Most evolutionists hinge on some belief about shared ancestry. This DOES NOT prove evolution. It's backwards. There is NO evidence for a working, functional evolution. And, in fact, all of the "evidence" for common ancestry can be attributed to common Design elements. If you can't solve the problem going forward, to where it actually becomes useful, and real, then you believe in a new age fairy tale, taken all together. A false religion of so-called science that is a DILLUSION. Fate is not without a sense of irony, I suppose. The Bible has always made the same claim about what it is, and where it comes from, and still stands firm on testable, repeatable, observable scientific phenomena.
Comments (76)
sorted by:
Is it possible that we don't understand how anything works, including the rules, and we have a very primitive understanding of reality?
YES - its likely. We know very little.
Ok and evolution has nothing to do with physics. Its just like...there. yes maybe God isn't guiding everything. Or maybe God is. Maybe everything in existence is set up so we purposefully will never understand it. Because God wills it
Not true at all. All of science is physics. Physics is just the set of rules that describe the basic operations the universe.
And if a god is playing games to make it look like it does not exist - great. It has nothing to do with what I can know about this universe.
Quantum physics does not line up with regular physics. Don't bullshit me. Its all flawed and wrong and humans might not be even able to conceive what actually 'reality' even is
Ok then explain to me, on a physics level, what drives evolution. I suppose thats just how it works, right? But why
'Ok like, some how bacteria or some shit spontaneously combusted in the mud, right, then it all, like, totally started striving forth and now we have like skyscrapers and shit. Gnarly!'
But just because we don't know everything does not mean we cannot build models about the world based on what information we have.
So, what models exist that make Darwinian predictions?
I use evolutionary algorithms every day in software engineering. You can put a fast replicating low load organism like yeast onto a task to evolve say an ability to process a chemical like lactase. The code for it is not in the initial spawned runs - but if you break off batches and increase the amount of lactose slowly - and cross breed the best surviving lineages - eventually you will hit upon a family of them that can process the lactose.
This is just because there is constant random drift. When a selection pressure - like the existence of a food source is available in a food scarce context, a geographic barrier, a container barrier - really anything that challenges organisms in a population ---- over time the ones that remain will be the descendants of ever better survivors in the selection context.
Its not really a hard idea to understand and requires no magic or force of god. Its built into the nature of reality. If I was a god - I would use evolution too because its so simple and explores an IMMENSE problem space in a massively parallel manner.
You sound like a programmer. Yes, there is a mutation problem. It's funny, though, you mention you're a software engineer. . . So, let's look at this for a second. Let's have it your way. . . let evolution be true. Now, shouldn't we be able to create software that "reproduces" and combines, and builds, and organizes on orders faster than normal biological reproduction, following the same structural growth of biological evolution, but for software? Where is it? Haven't figured it out yet? Or is there some "magic" you suppose that's in raw matter? Bud, there's nothing there. We're dust, and this all only makes sense with God at the beginning and helm of it all. You're building a house of cards and hiding behind technical babble. Evolution does not happen. You cannot show one single proof that evolution happens in the sense you believe.
And sorry, it is perfectly legitimate to ask what an animals is "turning into." Yes, I know we have conventions to categorize everything, blah blah blah, but everything (that is, EVERYTHING) is fully function, doing just what it was designed to do in its environment.
So, you know, think about it, there's a thing called luck. In all of the billions and trillions of living things that have existed, why has there never been something that survived despite having poor form with it's environment? Or that just eeked out an existence, but would be clearly seen as not very well adapted? Oh, because you have this theory about "survival of the fittest?" Okay, how do I measure that? Just look at humans today. Plenty of us survive, despite not being the best of the best of the best. So, where are all these creatures that are just not quite so perfect in their environment? They just all died, I guess. None of their fossils were preserved, though. Only the best of the best is what we see. If evolution were true (which is most definitely not) the world would look like a huge disgusting mess (and that's allowing an actual mechanism for it to even work). And this should especially speak to you, considering how you talk of all things being singular, and in some stage of transition. It'd be a huge mess. You haven't really tried your theory out. But the world is beautiful, and we all see it, and know that God is behind it all.
I will leave you with a video. I feel like if we have no baseline then there's not much point, so if you watch it, I'll respond. Otherwise, I'll leave it at this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU7Lww-sBPg
Please, pretty please, tell me why this guy is wrong.
Does not mean we will ever understand. Science vs. God. Who will win
Odin