Creationism and Ignorance

[Whateverist]

But changes in the genome (alleles) don't necessarily lead to changes in taxonomy - eg, melanistic jaguars are still jaguars and not a new species of "black panther".  As long as it's clear that speciation isn't a goal or anything (since creationists love to imbue intention on naturalistic processes), I think that'd fit in.

"Non-random changes in allele frequencies in populations over time, directed by natural selection and/other factors that may lead to speciation/taxonomy changes." Seems pretty neat.  Emphasizes non-randomness, changes in the genome, and notes natural selection as an important driver, and that speciation MAY occur.

Again see your point 

And yes non random is really important as how many creationists have tried the whole "evolution is just random chance " 'Or that whole tornado in a junk yard nonsense .

But the mutations are essentially random (though truly random is hard to find).  It is the selection process which is not random.

[Amarok]

@Tiz: shouldn't science give the most accurate definitions, without concern for how creationists might spin them?

It's odd that science in one breath says creationism isn't a player, but in the next is afraid of what they might do next.

Not really.  We're just thinking of ways to make evolution more understandable to the public - and simple, concise, and accurate definitions are the best for that.

Which is frequently undermined by creationists .They may not be intellectual players but they are good at distorting the facts . Truth needs rigorous safeguards against such efforts

[FatAndFaithless]

Again see your point 

And yes non random is really important as how many creationists have tried the whole "evolution is just random chance " 'Or that whole tornado in a junk yard nonsense .

But the mutations are essentially random (though truly random is hard to find).  It is the selection process which is not random.

Right, and the changes in populations over time relies on this non-random selection process.

[Amarok]

Again see your point 

And yes non random is really important as how many creationists have tried the whole "evolution is just random chance " 'Or that whole tornado in a junk yard nonsense .

But the mutations are essentially random (though truly random is hard to find).  It is the selection process which is not random.

True but they rarely mean just mutations .

[Whateverist]

Evolution was more plausible design argument wise in the past so why didn't most societies believe in it? Because philosophically it's impossible, but, now it's not even plausible knowing the confinements they have to work with design wise, I know it's impossible scientifically  design wise aside from why it's impossible philosophically.  The Bible proves why it's philosophically impossible. While now with science, we can even know it being design wise impossible.

Not address to you, MK.  But I ask the rest of you, is this the kind of noise we could shut out in a civil/pink sub-forum.  If so, where do I sign?

[FatAndFaithless]

Was thinking the same thing Whatev. This is actually an enjoyable conversation, and then MK comes in and tries to spread shit.

[Whateverist]

Was thinking the same thing Whatev.  This is actually an enjoyable conversation, and then MK comes in and tries to spread shit.

More like babbling nonsense.

[Mystic]

Some systems are not irreducibly complex. Some systems are. That is my summary of why evolution is impossible design wise. Philosophically, it has to do with the light of God and things needing to be created in truth.

Both of these are good reasons Christians provide, but too many Christians are intimidated by ignorant Atheists claiming to be objective, so they will never know how obvious it is the design of creation both scientifically and philosophically.

[Anomalocaris]

"Non-random changes in allele frequencies in populations over time, directed by natural selection and/other factors that may lead to speciation/taxonomy changes." Seems pretty neat.  Emphasizes non-randomness, changes in the genome, and notes natural selection as an important driver, and that speciation MAY occur.

Drift is random.

Yes, but what lives and reproduces isn’t random.

[Whateverist]

Some systems are not irreducibly complex. Some systems are. That is my summary of why evolution is impossible design wise. Philosophically, it has to do with the light of God and things needing to be created in truth.

Both of these are good reasons Christians provide, but too many Christians are intimidated by ignorant Atheists claiming to be objective, so they will never know how obvious it is the design of creation both scientifically and philosophically.

Okay that's my daily maximum junk thoughts for one day.  Peace out.  I'll leave the stage to the feces tosser.