[_ Old Earth _] Evolution vs Adaptation

[Donnyboy]

Darwin showed (not proved) that species adapt to their environments. We have also shown (not proven) that gene mutations do happen for all sorts of reasons, including environmental, that cause people and creatures to be quite different. As has been said in another post here, if we believe that mankind has only been around for some 6000 years, that is clearly NOT enough time for us to evolve from single cell entities to a complex living being. So I guess if you are a YEC, you MUST believe in creation with nearly NO evolution.

For the record, I personally don't know what to believe. I am here because I am curious and open minded. And as a spiritual being, I am just as interested in what you think as I am in actually knowing the answers to these difficult questions.

 

[Milk-Drops]

My main thing is that I think people are over thinking the term Evolution. Evolution, at its core, just means change over time. Now I can understand if some people who hold a 6000 year view say that its not enough time. Sure, that is reasonable. Though I think it would be better to say that, said person doesn't believe in common decent.

I personally don't care to much about whether people accept the theory of Evolution. I just want to clear up the misconceptions around the theory.

 

[Vaccine]

Darwin showed (not proved) that species adapt to their environments. We have also shown (not proven) that gene mutations do happen for all sorts of reasons, including environmental, that cause people and creatures to be quite different. As has been said in another post here, if we believe that mankind has only been around for some 6000 years, that is clearly NOT enough time for us to evolve from single cell entities to a complex living being. So I guess if you are a YEC, you MUST believe in creation with nearly NO evolution.

For the record, I personally don't know what to believe. I am here because I am curious and open minded. And as a spiritual being, I am just as interested in what you think as I am in actually knowing the answers to these difficult questions.

Hello DonnyBoy! I once believed in evolution and an old earth. I'm still searching for answers, but some things that got me thinking were DNA being a programming language, the origin of life experiments and this quote by Hoyle regarding the probability of abiogenesis and evolution to higher life forms comparable to "the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747"

More about the math:
http://www.knowtruth.com/god/existence/design_argument_3.php

 

[Free Christian]

Hi DonnyBoy. I too once believed in, partly, evolution. But the things that tipped me, lead me to the truth, was firstly God and trusting in His Word as being true and secondly the probabilities. A bit like Vaccine has shown there with the 747. For just 1 species to have changed into another, evolved, the numbers, of probability, were almost unthinkable. That other things that would take even half those numbers have never taken place ever or are ever likely to has to make one think, "ok that's just for one instance, what about now multiplying that by thousands for all the species of creatures?" For all the genetic info to have lined up just right for this and that considering the other possibilities and ways it could go from mutations and then multiply that by thousands of other needs to go the right way. Would probably take me a year to type the number.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Hi DonnyBoy. I too once believed in, partly, evolution. But the things that tipped me, lead me to the truth, was firstly God and trusting in His Word as being true and secondly the probabilities. A bit like Vaccine has shown there with the 747. For just 1 species to have changed into another, evolved, the numbers, of probability, were almost unthinkable. That other things that would take even half those numbers have never taken place ever or are ever likely to has to make one think, "ok that's just for one instance, what about now multiplying that by thousands for all the species of creatures?" For all the genetic info to have lined up just right for this and that considering the other possibilities and ways it could go from mutations and then multiply that by thousands of other needs to go the right way. Would probably take me a year to type the number.

The problem with Hoyle's little statement about the 747 is that its after the fact. Grab yourself a deck of cards. take the first 8 off the top of the deck. Record the order the cards where drawn. Now do the math of the likelyhood of drawing those cards. I bet you'd come up with a number that is obscene. Guess what though. You drew those 8 cards. Hoyle's numbers aren't based on the possibility of something happening. They are based on the possibility that it will happen again in the exact same way. Also, the 747 analogy is horrible because he is taking and already existing item and that we humans understand how it is built and the processes it takes to build it and making up a humorous, but false analogy.

 

[TOG]

The problem with Hoyle's little statement about the 747 is that its after the fact. Grab yourself a deck of cards. take the first 8 off the top of the deck. Record the order the cards where drawn. Now do the math of the likelyhood of drawing those cards. I bet you'd come up with a number that is obscene. Guess what though. You drew those 8 cards. Hoyle's numbers aren't based on the possibility of something happening. They are based on the possibility that it will happen again in the exact same way. Also, the 747 analogy is horrible because he is taking and already existing item and that we humans understand how it is built and the processes it takes to build it and making up a humorous, but false analogy.

The probability of drawing any 8 given cards in a specific order out of a normal deck of 52 card is just under 1 : 3*10¹³. That's not quite as obscene as the probability mentioned in Vaccine's link, which is 1 : 10⁴⁰⁰⁰⁰.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Hi DonnyBoy. I too once believed in, partly, evolution. But the things that tipped me, lead me to the truth, was firstly God and trusting in His Word as being true and secondly the probabilities. A bit like Vaccine has shown there with the 747. For just 1 species to have changed into another, evolved, the numbers, of probability, were almost unthinkable. That other things that would take even half those numbers have never taken place ever or are ever likely to has to make one think, "ok that's just for one instance, what about now multiplying that by thousands for all the species of creatures?" For all the genetic info to have lined up just right for this and that considering the other possibilities and ways it could go from mutations and then multiply that by thousands of other needs to go the right way. Would probably take me a year to type the number.

The problem with Hoyle's little statement about the 747 is that its after the fact. Grab yourself a deck of cards. take the first 8 off the top of the deck. Record the order the cards where drawn. Now do the math of the likelyhood of drawing those cards. I bet you'd come up with a number that is obscene. Guess what though. You drew those 8 cards. Hoyle's numbers aren't based on the possibility of something happening. They are based on the possibility that it will happen again in the exact same way. Also, the 747 analogy is horrible because he is taking and already existing item and that we humans understand how it is built and the processes it takes to build it and making up a humorous, but false analogy.

That is an excellent explanation, Meatballsub. We aren't surprised if they don't get, though, are we? How can we expect them to accept the Theory of Evolution, when they can't even see how monotheistic Judaism evolved from polytheistic Canaanite mythology and other mythologies? These people won't accept the Theory of Evolution, the Big Bang Theory, the Age of the Universe, or why God in the Bible is referred to as "Elohim" by one writer and "YHWH" by another.

 

[Vaccine]

Grab yourself a deck of cards.

Hello MBS, Hoyle's analogy was referring to abiogenesis. In other words, where did the deck of cards even come from? The analogy is very apt when talking about the origin of life.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Hello MBS, Hoyle's analogy was referring to abiogenesis.

Not really. Hoyle is using math based on a modern cell. Abiogenesis doesn't state a modern cell was formed. Abiogenesis is a hypothesis that explains a possible way that the basic proteins that build primitive cells can bond and make primitive cells. Like I stated, Hoyle isn't stating about abiogenesis in general, but a very specific type of abiogenesis.

In other words, where did the deck of cards even come from?

Its an anology that shows that any event can be shown to be impossibly unlikely.

The analogy is very apt when talking about the origin of life.

Except the part where its not about creating a foundation for life. Instead is talking about specific life.