOODS regularly all over the Earth today?
יא וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת-בְּרִיתִי אִתְּכֶם, וְלֹא-יִכָּרֵת כָּל-בָּשָׂר עוֹד מִמֵּי הַמַּבּוּל; וְלֹא-יִהְיֶה עוֹד מַבּוּל, לְשַׁחֵת הָאָרֶץ. 11 And I will establish My covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.’ Genesis 9:11 Torah
I will maintain My covenant with you: never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” Genesis 9:11 The Contemporary Torah, JPS, 2006
Are you really suggesting that Genesis 9:11:are NOT the words of God Himself speaking to Noah as the Bible faithfully tells us?
`
Yes, as I have come to expect and appears to be common practice here, a straightforward answer to an honest straightforward question is once again not forthcoming.
Here again, the accusations fly, when have I ever slandered science or fabricated an alternative reality?
I believe the Bible as it is so clearly written as over 70 translations ever so clearly attest.
It is not I that am fabricating anything whatsoever here.
In case it was not clear, I am not invested in any concordant interpretation. I expressly do not consider Genesis 9:11 when looking at geology, and I do not take Genesis literally in terms of a modern cosmology. Therefore, I have zero interest in reconciling the account, so I do not. Was that not straightforward enough for you the first time? There is your direct answer again.
The Earth is not just old, but bears a detailed record of continuity, so there was no global extent flood. Geology is not dogma and is not decided by proof texts.
Thanks Terry for your insightful post, it is much appreciated!
Counterargument: While individual mutations might be rare, the vastness of time and the diversity of organisms provide ample opportunities for beneficial mutations to occur. Additionally, genetic drift and other factors can play a role in fixing beneficial mutations.
It appears the argument here seems to gloss over the inordinate reality of the extreme rarity of obtaining a truly beneficial mutation that doesn’t simultaneously cause damage to other strings of code on the genome at the loci of the mutation.
But when you study geologic formations all over the planet you see the same thing of thousands of parallel sediment layers with for the most part by a very big factor, nearly all have the same very sharp strata boundaries and absolutely no bioturbation or soil horizons, you get a very different understanding that is contrary to the ‘deep time’ belief.
We all have a worldview through which we interpret what we see, the data, the evidence. I have a worldview, you have a worldview, we all have a worldview that biases the way we interpret the data. The question is which is the best bias to be biased by!
I suggest that having a worldview that is consistent with Biblical teaching is the best bias of all to have.
Complexity of Evolution: Evolution is a complex process involving various mechanisms, not solely reliant on random mutations.
The reality is that life is far too complex for evolution to account for it.
Scientific Consensus: The overwhelming majority of scientists support the theory of evolution based on a vast body of evidence.
The reality is that the overwhelming majority of scientists were indoctrinated into the evolutionary paradigm right from the outset of their education. I wonder how many have performed a critical analysis of evolution; not many I’m sure. My experience tells me that most believe evolution because a scientist they respect believes it and so on for that scientist; it’s a self propagating paradigm that does not tolerate being questioned. Creationism isn’t based upon false beliefs, it is based on the Holy Bible.Whereas for the overwhelming majority of scientists, it is based upon a materialistic philosophy that excludes God by decree and in many cases has a completely atheist worldview.
Falsifiability: Scientific theories must be falsifiable, meaning they can be tested and potentially disproven. While creationism often relies on faith-based beliefs, evolutionary theory is constantly being tested and refined.
The problem with evolution is that it can’t be falsified. It is untouchable. In any other area of science, such a belief would be discarded as falsified, but as the only viable alternative to evolution (i.e., God created it), is not acceptable to the overwhelming majority of evolution believing scientists working within the ‘world’, belief in evolution is retained despite the numerous absurdities, inconsistencies and mathematically proven impossibilities!
But of course, no argument can refute evolution as it moves the goal posts when needed to accommodate anything that arises that challenges its validity!
Yes, and that goes both ways. I have a thorough understanding of evolution; indeed I argued for for many years and could not conceive that in fact I was so wrong. But I was in error, I was utterly blind to the Truth, though I truly believed I was correct, after all it was just so obvious.
Boy, did I get a shock when I finally realised that my faith in the reality of evolution disintegrated in front of my eyes.
These days all I can see is God’s hand everywhere in the creation and I see His handiwork in all the beauty that He created for us, and I see continental scale geology standing across the globe as stark testament to the accuracy of the Bible about the global flood of Noah’s day.
I also see from that how much our gracious, patient Lord God deals with sin.
The beginning of wisdom is truly fear of the Lord God.
Yes because it points toward Christ and his gospel, that is the whole point of the Noah Story.
Listen to Peter
because[e] they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
and again Peter
2 Peter 2:4-6
4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell[a] and committed them to chains[b] of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; 5 if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;[c]
They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
We are disciples of Jesus Christ. He left the Holy Spirit teach theology not science. We are under the authority of the apostles and Peter was leader. The main theological point Peter makes about the flood are
The Ark (Christ) is what saves the righteous from the coming Judgment (flood)
People that deny Christs return also deny God’s hand in creation and power to judge the world.
