According to science, how does a new species develop?

The horshoe crab is evidence for creation. There are many living fossils that evolutionists thought died millions of years ago, but nothing of the sort. They are still alive today and have not changed, i.e. no evolution.



That isn't proof of creationism. The fact that some animals haven't evolved much isn't a violation of the principles of natural selection. If they have a good design that allows them to thrive, then why should they evolve??
 
I thought God was the all powerful creator. Are you saying that God has limitations, that he doesn't have control over everything? You can't claim God is the all powerful creator of the universe and simultaneously claim that he isn't responsible for Polio and Small Pox. That's called a contradiction. If he's all powerful, he has the ability to prevent every death and all the suffering that occurs on planet Earth. That makes him responisible for allowing it to happen. He's even responsible for original sin since he created the devil and the natural curiosity of humans.

The fact that scientists revise their theories doesn't mean you can legitimatelyclaim that creationism is real. Scientific knowledge is imperfect. If we knew everything, then we wouldn't need science. As we gain more knowledge, we revise our theories about nature accordingly. That doesn't make science invalid. Science is a process, not an end point.
You got it completely wrong. Suffering is the result sin. God did not create sin. He did not create evil. They are the result of human agents. Adam and Eve sinned. No one made them do it. They did it on their own. They are responsible for their actions, and the rest of us suffer because of it. And God IS all powerful. One day, he will take death and sin and throw them into the lake of fire, along with all those who have rejected Him.
Even if I concede that God didn't create suffering and evil, which I don't, he allows it when according to you he has the power to prevent it.

Furthermore, you still haven't even attempted to get around the fact that God created Smallpox, Polio, hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and volcanoes.

If he's "all powerful," then why doesn't he end death and sin right now? What's he waiting for, so millions more can die and suffer horribly?
Why should He? They are the result of sin. It's our fault those things exist because Adam sinned. But this life is just a way-station to our final destination. Which destination you arrive at is entirely up to you. Jesus died to save you. You can sit there and complain, or you can accept the free gift of Salvation. Your choice.
How is it my fault if Adam did the sinning? Do you believe in collective responsibility like the Nazis did?

We can address Jesus later. Right now you need to explain why God allows endless suffering and death of even innocent children.
Think of it this way. You cannot get good fruit from a bad tree. It's the same thing. Adam sinned, and his sinful nature was passed on to everyone who ever lived. It is a spiritual condition. It's not because of what we've done, but what we are. Also, God cursed all of Creation after Adam sinned. Adam is the reason that sin and suffering came into the world. You ask why God hasn't done anything about it. It's because it is not the right time. He will act to correct all wrongs, but He will do it according to His time table. Meanwhile, He sent His only Son so that we might have life. This short physical existence is nothing. Set your eyes on eternity and the condition of your own soul. That's what really matters.
If Adam passed on his sin to all his descendents, it's because that's the way God made him. God is still responsible. You can't get God off the hook for the existence of evil and suffering in the world since he is all powerrull and could have prevented it. If you claim he couldn't have prevented it, then you're admitting that he isn't all powerful, and therefor he isn't God.

How is it not the right time for God to stop evil? If God is all powerfull, he can do this very moment with a mere thought. What's stopping him? If you are a Christian, there's no denying that there is evil in the universe it's because God allows it.

Trying to excuse the evil God allows by saying human life isn't important is simply condoning the existence of evil.
 
You got it completely wrong. Suffering is the result sin. God did not create sin. He did not create evil. They are the result of human agents. Adam and Eve sinned. No one made them do it. They did it on their own. They are responsible for their actions, and the rest of us suffer because of it. And God IS all powerful. One day, he will take death and sin and throw them into the lake of fire, along with all those who have rejected Him.
Even if I concede that God didn't create suffering and evil, which I don't, he allows it when according to you he has the power to prevent it.

Furthermore, you still haven't even attempted to get around the fact that God created Smallpox, Polio, hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and volcanoes.

If he's "all powerful," then why doesn't he end death and sin right now? What's he waiting for, so millions more can die and suffer horribly?
Why should He? They are the result of sin. It's our fault those things exist because Adam sinned. But this life is just a way-station to our final destination. Which destination you arrive at is entirely up to you. Jesus died to save you. You can sit there and complain, or you can accept the free gift of Salvation. Your choice.
How is it my fault if Adam did the sinning? Do you believe in collective responsibility like the Nazis did?

