Alternatives to Evolution

Originally posted by twhitehead
There are a number of people on this site (and around the world) who don't accept the Theory of Evolution as being a viable explanation for the development of life as we know it.
However, I am yet to hear even one of them give a viable alternative explanation. The ID folks concentrate on criticizing evolution and saying "that cant happen" or "that is imp ...[text shortened]... in every single mutation? Or do you actually accept that evolution is taking place?

the diversity comes from the different places people are born, in hot places they have darker skin etc.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
the diversity comes from the different places people are born, in hot places they have darker skin etc.

So it's not genetic? Why then do African Americans have black kids then?

Originally posted by twhitehead
There are a number of people on this site (and around the world) who don't accept the Theory of Evolution as being a viable explanation for the development of life as we know it.
However, I am yet to hear even one of them give a viable alternative explanation. The ID folks concentrate on criticizing evolution and saying "that cant happen" or "that is imp in every single mutation? Or do you actually accept that evolution is taking place?

I don't reject the science behind evolution, but what I do reject are some of the assumptions made regarding the scientific findings. The main assumption of coarse is that there is no divine instigator or overseer of the process. We are either left with "Goddunnit" or "nothindunit".

Likewise, I do not reject scripture and the creation account, rather, I reject the assumptions made about creation and the creation account in regards to the assumed impossibility that God chose to use an evolutionary process to help him create.

I think that those who believe in God have a better view of the power behind the "life process" and those that study science have a better understanding of the mechanisms of those "life processes". Each has a slice of the truth that both reject the other as having.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Or the sad state of evolution.
Kelly

I'm assuming you're posting things of this nature in the other thread, which is too large now for someone new to reasonably contribute without spending hours reading the whole thing. That being said:

There are MOUNTAINS of evidence for evolution of living creatures over time. The evidence is overwelming; insurmountably in favor of it. It is a FACT. It has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen. Now, if it is a religious issue for you, let me point out that science and evolution have NO OPINION on the origins of life. But it does have answers on how the life we see around us came to be the way it is. 99.9% of scientists accept evolution as undeniably true and upwards of 70% of them consider themselves religious. There is NO inherent incompatibility between a belief in a supreme being and acceptance of evolution as the scientific fact that it is. Choosing not to believe doesn't make it untrue. Not believing in gravity idoesn't mean you can jump off a cliff and fly.

99% of people I've met that disagree with evolution misunderstand it...often from being deliberately fed misinformation, but also from being victims of a poor science curriculum. I fear you are one of these people.

Originally posted by whodey
I don't reject the science behind evolution, but what I do reject are some of the assumptions made regarding the scientific findings. The main assumption of coarse is that there is no divine instigator or overseer of the process. We are either left with "Goddunnit" or "nothindunit".

Likewise, I do not reject scripture and the creation account, rather, I ...[text shortened]... "life processes". Each has a slice of the truth that both reject the other as having.

The main assumption of coarse is that there is no divine instigator or overseer of the process. We are either left with "Goddunnit" or "nothindunit".

Or Elvesdunnit, or SpaghettiMonsterdunnit, etc etc. Or any combination.

Now, let's assume Godunnit, and let's talk about where God came from. There is either "Metagoddunnit" or "SpaghettiMonsterdunnit" or "Elvesdunnit" or "nuthindunnit" etc etc.

These assumptions could go on forever. You can add any number of beings into any explanation. The example my Philosophy 1 professor used was an analogy involving the clock on the wall.

We know where the clock was made and by who. We know what the physics are that allow the clock to work. We know the power source is electricity and we know where the electricity came from. Now what, besides the mechanics and the electricity, moves the hands? Why, invisible clock elves dunnit of course! Or unicornsdunnit. Or SpaghettiMonsterdunnit. Or Goddunnit.

Adding a god into the mechanisms of evolution is equivalent to adding elves to the mechanism of the clock...or the mechanisms which determine which way the wind blows...etc.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]The main assumption of coarse is that there is no divine instigator or overseer of the process. We are either left with "Goddunnit" or "nothindunit".

Or Elvesdunnit, or SpaghettiMonsterdunnit, etc etc. Or any combination.

Now, let's assume Godunnit, and let's talk about where God came from. There is either "Metagoddunnit" or "SpaghettiMon ...[text shortened]... m of the clock...or the mechanisms which determine which way the wind blows...etc.[/b]

Whether or not you add God to the mix or add "nothingness" to the mix, you have to realize that you must take a leap of faith to accept either notion. Science cannot prove or disprove either proposition, therefore, choose your poisen.

