Creation AND Evolution?

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I don’t have to imagine what conversations are like. This is more like a lecture than a discussion.

Well, KellyJay, if you had done your homework, there'd be no need for a lecture. It's fine if you have objections to the theory of evolution, but you need to first know what that is, and that's why I have been trying to explain some necessary concepts to you.

Originally posted by @kellyjay to another poster
I actually don’t think you care for a conversation as much as you do a shot at telling others what you think.

Oh the irony.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
Well, KellyJay, if you had done your homework, there'd be no need for a lecture. It's fine if you have objections to the theory of evolution, but you need to first know what that is, and that's why I have been trying to explain some necessary concepts to you.

You know if you had address a small portions of the questions I gave you I might had
thought we were actually having a conversation. Your explaining necessary concepts
while not addressing the concerns previously brought up didn't lend to any give and take.

Example: I pointed out to you in a few places that you were looking at modern life and
making claims about evolution as if these things were always true, not really acknowledged.

I asked, what features beside being able to eat and reproduce did life have at the start?
It went ignored.

I asked, why you were projecting features modern lifeforms had into the distant past
since that meant you were assuming a great deal without cause. Maybe you have cause
but without sharing why, it was ignored.

If all you want to do is tell me what you think I haven't read or studied in the past, this is
not a conversation.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
You know if you had address a small portions of the questions I gave you I might had
thought we were actually having a conversation. Your explaining necessary concepts
while not addressing the concerns previously brought up didn't lend to any give and take.

Example: I pointed out to you in a few places that you were looking at modern life and
making ...[text shortened]... do is tell me what you think I haven't read or studied in the past, this is
not a conversation.

He is still conveniently ignoring my question to him at the top of page 45 as well.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
You know if you had address a small portions of the questions I gave you I might had
thought we were actually having a conversation. Your explaining necessary concepts
while not addressing the concerns previously brought up didn't lend to any give and take.

Example: I pointed out to you in a few places that you were looking at modern life and
making ...[text shortened]... do is tell me what you think I haven't read or studied in the past, this is
not a conversation.

I did not address your points, because addressing them requires you to understand what natural selection is. That's why I have first been trying to explain to you what natural selection is, before moving on to the effects of natural selection on the long term. If you'd like, we could resume our discussion about natural selection. Once you grasp the main idea, we can continue from there.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
He is still conveniently ignoring my question to him at the top of page 45 as well.

The earliest lifeforms were in fact even simpler than single-celled organisms.

Originally posted by @whodey
You assume that creation was a static event.

If so, why the 6 days?

Scripture

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
I did not address your points, because addressing them requires you to understand what natural selection is. That's why I have first been trying to explain to you what natural selection is, before moving on to the effects of natural selection on the long term. If you'd like, we could resume our discussion about natural selection. Once you grasp the main idea, we can continue from there.

I have questions for you, and now I have to see these things as you do in order for you to explain things to me. Well seeing that I disagree with the theory, you and I are never going to get there. It sounds more like a indoctrination than a discussion.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Scripture

“The universe is filled with goodness...”
KellyJay


Scripture?

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I have questions for you, and now I have to see these things as you do in order for you to explain things to me. Well seeing that I disagree with the theory, you and I are never going to get there. It sounds more like a indoctrination than a discussion.

To disagree with the theory, you first need to know what it is. You don't disagree with the theory, you just don't like some of the consequences of the theory and our empirical knowledge.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
To disagree with the theory, you first need to know what it is. You don't disagree with the theory, you just don't like some of the consequences of the theory and our empirical knowledge.

I am telling you why I disagree stating my reasoning which you ignore. I have seen the claims and reject them, you ignoring them to me feels like I have to agree with you to move on.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
To disagree with the theory, you first need to know what it is. You don't disagree with the theory, you just don't like some of the consequences of the theory and our empirical knowledge.

You should just dwell on this for awhile, it basically is you in an nutshell. No one who disagrees with you has understanding like you! Yes, if we would just accept what we are told without question!

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I am telling you why I disagree stating my reasoning which you ignore. I have seen the claims and reject them, you ignoring them to me feels like I have to agree with you to move on.

Do you agree or disagree with quantum chromodynamics? Neither, because you don't know what it is. The same applies to the theory of evolution. If you want to form an opinion on it, you first need to learn what it is.

There are still plenty of people publishing on topics related to evolution. So it's not like there is nothing left to learn and nothing to disagree about.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I am telling you why I disagree stating my reasoning which you ignore. I have seen the claims and reject them, you ignoring them to me feels like I have to agree with you to move on.

C'mon KJ. KN hasn't been asking you to agree with what the results of natural selection may or may not be. Rather KN has been trying to help you to understand the basic mechanics of natural selection. You've shown time and again that you don't understand the basic mechanics.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
C'mon KJ. KN hasn't been asking you to agree with what the results of natural selection may or may not be. Rather KN has been trying to help you to understand the basic mechanics of natural selection. You've shown time and again that you don't understand the basic mechanics.

I reject the method as I have said. I have been voicing the reasons for my rejection. The causes have to do with creating something highly complex that must function properly or its useless. Doing that with a plan, purpose, and design is difficult.