(January 1, 2017 at 4:49 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(January 1, 2017 at 2:59 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The "beating the snot out of each other" metric is common through out nature...
Incorrect. Survival is the metric.
Quote:Also I doesn't take a scientist to figure out that gmo's and processed foods likely have a negative impact on our biology, for example young girls are reaching puberty much earlier than they used to.
http://www.sciencealert.com/girls-are-go...rm-effects
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/02/06/puber...01920.html
Quote:The above is an example of what I mean by de-evolution, and by devolving I simply mean the human biology going in a negative direction.
But that is not any expression of evolutionary motion. That is a physiological response to the environment, and its heritability hasn't been demonstrated. For this reason it gives your argument no support.
Ah, but your definition of evolution and mine are two separate things.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you believe that all life evolved from a common ancestor; I believe each species evolved from an ancestor of the same species, and of those two scenarios, only the latter is demonstrable.
If we use dog breeding as an example (since speciation can be achieved through animal husbandry), in order to create a new breed of dog, you would inbreed in order to fix desirable traits, but there is a point where continued inbreeding becomes too risky.
If we follow the narrative of the Bible, God originally created man, and in order for man to reproduce they had to inbreed. This was not a problem for them since they were the beginning of the species. Nowadays inbreeding with your sister is wrong and is highly likely to have negative effects.
So that being the case, we can ONLY go in a negative direction, heck according to scripture didn't man used to live upwards of 900 years?
So when I say we "devolved" know that I'm always referring to evolution from a biblical stand point, whether you agree with it or not...