(September 16, 2016 at 12:20 am)ScienceAf Wrote:(September 15, 2016 at 9:48 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I had to look it up... That is the first time I have heard about Bariminolgy. While I am sure that like anything else; theistic evolution has many different nuances and distinctions within the group, it normally refers to those who believe in theism and many of the ways in which the word evolution is framed.
For me, macroevolution would be the line where I become skeptical, and don't think the claims are very well supported. Granted for a naturalist, who believes that the world and life had a beginning, I do understand where many of the claims are the most reasonable explanation.... I also do not think that evolution is falsifiable under this view.
You become skeptical when macroevultion comes into play?
Good one... you forgot that as a Christian your not really questioning everything. Taking things as you've been told.
But either way.
The only difference between macro and micro evolution is the time span. At least when it was first used.
Man has never popped out of a man ape
Read 2001 a space oddesy, it explains it well.
The only diiferences between macro and microevolution are whatever made up differences creatards ascribe to those two terms, because they created them in the Great Panda Shift of the late eighties in order to try and put on a scientific veneer and get creatardism taught in schools under intelligent design. Science does no use those terms, as while there are a number of mechanisms driving evolution, evolution itself is a single process.
And I am as skeptical of RRs claims to formerly accept evolution. There are gross mischaracterisations replete throughout RRs postings hers showing the only grounding he got in evolution was from a creatard perspective.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home