The bible is a theological text meant for the Church, not the atheist world. The Flood story is essential in proper theological understanding regardless about the volume of water in reality. God saved the lineage of Adam to Christ along with all those of the faith of Abraham. This may sound bad, but the unbelieving world will be lost in the final judgment of fire as Peter says. The non Adamic people (not clothed in sacrificial skins) is dead already drowned in sea of unbelief. Our job as Christians is to get as many into the Church (ARK) as possible. We do this by preaching the gospel and loving all peoples.
I agree with much of what you have to say and there are many parallels that can be drawn from the creation account and the flood of Noah, and yes I absolutely agree they all point to Jesus.
But, I think what you are missing here is the amazing fact that all those parallels exist and point to Jesus from an actual REAL event in history.
Genesis up to Babel, I do not doubt the accuracy; it is an account of history, it is trustworthy and true.
God does not tell us fairy tales upon which the parallels that ultimately point to Jesus emanate.
The mind blowing amazing thing about those parallels that point to our Loving Saviour and Lord Jesus, is that they are based on reality, that is REAL history.
Our God is an awesome God who is majestic beyond equal, He is mighty and yet He loves us all and wishes that not one of us will perish. But He has left that decision to each one of us, and has given us all a conscience to steer our way safely through the storms of life.
Yes, the Harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few!
Yes, I guess you have answered the question there when you state, " there was no global extent flood".
The Holy Scripture of Genesis 9:11 tells us what God said to Noah , that its abundantly clear the flood was absolute and cut off life from all flesh and destroyed the earth.
"And I will establish My covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.’
Therefore, it appears you believe you avoid admitting the excruciatingly blatant anomaly of God saying never again will He flood the Earth when you know full well as we all do that floods still occur regularly around the world.
But don’t you realise from what Genesis 9:11 ever so plainly tells us, the flood could not have been a local flood because we still have local floods, many of them in fact, therefore, it is obvious and clear the flood was a destructive flood that covered all the Earth, or in other words, it was a global flood.
Bacteria were the model organisms in these experiments. By number, prokaryotes are the dominant form of life on the planet. Bacteria in and on your body outnumber your own cells by several orders of magnitude.
What makes you say that there hasn’t been significant evolution of humans? What measures are you using? How much evolution would you expect, and why?
Children are being taught that organisms come about the very same way you did, through biological reproduction. Organisms receive DNA from their ancestors as well as new mutations all their own, just like you did.
Perhaps you should consider that the Noah story was a parable, so asking practical questions about avoiding a flood misses the entire point.
That would appear to include you as well. You don’t seem to be aware of any of the evidence that supports the theory of evolution.
It’s based on evidence which you refuse to address.
The link above contains 29 ways in which evolution can be falsified. Again, you have never done a critical examination of the theory of evolution. If you had you would have been aware of all the different ways the theory can be falsified.
Everything time you speak on evolution you prove yourself wrong. For example, you claim that the theory can’t be falsified even though there are many, many examples of ways in which the theory can be falsified.
unfortunately, you appear to miss the point here when you say, “Children are being taught that organisms come about the very same way you did, through biological reproduction”
Biological reproduction has never been taught as how life came into existence; such a belief betrays a sad lack of understanding of the abiogenesis mythology.
Unfortunately, in the real world Children are being taught that life came about by chance that in terms of probability is mathematically akin to a solar system full of shoulder to shoulder blind men all solving their Rubik’s cube simultaneously, in other words biological evolution is impossible!
Yes, “Organisms receive DNA from their ancestors as well as new mutations all their own, just like you did.” at least that is correct, however the faith you appear to put into the “new mutations” is categorically unfounded.
The reality of having around about one million near neutral, but still slightly negative mutations to every slightly beneficial mutation appears to be lost to people on this site, I can only assume because the prime paradigm ‘evolution’ has them blinded to the obvious reality that the claimed upward ascension from a single reproducing cell (itself an impossibility by chance), to the complex variety of amazing and beautiful life on Earth can never occur, it is the dangerous myth of our times, that is deceiving millions of people.
The Churches that have compromised on the Truth and traded it for the lie of evolution haven’t helped either, since they compromised with the lie, church attendance numbers have been declining,leaving only a few white haired faithful Christians and a few younger Christians in many Churches I have seen.
Belief in evolution is like a disease that is infecting the minds and hearts of mankind in this age.
No T_aquaticus, the Flood was real enough, as the sedimentary rocks worldwide loudly testify, it is the False Beliefs that it was either a parable or a local flood that sets people off down the wrong path, to interpret as they do, ‘deep time’ slow and gradual deposition and belief in evolution that has them changing the Bible to accommodate those wrong beliefs.
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.Matthew 7:13-14
Dear T_aquaticus,
then how about you explain some of those, “many, many examples” as to how the theory of evolution can be falsified.
I have looked and looked for many decades and only ever observed a belief system that is impossible to falsify, not because it is correct, but because it is utterly malleable.
As distinguished Finnish biochemist Matti Leisola wrote in 2018: "Evolution is slow and gradual except when it is fast. It is dynamic and creates huge changes over time, except when it keeps everything the same for millions of years."
It’s a lot higher than 1 million neutral mutations. Given that only about 10% of the human genome is functional there are billions of nearly neutral mutations in the human genome. Why you think this is a problem is beyond me.
Given your inability to even address the evidence, I don’t see how you can call it a lie.
There is no world wide flood layer that dates to 4,000 years ago.
So what if you are incorrect about the Noah story being literal?