We can address Jesus later. Right now you need to explain why God allows endless suffering and death of even innocent children.
Think of it this way. You cannot get good fruit from a bad tree. It's the same thing. Adam sinned, and his sinful nature was passed on to everyone who ever lived. It is a spiritual condition. It's not because of what we've done, but what we are. Also, God cursed all of Creation after Adam sinned. Adam is the reason that sin and suffering came into the world. You ask why God hasn't done anything about it. It's because it is not the right time. He will act to correct all wrongs, but He will do it according to His time table. Meanwhile, He sent His only Son so that we might have life. This short physical existence is nothing. Set your eyes on eternity and the condition of your own soul. That's what really matters.
If Adam passed on his sin to all his descendents, it's because that's the way God made him. God is still responsible. You can't get God off the hook for the existence of evil and suffering in the world since he is all powerrull and could have prevented it. If you claim he couldn't have prevented it, then you're admitting that he isn't all powerful, and therefor he isn't God.

How is it not the right time for God to stop evil? If God is all powerfull, he can do this very moment with a mere thought. What's stopping him? If you are a Christian, there's no denying that there is evil in the universe it's because God allows it.

Trying to excuse the evil God allows by saying human life isn't important is simply condoning the existence of evil.
DO you believe in God?
 
The horshoe crab is evidence for creation. There are many living fossils that evolutionists thought died millions of years ago, but nothing of the sort. They are still alive today and have not changed, i.e. no evolution.



That isn't proof of creationism. The fact that some animals haven't evolved much isn't a violation of the principles of natural selection. If they have a good design that allows them to thrive, then why should they evolve??

You are implying that there is a choice of whether or not something evolves. Since the whole evolution thingy is based on random mutations, those mutations would continue. Evolutionists want us to believe that some critter came out of the sea and grew some legs. It was also perfectly suited to it's environment. Why did it decide to leave? Your argument makes no sense at all.
 
The horshoe crab is evidence for creation.
100%, hilariously wrong . It is not evidence for creation, as it is easily and simply explained by evolution. It is no more evidence for your magical nonsense than airplanes are evidence for lack of gravity. Get that weak sauce out of here.
 

Wrong, but since you provided the link... What's the reason for posting the link? Where does Dewey place Roman and Greek Mythology? Where does Dewey put the Bible?

Please explain how I am 'wrong'? The Bible has a creation myth- the Greek religions had a creation myth.

The Dewey Decimal system puts the following all in 'non-fiction'- which is of course- everything other than what is labeled as fiction:
200 is the overall section for 'religion'
The Bible is 220, Old Testament 221, New Testament 225.
Greek and Roman religions 292, Islam 297.

Also 'non-fiction'-
130 Parapsychology & occultism
139 Phrenology
300px-PhrenologyPix.jpg
 
Creation is plausible and more scientific. OTOH the BBT, based on evolutionary thinking, states that it started with invisible particles and singularity. Singularity is a situation of infinite density and temperature. It is impossible for something infinite to exist in the material world (or else one has to divide by zero). We can only have countless items such as stars and the sand on the beaches.

There's nothing plausible about creation theory. There's nothing "scientific" about it. It's a myth conceived by a nomadic tribe in the Bronze age.

Sure, there is. It is what was believed in science before the 1850s. Christians invented modern science starting with Sir Francis Bacon, the father of the scientific method. Before that were a plethora of Christian scientists which you know such as Newton, Galileo, Kepler, Pascal, Linnaeus, Cuvier, Pasteur, Copernicus, Mendel, Lemaitre and more.

Historical
Historical Creation Scientists

Modern
Creation Scientists

Oh many scientists are Christians.

Doesn't mean that they believe in 'Creation science' which is just a fancy of saying "Because the Bible told me so"

Most scientists are atheists, especially biologists.
Those are the four areas of most disagreement with creation scientists

"Creation scientists' i.e. Christians who for some reason find a need to pretend science justifies their faith.
 
Fish started walking is what evolutionists teach,
It is not, you freak. Again, a child would laugh at you for this dumb statement
Creation and Genesis is based on the Bible. It is God's word and the truth.
Yes, thank you for repeating your religious bullshit for the 1000th time. Yes, we get it: it's true, because it's true. Fascinating.

Why are still here? If I don't believe somebody, then I don't waste my time following them around ha ha.

OTOH, if you want to learn something, then stick around. Just keep your yap shut.

Evangelicals don't like it when people question their zealotism.
 
