Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Evolution or intellegent design?
02-04-2009, 03:10 AM
Post: #1
Evolution or intellegent design?
Ok folks im probbably going to open pandoras box here but...

I was having a discussion with a friend when he piped up with the question
"how do stem cells know which organs to become?" and at the time i couldnt answer this. since them with a little research ive learned that while we dont have a complete understanding of it yet we understand that it is a complex (to this mans mind at least) combinitions of different proteins.

But long story short this has got me wondering what creationism viewpoints are as to creation and the scientific evidence for it.

and since were putting creationism on the chopping block, lets put his good buddy and rival right up there next to him and ask Whats evolutions viewpoints are to our orgins and the scientific evidence for it?

So people....

Begin!

"Perhaps you've seen them only then you've just believed
And when they're fleeing then you feel you've been deceived
But in that feeling something ancient's been retrieved"
-Jack Hardy
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2009, 05:27 AM (This post was last modified: 02-04-2009 05:30 AM by Annolennar.)
Post: #2
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
Mind if I toss in my monkeywrench right at the get-go? Smile

"Intelligent design" is not synonymous with "creationism".

-

I personally believe in both intelligent design and evolution, and have no problem with doing so. In fact, all relevant statistics I've seen indicate that biblical literalists are a minority among even American Christians (albeit quite a vocal minority!).

That said, 'theistic evolution' and its attached theories of intelligent design seem to satisfy most of the objections of both hardline creationists and hardline evolutionists.

It accepts what scientific fact plainly tells us, based on the fossil record, observed biological phenomena, etc... : that roughly four and a half billion years ago the Earth formed from the Sun's accretion disk; that eventually the crust cooled and the atmosphere and oceans formed; that at some point simple single cell organisms arose from RNA molecules; and so on and so forth as natural selection refines RNA into DNA into proto-cells into simple cells into complex cells into multicellular organisms into simple animals into complex animals until eventually we end up here today, trying to figure out how it all happened.

It also accepts Biblical truth (albeit not with the interpretation that fundamentalists and literalists are likely to prefer): that God created all these things; that He set forth the laws by which the universe works and the roles that various parts of creation fill; that Genesis, when read without presupposition, does not tell a scientific account, but rather an account of the above roles and laws as part of God's plan and how humanity fits into that plan and relates to the roles and laws set forth.

Finally, it satisfies the philosophical conundrums that you inevitably run into with both radical Creationism and atheistic evolution: the necessity of a "First Cause" or "Unmoved Mover"; why God would create a world that so obviously shows the evidence of several billion years of evolution (and give us the intellect to figure that out) if it were really only six thousand years old; and any concerns of entropy versus irreducible complexity.

So, the evidence/basis for theistic evolution et al? Well, virtually all of scientific pursuit, sound logic, a solid philosophical grounding, and proper understanding of the Bible.

If you should see evident sins or defects, draw out of those thorns the rose; perceiving, moreover, that such apparent sinners may frequently have a good intention, for no one can judge the secrets of the heart of man.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2009, 12:52 PM (This post was last modified: 02-04-2009 12:53 PM by grunfeld.)
Post: #3
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
(02-04-2009 03:10 AM)Urthred Wrote:  I was having a discussion with a friend when he piped up with the question
"how do stem cells know which organs to become?"

They don't know anything, of course. It's not like a stem cell knows, "I'm need to become a T cell, so let me get moving on that goal".

They become different cell types through the process of differentiation, which results from differential gene expression. The cues as to which genes to express, and when, where, and how much, and which ones to suppress, usually come from outside the individual cell, from surrounding cells/tissue. Reciprocal interactions can occur where, loosely speaking, cell A "tells" cell B to change in some way, and then in return, cell B "tells" cell A to change (reciprocal induction).


(02-04-2009 03:10 AM)Urthred Wrote:  But long story short this has got me wondering what creationism viewpoints are as to creation and the scientific evidence for it.

