29 Jul 14
Originally posted by C HessNo, that is not what I admitted! I do believe small changes take us into a
I don't understand. You admit that many tiny changes inevitably lead to a large one, and
then in your next sentence you say this can't happen. I wish you'd make up your mind. If
small changes can accumulate over time, then it's inevitable that they would produce large
changes in the long run (like an eye or any other organ developing). The only way this ...[text shortened]... back. You
need to demonstrate that such a something exist before you get to dismiss evolution.
larger one yes! What I am not doing is saying you can take that, then just
say we must now accept we can go from worms to whales, jellyfish, or oak
trees.
You start with butterflies you end with butterflies, you start with dogs you
end with dogs, you start with X you'll end up with X.
If you want to discuss the eye forming we can do that *again*, I'll share
why I still don't buy it and you can tell me how you think it happen and
then after you share that, you can go on as if it was settled. 🙂
I don't have to dismiss why these small changes must lead into the larger
ones you claim they do, that is your job since you are making the positive
claim.
Kelly
29 Jul 14
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadDon't you know that a wolf is the same kind of animal as a dog?
Its funny how many times it has been pointed out to you that wolves and dogs can interbreed, yet you conveniently forget this fact.
[b]What you need to show is something a little more such as go from warm blooded to cold, or cold to warm.
How about simply showing the genes involved and patterns in how they evolved from one another?
You could star ...[text shortened]... ellent free course:
https://www.edx.org/course/mitx/mitx-7-00x-introduction-biology-secret-1768[/b]
Creation Science Evangelism
29 Jul 14
The funny part is how Kelly talks of 'dogs' and 'butterflies' as if they are similar categories. In reality 'dogs' is a single species, whereas 'butterflies' covers 15 - 20 thousand different species. This just demonstrates how ridiculously vague and unscientific his claim actually is. He knows this. The plan is that once someone shows a change that crosses the boundaries he gave, he will just move the goal posts and say 'but it will never cross this boundary'.
29 Jul 14
Originally posted by RJHindsOne big exception, evolution 'beliefs' can change with new evidence. Your religion has no such possibility. You are firmly fixed in the tenth century.RELIGION: A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe...
Random House Webster's College Dictionary, 2000, page 1116
The theory of evolution seems to be such a set of beliefs.
29 Jul 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadThere are about 150 species of dogs, but they call them breeds because they are domesticated and artifically selected species.
The funny part is how Kelly talks of 'dogs' and 'butterflies' as if they are similar categories. In reality 'dogs' is a single species, whereas 'butterflies' covers 15 - 20 thousand different species. This just demonstrates how ridiculously vague and unscientific his claim actually is. He knows this. The plan is that once someone shows a change that cross ...[text shortened]... aries he gave, he will just move the goal posts and say 'but it will never cross this boundary'.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
29 Jul 14
Originally posted by KellyJayActually, you're making the positive claim. As I have already demonstrated in this or the
I don't have to dismiss why these small changes must lead into the larger
ones you claim they do, that is your job since you are making the positive
claim.
Kelly
other thread (I honestly can't keep track anymore), the logical conclusion is that if you
allow small changes to accumulate they result in big changes. A big change would be a
land-living mammal form evolving into a whale, or an eyeless form evolving eyes. (These
are big changes only on the surface, but big changes none the less.) You are the one
making a positive claim, that somehow, for evolution, the laws of logic are suspended, and
small changes can only lead to slightly bigger changes, such as a butterfly remaining a
butterfly. Since you decided that this showstopper exist somewhere in nature, you need to
point it out, not me.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
29 Jul 14
Originally posted by RJHindsEvolutionary theory doesn't deal with cause or purpose, and it only attempts to describeRELIGION: A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe...
Random House Webster's College Dictionary, 2000, page 1116
The theory of evolution seems to be such a set of beliefs.
the nature of biological life. Not exactly a poster boy for your definition of religion there.
Atheism doesn't fit either since it's not concerned with any of these criteria for religion.
29 Jul 14
Originally posted by C HessI've agreed small changes make a big one, but I only see that with in kinds.
Actually, you're making the positive claim. As I have already demonstrated in this or the
other thread (I honestly can't keep track anymore), the logical conclusion is that if you
allow small changes to accumulate they result in big changes. A big change would be a
land-living mammal form evolving into a whale, or an eyeless form evolving eyes. (These ...[text shortened]... you decided that this showstopper exist somewhere in nature, you need to
point it out, not me.
You are the one that is suggesting it goes beyond that, not me. If you can
show me an eye less creature getting eyes, I'd be impressed, or a land
mammal evolving into a whale. Those would be good enough for me, but
you would have to do more than just say, it could have happen like this,
or you are left with just connecting dots not proving a point.
Kelly
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
29 Jul 14
Originally posted by KellyJayFor crying out loud! Two versions:
I've agreed small changes make a big one, but I only see that with in kinds.
You are the one that is suggesting it goes beyond that, not me. If you can
show me an eye less creature getting eyes, I'd be impressed, or a land
mammal evolving into a whale. Those would be good enough for me, but
you would have to do more than just say, it could have happen like this,
or you are left with just connecting dots not proving a point.
Kelly
1. Accumulated small changes lead to bigger changes.
2. Accumulated small changes lead to bigger changes, but at some arbitrary point, this
process stops, and so there's a limit to how big these changes can really get.
Now, I ask you, which one of those do you think requires some level of explanation?
29 Jul 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsGet a better dictionary RJ, this is from the Oxford online dictionary:RELIGION: A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe...
Random House Webster's College Dictionary, 2000, page 1116
The theory of evolution seems to be such a set of beliefs.
1 The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods: ideas about the relationship between science and religionReligion is specifically to do with the supernatural except in sense 1.2 when it is used analogically.
1.1 A particular system of faith and worship: the world’s great religions
1.2 A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion: consumerism is the new religion
Origin
Middle English (originally in the sense 'life under monastic vows' ): from Old French, or from Latin religio(n-) 'obligation, bond, reverence', perhaps based on Latin religare 'to bind'.