I thought God was the all powerful creator. Are you saying that God has limitations, that he doesn't have control over everything? You can't claim God is the all powerful creator of the universe and simultaneously claim that he isn't responsible for Polio and Small Pox. That's called a contradiction. If he's all powerful, he has the ability to prevent every death and all the suffering that occurs on planet Earth. That makes him responisible for allowing it to happen. He's even responsible for original sin since he created the devil and the natural curiosity of humans.

The fact that scientists revise their theories doesn't mean you can legitimatelyclaim that creationism is real. Scientific knowledge is imperfect. If we knew everything, then we wouldn't need science. As we gain more knowledge, we revise our theories about nature accordingly. That doesn't make science invalid. Science is a process, not an end point.
You got it completely wrong. Suffering is the result sin. God did not create sin. He did not create evil. They are the result of human agents. Adam and Eve sinned. No one made them do it. They did it on their own. They are responsible for their actions, and the rest of us suffer because of it. And God IS all powerful. One day, he will take death and sin and throw them into the lake of fire, along with all those who have rejected Him.
Even if I concede that God didn't create suffering and evil, which I don't, he allows it when according to you he has the power to prevent it.

Furthermore, you still haven't even attempted to get around the fact that God created Smallpox, Polio, hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and volcanoes.

If he's "all powerful," then why doesn't he end death and sin right now? What's he waiting for, so millions more can die and suffer horribly?
Why should He? They are the result of sin. It's our fault those things exist because Adam sinned. But this life is just a way-station to our final destination. Which destination you arrive at is entirely up to you. Jesus died to save you. You can sit there and complain, or you can accept the free gift of Salvation. Your choice.
How is it my fault if Adam did the sinning? Do you believe in collective responsibility like the Nazis did?

We can address Jesus later. Right now you need to explain why God allows endless suffering and death of even innocent children.
Think of it this way. You cannot get good fruit from a bad tree. It's the same thing. Adam sinned, and his sinful nature was passed on to everyone who ever lived. It is a spiritual condition. It's not because of what we've done, but what we are. Also, God cursed all of Creation after Adam sinned. Adam is the reason that sin and suffering came into the world. You ask why God hasn't done anything about it. It's because it is not the right time. He will act to correct all wrongs, but He will do it according to His time table. Meanwhile, He sent His only Son so that we might have life. This short physical existence is nothing. Set your eyes on eternity and the condition of your own soul. That's what really matters.

So you torture trees that bear bad fruit?
 
The horshoe crab is evidence for creation. .

Demonstrating once again that the anti-evolutionists have no clue what scientific evidence or evolution is.

We have fossil evidence that horseshoe crabs very similar to todays horseshoe crabs existed millions of years ago.

And the Christian Creationists argue that proves that the world was poofed into existence 6000 years ago.
 
Even if I concede that God didn't create suffering and evil, which I don't, he allows it when according to you he has the power to prevent it.

Furthermore, you still haven't even attempted to get around the fact that God created Smallpox, Polio, hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and volcanoes.

If he's "all powerful," then why doesn't he end death and sin right now? What's he waiting for, so millions more can die and suffer horribly?
Why should He? They are the result of sin. It's our fault those things exist because Adam sinned. But this life is just a way-station to our final destination. Which destination you arrive at is entirely up to you. Jesus died to save you. You can sit there and complain, or you can accept the free gift of Salvation. Your choice.
How is it my fault if Adam did the sinning? Do you believe in collective responsibility like the Nazis did?

We can address Jesus later. Right now you need to explain why God allows endless suffering and death of even innocent children.
Think of it this way. You cannot get good fruit from a bad tree. It's the same thing. Adam sinned, and his sinful nature was passed on to everyone who ever lived. It is a spiritual condition. It's not because of what we've done, but what we are. Also, God cursed all of Creation after Adam sinned. Adam is the reason that sin and suffering came into the world. You ask why God hasn't done anything about it. It's because it is not the right time. He will act to correct all wrongs, but He will do it according to His time table. Meanwhile, He sent His only Son so that we might have life. This short physical existence is nothing. Set your eyes on eternity and the condition of your own soul. That's what really matters.
If Adam passed on his sin to all his descendents, it's because that's the way God made him. God is still responsible. You can't get God off the hook for the existence of evil and suffering in the world since he is all powerrull and could have prevented it. If you claim he couldn't have prevented it, then you're admitting that he isn't all powerful, and therefor he isn't God.

How is it not the right time for God to stop evil? If God is all powerfull, he can do this very moment with a mere thought. What's stopping him? If you are a Christian, there's no denying that there is evil in the universe it's because God allows it.

