why do some theists believe in Darwinian evolution?

[786]

786,



Yes, but everytime I have encountered someone who made that claim, asked about why they believe they refer to some religious text at some point.

Ask them to define the god they believe in.

Okay, but talk about the present. Does it not justify the OP question. Theist are still compatible with evolution...

 

[AlexG]

So all humans share about 250 genes that are found no were else on earth because of evolution? .

98% of those genes are shared by chimpanzes.

 

[AlexG]

so what was the point?

If you read it, you'll see that there are thousands of random mutations which take place in the fly.

Or are you going to claim they're all divinely ordained?

 

[786]

If you read it, you'll see that there are thousands of random mutations which take place in the fly.

Or are you going to claim they're all divinely ordained?

None of them are 'shown to be random'... Don't get 'divine' involved in this. I don't care if god exists or not.

So instead of bringing in the 'god' question.. Just show where the proof of random is.

 

[AlexG]

Just show where the proof of random is.

These are mutations which show up in some and not others, on an unpredictable basis.

What do you consider as 'proof'?

 

[kx000]

98% of those genes are shared by chimpanzes.

No. 98% of human genes in general are shared with chimps.. that doesn't account for the 250 im talking about.

 

[AlexG]

You know that in your bones?

 

[786]

These are mutations which show up in some and not others, on an unpredictable basis.

What do you consider as 'proof'?

What the hell does this prove? Have you heard of pseudorandom?

Lets put this in a scientific manner:

I say there are two hypothesis for what you have observed:
1. Pseudorandom
2. Random

What evidence do you have to choose the hypothesis that your observations show 'random'?

 

[AlexG]

Pseudorandom is a process which appears random but is not.

What evidence do you have that the process is pseudorandom? It appears random. What evidence do you have that it is not as it appears?

Other than your wanting it to be so?

 

[kx000]

Ooh, and another fatuous empty claim.
Tell me, was it your aim to come across as vapid and vacuous?

I don't know what those words mean.

 

[kx000]

You know that in your bones?

No. I know that because of google.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_adn08.htm

 

[Dywyddyr]

I don't know what those words mean.

Along with so much else...

 

[786]

Pseudorandom is a process which appears random but is not.

What evidence do you have that the process is pseudorandom? It appears random. What evidence do you have that it is not as it appears?

Other than your wanting it to be so?

Lmao.... You are dealing with results and observation. If 2 hypothesis yield the same observations you can't just choose one. I never said it is psuedorandom. i'm saying one can not decide either way.

 

[Dywyddyr]

No. I know that because of google.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_adn08.htm

General note: crank sites do NOT improve knowledge.

 

[kx000]

Pseudorandom is a process which appears random but is not.

What evidence do you have that the process is pseudorandom? It appears random. What evidence do you have that it is not as it appears?

Other than your wanting it to be so?

You have no evidence that it is in fact random. But, there is evidence our evolution was tainted at some point.

 

[AlexG]

No. I know that because of google.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_adn08.htm

"Collaborative research from a gathering of exo-scientists postulate that there are genes from over 20 extraterrestrials civilizations in Human DNA. "

Too fu*king funny.

:roflmao:

 

[AlexG]

Lmao.... You are dealing with results and observation. If 2 hypothesis yield the same observations you can't just choose one. I never said it is psuedorandom. i'm saying one can not decide either way.

So you don't have anything to back up your position.

Just more weasel wording.

 

[kx000]

General note: crank sites do NOT improve knowledge.

the human genome contains 223 genes that do not have the required predecessors on the genomic evolutionary tree.

Thats the only part you need to understand.

 

[AlexG]

It makes perfect sense that an ignorant crank will quote a crank website.

Fail.

 

[786]

So you don't have anything to back up your position.

Just more weasel wording.

No it seems you don't understand scientific theory. If 2 hypothesis yield the same result they are both valid interpretation of the data. To choose one over the other requires you to falsify one. So where is the evidence that it is random.