There is no scientific evidence supporting Creation. On the other hand, there is plenty of scientific evidence that refutes it.


(02-04-2009 03:10 AM)Urthred Wrote:  and since were putting creationism on the chopping block, lets put his good buddy and rival right up there next to him and ask Whats evolutions viewpoints are to our orgins and the scientific evidence for it?

Like all other extant life, humans have an evolutionary origin. Common ancestry is not a mere assumption: many verifiable evidences support it. The 96 – 99% identity between the human and chimp genomes, with us then being slightly less related to gorillas, then to orangutans, then to monkeys, etc,; the presence of a postanal tail, notochord, premaxillary bone, pharyngeal slits, and fish-like arrangement of aortic arches, in our embryos; the fusion of 2 ancestral ape chromosomes to create human chromosome 2; derived shared characteristics (such as trichromatic vision); phylogenetic trees based on sequences of the GULO pseudogene and other DNA sequences; the shared 55-bp deletion that disabled the GBA gene in humans, chimps, and gorillas, whereas orangutans have a functional GBA gene without the 55-bp deletion; the presence-absence pattern of 100 SINEs; the shared presence and matching locations of numerous retroelements (which could have inserted just about anywhere in the genome if they transposed independently in the different, allegedly genetically unrelated species) – for example, 7 Alu retroelements in and just outside of the beta globin cluster in humans and chimps, and the HERV-K’s; etc.

What’s the alternative? God creating the same non-functional genes (pseudogenes) in humans, mice, and rats, and doing so in a manner that gives the false appearance of neutral evolution? And for God also to have created the same retroelements in the same locations in humans and chimps in order to deceive scientists into believing the “lie” of common ancestry? God creating mutations in the GULO pseudogene across multiple species in just the right manner to produce a false phylogeny that indicates common ancestry? And so on? This turns God into a great deceiver.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2009, 02:54 PM
Post: #4
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
turns God into a great deviever,how can you decieve a human if they don,t ask for the answers.

Good evil salvation
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2009, 10:01 PM
Post: #5
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
(02-04-2009 02:54 PM)smellycat Wrote:  turns God into a great deviever,how can you decieve a human if they don,t ask for the answers.

If evolution is wrong, then God is a Great Deceiver for planting all kinds of misleading evidence, all over the natural world.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2009, 02:33 AM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2009 02:36 AM by smellycat.)
Post: #6
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
God is an artist look around you,not everything has to be acceptable of the clay.
thinks grunfield wants put God into a box.?lol.

Good evil salvation
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2009, 11:27 AM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2009 11:31 AM by grunfeld.)
Post: #7
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
(02-05-2009 02:33 AM)smellycat Wrote:  God is an artist look around you,not everything has to be acceptable of the clay.

Clay schmay.

If evolution is not right, then God is a Great Deceiver for planting so much misleading evidence throughout living organisms and the rest of natural world.

If you want to worship Satan, so be it.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2009, 11:39 AM
Post: #8
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
there is written in scripture about planting the Good seed,and an enemy planting also.so opinions about evolution,etc.can,t prove anything for or aggainst until we find truth.the truth is very difficult to find,Christ came to save us.

Good evil salvation
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2009, 12:13 PM
Post: #9
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
(02-05-2009 11:39 AM)smellycat Wrote:  there is written in scripture about planting the Good seed,and an enemy planting also.so opinions about evolution,etc.can,t prove anything for or aggainst until we find truth.the truth is very difficult to find,Christ came to save us.


If evolution is not right, then God is a Great Deceiver for planting so much misleading evidence throughout living organisms and the rest of natural world.

If you want to worship Satan, so be it.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2009, 12:45 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2009 12:45 PM by smellycat.)
Post: #10
RE: Evolution or intellegent design?
so if man went to mars and replenished it what would you say to the people of how it begun.?
there is lots we need to learn.

Good evil salvation
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)