How do you explain this without some form of evolution?
How do you explain this without some form of evolution?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Cross-mixing by selective breeding.
in what sense is that evolution?... the dogs you posted cant even breathe properly.
its called "selective breeding", retard.
>Some form of.
Which falls under evolution. The fact that something like a Wolf can be changed intellectually, socially and physically into an abomination like a Pug shows just how far it can go.
>"Evolution may be defined as any net directional change or any cumulative change in the characteristics of organisms or populations over many generations."
>Evolution may be defined
may be is not "evolution IS"
if you use "may be" then you can say anything without it actually being what youre saying.
this post may be considered the final and true end to the thread.
Selective Breeding is Evolution but fast forwarded and headed with a human goal (good or bad) in mind. Like how modern horses make ancient ones look scrawny and weak. In nature, the same kind of generation change would happen except a lot slower without a human to control things and the only "goal" involved there is to see which combination would let the creature spread its genes efficiently.
>Selective Breeding is Evolution
lie
Evolution is only the concept of change in populations. Natural selection is the mechanism proposed by Darwin to explain how evolution happens. Evolution can and does still occur via artificial selection and random selection.
>re-define evolution so that it's just common sense and doesn't contradict creation
>"why doesn't everyone believe in evolution?"
Do evolutionists really?
Evolution isn't an ideology like you keep trying to make it out to be. Evolution is a change in heritable characteristics of organisms over successive generations. Nothing more, nothing less. Anything else is you just projecting your contemporary political issues onto an ideology that does not exist.
If that's what evolution is, then evolution is perfectly consistent with biblical creationism. But that's not all evolution is evolution postulates that molecules became men.
evolution postulates that molecules became men.
That's abiogenesis. You can accept evolution without accepting abiogenesis. They are two different theories.
>molecules became men.
Why is that more ridiculous than "gametes became men" or "man was made out of clay" for that matter
‘Some form of evolution’ You are referring to is basic Mendelian genetics and inheritable traits (Mendel was a Catholic priest by the way)
The problem is can not explain going from random molecules and proteins and arriving at dog. It dos not math. Beautiful theory but inadequate to explain origins of life
Abiotic synthesis of amino acid bruh
Evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis
>The problem is can not explain going from random molecules and proteins and arriving at dog.
Doesn't need to. First organism could have been created by God or engineered by aliens or simply formed out of self-assembling proteins, it literally doesn't matter.
>Beautiful theory but inadequate to explain origins of life
It's the most "adequate" explanation we have that is congruent with the realities of living organisms, and far better to past "explanations" like "let the earth bring forth..."
That's the part that always ducks my head.
In no way is the theory of evolution incompatible with religion or even intelligent design. Just say God guided evolution and it was his will. So easy. It seems like a weird hill to die on for a particularly dense subset of Christians.
>In no way is the theory of evolution incompatible with religion
cope, it's completely incompatible with the genesis account which is that animals and men were created fully formed. there's no room for evolution there no matter how much you want to mental backflip your way out of it with muh allegory
>or even intelligent design
why would you use the gradual process of billions of years of selection, wiping out 99.9999% of all species along the way and intervening with meteors to kill off the dinosaurs in order to make way for mammals just to achieve an imperfect result instead of doing what the bible says god did? why did single celled bacteria just exist for like a billion years before becoming multicellular? is every mutation a divine act or only the good ones?
it seems highly inefficient, contrived, and also misleading to any conscious life that arises and looks back on it.
Was there literally a plank of wood in that guy's eye? Was there literally a prodigal son who returned to his father?
A literal interpretation of the Creation account is not only unnecessary, its irrelevant.
why would you use the gradual process of billions of years of selection, wiping out 99.9999% of all species along the way and intervening with meteors to kill off the dinosaurs in order to make way for mammals just to achieve an imperfect result instead of doing what the bible says god did? why did single celled bacteria just exist for like a billion years before becoming multicellular? is every mutation a divine act or only the good ones?
Why would he not use the material laws of the universe to create?
why stop there then, jesus is an allegory, god is an allegory, it's all made up. what makes them more real than anything else in the bible?
moreover why is jesus necessary if adam didn't actually eat the forbidden fruit and bring sin into the world, and why is the garden of eden given a geographical location in genesis?
>Why would he not use the material laws of the universe to create?
because it doesn't make any sense to use such an indirect, messy, and seemingly chancy method of creating humans. if he could make the universe then he could make humans. there's literally no reason to not just make humans ex nihilo, actually intelligently designed, without any of those vestigial features, and immune to all disease and negative mutations.
also I'd mention the suffering that natural selection would cause but I'm actually open to the idea that suffering/consciousness is a recent phenomenon
No, because those things need to literally happen in order for the Bible to mean anything. the Creation account being a poetic demonstration instead of a blow by blow account of everything that happened doesn't take anything away from the point of the passage, that God created the Heavens and the Earth. There's already clear allegory in the Bible, its not like every single passage is meant to be taken literally, so why are you pretending like it has to be kept literally sanctified or else le slippery slope?
>because it doesn't make any sense to use such an indirect, messy, and seemingly chancy method of creating humans
Maybe to you it seems that way lol.
>there's literally no reason to not just make humans ex nihilo
I'm very happy God created a world for me with this much history and depth.
> going from random molecules and proteins and arriving at dog
"I don't know how this happened so I'm gonna make up an invisible omniscient being to explain it"
>not him but
Yes, its the only explanation for Consciousness
Alright guys it’s that time of day to tell Christians that evolution and abiogenesis are separate concepts
Inferior specie
I'm pretty sure this rebunks Lamarck
Selective breeding, smoothbrain
Artificial selection still causes change in population allele frequency which is evolution. Evolution occurs via both natural and human driven selection