Evolution and Genesis

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I do not believe the claim that mankind is a direct descendant from a primordial single-celled animal is a open and shut case.

Do you believe that mice as direct descendants from primordial single-celled animals is an open and shut case?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I do not believe the claim that mankind is a direct descendant from a primordial single-celled animal is an open and shut case.

Indy does not believe in evolution. What he's doing is what Adam has accused Tex of doing. He's chickening out.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

This is irreconcilable with the evidence supporting evolution/natural selection/random mutation/speciation whatever you want to call it as presently understood by the mainstream scientific community. Emphasis is on randomness.

What you are is a freaking primitive biblical literalist purveyor of creationism in modern clothing.

If you believe that mankind is in the image of God, meaning we have the same anatomical features, then it is mathematically impossible to conclude that a myriad of "random" mutations over the course of billions of years would produce a life form that ended up looking like the guy that set the oven to 450 degrees and went out for a very long walk.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I do not believe the claim that mankind is a direct descendant from a primordial single-celled animal is an open and shut case.

Do you believe that mitochondria within our cells are the descendants of primitive "bacteria" which entered into a symbiotic relationship with more advanced cells, and that these mitochrondia have their own "bacteria-style" genomes and "bacteria-style" protein synthesis machinery?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Do you believe that mitochondria within our cells are the descendants of primitive "bacteria" which entered into a symbiotic relationship with more advanced cells, and that these mitochrondia have their own "bacteria-style" genomes and "bacteria-style" protein synthesis machinery?

I believe there are certain microscopic and anatomical blueprints that have been proven to work.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

If you believe that mankind is in the image of God, meaning we have the same anatomical features, then it is mathematically impossible to conclude that a myriad of "random" mutations over the course of billions of years would produce a life form that ended up looking like the guy set the oven to 450 degrees and went out for a very long walk.

All mutations are random and easy to describe mathematically.

What mutations are selected for is also ultimately random, but selection depends on much more complex interactions that are more difficult to describe mathematically.

But if you envision a "clock maker" God who knows the result of any given set of circumstances, then you could conclude that the human body is the result of a set of circumstances that he knew would lead to a certain outcome. I think the important point is that God breathed a "soul" into our physical forms.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

If you believe that mankind is in the image of God, meaning we have the same anatomical features

LOL. Is it an open and shut case that this is so? Like I said, you're a freaking creationist. Just belly up and admit what you are. If you believe "it is mathematically impossible to conclude that a myriad of 'random' mutations over the course of billions of years would produce a [given] life form" that's what you are. You're outed.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I believe there are certain microscopic and anatomical blueprints that have been proven to work.

I don't understand what you're saying.

The point is that in every single one of your cells there is a little organelle which is an evolutionary descendant of a bacterium. I'm wondering how you reconcile that with your doubt of human evolution.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

If you believe that mankind is in the image of God, meaning we have the same anatomical features, then it is mathematically impossible to conclude that a myriad of "random" mutations over the course of billions of years would produce a life form that ended up looking like the guy that set the oven to 450 degrees and went out for a very long walk.

I think you're missing the point that evolution truly is a science that can be described mathematically.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

LOL. Is it an open and shut case that this is so? Like I said, you're a freaking creationist. Just belly up and admit what you are. If you believe "it is mathematically impossible to conclude that a myriad of 'random' mutations over the course of billions of years would produce a [given] life form" that's what you are. You're outed.

If you believe in the "man is in God's image" premise, then I'd be curious how you can mathematically justify the cumulative sum of random mutations producing a person in God's image was a mathematical certainty.

If you don't believe in the intial premise, then the argument is completely moot.