Trying to excuse the evil God allows by saying human life isn't important is simply condoning the existence of evil.
DO you believe in God?

Still waiting for you to put into context why God would want you to burn your daughter to death.
 
The horshoe crab is evidence for creation. There are many living fossils that evolutionists thought died millions of years ago, but nothing of the sort. They are still alive today and have not changed, i.e. no evolution.



That isn't proof of creationism. The fact that some animals haven't evolved much isn't a violation of the principles of natural selection. If they have a good design that allows them to thrive, then why should they evolve??

You are implying that there is a choice of whether or not something evolves. Since the whole evolution thingy is based on random mutations, those mutations would continue..


Mutations continue all of the time.

If you understood the basic theory of evolution, you would understand that most mutations do nothing, most of the remainder are harmful, and that mutations normally will only be passed on when they provide a competitive advantage to the creatures.

Why has the horseshoe crab stayed very similar for all of this time? Because it works well- but the bigger fallacy is the claim that the horseshoe crab of today is identical to that of millions of years ago- they are very similar- not identical.
 
Great article.

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.



Tragopogon1.gif


For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.

I noticed the internet fairy tale believer didn't respond to this great article I cited- anyone surprised?

Great article.

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.



Tragopogon1.gif


For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.
I noticed the internet fairy tale believers still don't have the balls to respond to this great article I cited- anyone surprised?

Great article.

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.



Tragopogon1.gif


For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.
 
A mutation is a variation of normal DNA. It is a mistake.

For one species to turn into another, the very same mistake<(an oxymoron) would have to occur over millions of years for a new species to exist. We would be walking on all of the bones of all those missing links that the process would have to produce before it made it as a new species. Then there again is that pesky attribute of DNA to correct, to not make the same mistake again.

So, what do the species whose DNA has erred have sex with? Their own species? That would set them on a path to overcoming the DNA mistake, not propagating it.
Maybe sex with a different but similar species to create a new creature?
A donkey can have sex with a horse and produce a mule. The mule is a DNA mistake. DNA takes care of that mistake by making mules sterile. DNA does it's very best to NOT create new species.

And the next question, "Why has evolution stopped?" begs an answer that scientists merely stab at. Where are the monkey/humans that are still transitioning? Where are the human/next species links? Have humans reached the pinnacle of perfection and no longer need to transition into something more favorable? How are we preventing this inevitable, natural evolution now, and even stopping it?
It does create a funny side note:
Because of the stupidity and poor social skills of our children, science thinks we are devolving. Teach your grandchildren to develop a taste for banannas....
 
Last edited:
A mutation is a variation of normal DNA. It is a mistake.

For one species to turn into another, the very same mistake<(an oxymoron) would have to occur over millions of years for a new species to exist. We would be walking on all of the bones of all those missing links that the process would have to produce before it made it as a new species.
Wow....millions of years.....yes sometimes it takes that long.

We are walking on the remains of all the species before us- we even build with them.

And a 'mistake' can often lead to beneficial change.
 
And the next question, "Why has evolution stopped?" begs an answer that scientists merely stab at.

Yeah- I hear that from Anti-Evolutionists a lot.

Of course you cannot prove that evolution has stopped.

Because of course it hasn't. You just cherry pick some species that you haven't observed changing in your lifetimes and proclaim that evolution is dead.

I have cited an article three times in this thread detailing observed evolution.

You Christianists ignore it of course.
 
A mutation is a variation of normal DNA. It is a mistake.

For one species to turn into another, the very same mistake<(an oxymoron) would have to occur over millions of years for a new species to exist. We would be walking on all of the bones of all those missing links that the process would have to produce before it made it as a new species.
Wow....millions of years.....yes sometimes it takes that long.

We are walking on the remains of all the species before us- we even build with them.

And a 'mistake' can often lead to beneficial change.

The VERY SAME MISTAKE, not the amount of time, is the key you skipped over.
Let's say you drove too fast and careened off of a bridge and hit a train down below. You made a mistake. Now recreate the exact same mistake, over and over and over for the rest of your life. How many of the attempts were exactly the same as the first mistake? None.

With DNA the mis-take would produce a new and different mis-take long before it became another species, or it would correct the original mistake. It would not keep making the same mistake. And the mistake would have to find another of it's species with the same mistake, otherwise, the genes would try to correct, not reproduce it's mistakes. Mistakes usually die off in nature so the stronger of the species can continue to reproduce in kind.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top