Originally posted by whodey
Whether or not you add God to the mix or add "nothingness" to the mix, you have to realize that you must take a leap of faith to accept either notion. Science cannot prove or disprove either proposition, therefore, choose your poisen.

I'll chose the most parsimonious one (no God).

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So it's not genetic? Why then do African Americans have black kids then?

you know what i meant, the diversity comes from the different places in the world, and genetics pass it down. why does it have to be african americans anyways? you couldve said any other race.

Originally posted by amannion
What no one ever seems to discuss with this Noah rubbish is how viable populations of all species arose from just two individuals?
I mean, if a species on Earth today has only two individuals left - they're goners, and considered so. The lack of genetic diversity in two makes the likelihood of viability just about zero.
How did Noah get around this?

Don't worry. All the rubbish has been tossed. It doesnt' matter. It just happened. Their mom said so, or their pastor said so, but in the end God said so, so there.

I think it's a sorry way to live, but hey i'm not a xian so big deal.

Originally posted by whodey
I don't reject the science behind evolution, but what I do reject are some of the assumptions made regarding the scientific findings. The main assumption of coarse is that there is no divine instigator or overseer of the process. We are either left with "Goddunnit" or "nothindunit".

Actually, the science behind evolution doesn't factor in the supernatural since by definition it is unobservable by current scientific methods. Therefore,it is incorrect to state that evolutionary theory assumes there is no "divine instigator". Evolutionary Science doesn't address "supernatural intervention" at all, and from what I've read the data doesn't need to...even when creationists conflate "evolution" with "abiogenesis".

As for what we are left with...you say "goddunnit", I say "a host of environmental, biological, chemical and other natural factors including societal may have led life on this planet to where we are now". Not quite "nothing", I'm sure you'll agree.

Originally posted by genius
i found an online bible-and i must have been imagining it. can't think where i got it from!

This is in the Greek mythology flood, after Zeus wiped out humanity because they were a bunch of conniving a-holes. He save the two most holy people he could find, and they recreated mankind by tossing rocks over their shoulders.

Originally posted by Poison Godmachine
I'm assuming you're posting things of this nature in the other thread, which is too large now for someone new to reasonably contribute without spending hours reading the whole thing. That being said:

There are MOUNTAINS of evidence for evolution of living creatures over time. The evidence is overwelming; insurmountably in favor of it. It is a FA t also from being victims of a poor science curriculum. I fear you are one of these people.

The fact is we see small changes, now how far those changes have
been taking life forms is not a fact, but a matter of belief as far as
our knowledge is concern. That is true without bringing in any religious
text, it is simply the way it is. You want to assume that 99.9% of
scientists accept evolution, okay by me, depending on how you use
that word I accept it too. That does not mean that everyone accepts
as a 'fact' that all life started at some simple level without any plan,
purpose, or design and just through all the natural processes life goes
through, evolved into the variety we see today.

I'd say you have your own fair share of misinformation pulsing through
your belief system as well if you honestly believe your’99.9%’ numbers
and some of the other things you are attempting to pass off as truth too.
Kelly

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]The main assumption of coarse is that there is no divine instigator or overseer of the process. We are either left with "Goddunnit" or "nothindunit".

Or Elvesdunnit, or SpaghettiMonsterdunnit, etc etc. Or any combination.

Now, let's assume Godunnit, and let's talk about where God came from. There is either "Metagoddunnit" or "SpaghettiMon ...[text shortened]... m of the clock...or the mechanisms which determine which way the wind blows...etc.[/b]

Since you have never seen life molded completely from
non-living material without any direction from anything before,
how do you know what is, or is not required? You don't know,
but you are more than willing to make a judgment on the
truthfulness of what you believe is true.
Kelly

Originally posted by David C
As for what we are left with...you say "goddunnit", I say "a host of environmental, biological, chemical and other natural factors including societal may have led life on this planet to where we are now". Not quite "nothing", I'm sure you'll agree.[/b]

No I don't agree. After all, those natural factors seem to have burst out of thin air, no? You then have the oppurtunity to say that those natural factors are eternal just as I have the oppurtunity to say that God is also eternal who created those natural factors.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I'll chose the most parsimonious one (no God).

Parsimonious? Don't you mean pellmell?