|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6277 days) Posts: 420 From: Cincinnati OH USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Insect diversity falsifies the worldwide flood. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I don't see anything beyond microevolution required for all those insect species to have developed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4158 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
Well there are two elements to this:
1) if a creationist wants to claim - "God made it happy and his magic made the story true" - well that's not subject to falsification because it relies on a magical figure beyond science. 2) If a creationist wants to claim - "The flood happened and this is supported by science" - well that version is open to scientific enquiry (well I say "open", it's nonsense in terms of being based upon any form of reality). If you want to claim (1) - great, but it's nothing to do with science (which is what we dicuss in the science forums) If you want to claim (2) - well, hard shit, you are wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
CK, the claim can be a mixture of 1 and 2 actually.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4158 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
Well yes and no - but as soon as God creates special conditions or you introduce "god dunn it", then what do you need science for?
You just answer "god dunn it" for all the questions - the flood works that way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
So your argument is that if God does do something, science must steadfastly insist He didn't and offer up other explanations even if they are not true?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4158 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
quote: No my argument is that if you want to insist that God did something, then scientists are going to shrug their shoulders and go "great - good for you". Science is not going to "insist" anything about what he did or did not because science cannot test for God, he is beyond science. All of the scientific evidence (in multiple multiple disciplines which when taken together represents a totality that renders the position stupid) indicates that a) the earth is not 5000 years old and b) that the flood did not happen. Why am I going to be looking for or be concerned with intervention of a christian god concept when the physical evidence shows me that the flood never happened?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
randman writes: It is possible to falsify perhaps a certain theory on how the Flood occurred. The theory that the whole earth was flooded has been falsified.The theory that all animals could fit on the ark has been falsified. The theory that all animals could have hypermacroevolved after the flood has been falsified. The theory that all humans are descended from Noah has been falsified. What's left? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Faith writes: it's likely in any case that the number of species involved was appreciably smaller than the number of species countable today, and that those today evolved from the ones on the ark; and certainly very likely that the more delicate or finicky species weren't there, but must have evolved since (Why not? You DO believe in evolution don't you? Yes, we think evolution is what happened. But evolution of all of today's insect species from a base small enough to fit on the Ark more or less unnoticed, in just over 4000 years, is impossible. Such a development would take a lot of time, in the order of millions of years.
OR that God saved insects in some fashion completely apart from Noah, and He has given us no clue how. Or that God created the earth and everything on it yesterday, complete with our memories and history records and all that. Tell me how we should choose which of the two theories to believe. Your theory and mine are examples of ad hoc explanations. As hoc explanations are a no-no in rational debate. "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin. Did you know that most of the time your computer is doing nothing? What if you could make it do something really useful? Like helping scientists understand diseases? Your computer could even be instrumental in finding a cure for HIV/AIDS. Wouldn't that be something? If you agree, then join World Community Grid now and download a simple, free tool that lets you and your computer do your share in helping humanity. After all, you are part of it, so why not take part in it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes, we think evolution is what happened. But evolution of all of today's insect species from a base small enough to fit on the Ark more or less unnoticed, in just over 4000 years, is impossible. Such a development would take a lot of time, in the order of millions of years. Has anybody calculated it out? Seems to me I've read that genetic experiments with insects, such as with fruit flies, produce changes quite rapidly. Also there would have been more potential for change back then, more genetic possibilities. As for your ad hoc explanation and mine, the one to be chosen is the one that fits with the Bible. Yours doesn't. Mine may not either, but that's the idea anywayh.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
But evolution of all of today's insect species from a base small enough to fit on the Ark more or less unnoticed, in just over 4000 years, is impossible. Can you substantiate that?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
He probably shouldn't have said it is impossible. But certainly the onus is upon the person claiming that such hyperevolution did occur to show that it both can and did occur. That is why it is an ad-hoc explanation.
It is not up to him or anyone else to show how it can't happen. Although I am sure a pretty good case can be made that it can't without further ad-hoc conditions being presented such as "greater genetic diversity" which doesn't make ANY sense given that there was only 2 representatives of each species. Apparently according to Faith genetic diversity is not actually stored in genes. Either way, until there is support for it from her, it IS just an ad-hoc explanation. Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given. Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Polyploidy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
Yet more ad-hoc. You cannot even demonstrate that such creatures could survive.
Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
well, the whole ToE is somewhat ad hoc then if asserting that insects could have evolved from a common ancestor is ad hoc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
No, the theory of common decent is based on the construction of nested heirarchies based on EVIDENCE. The TOE does not propose that all insects came from a few pair 4000 years ago so it does not need the ad-hoc addons of polypody, hyperevolution, etc. Regular common breeding and time is enough and that is not too hard to imagine because that is what we see happening today. The problem with Faith's explanation is that it ADDS ad-hoc reasoning and to supplement the LACK of any evidence for the wild hypothesis.
Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024