Evolution For Coggies

[_bcspace]

Man was CREATED IN the image of God. Any evolution that has taken place has taken place from the time of Noah till now.

Period.

How does evolution preclude man from being created in the image of God?

[_moksha]

Its really quite simple, heres Chi-chi to explain:

Yes, I too misread the title and thought it would be about the evolution of Coggins.

[_beastie]

Now go talk to Beastie, Seth, marg, tarske, Richard Dawkins, Sephen Hawking, or Daniel Dennet about the matter. What you will see in this world is the idea that evolution precludes and forecloses acceptance of theism of any kind.

WTF?? I've never made such a statement, and I doubt any of the others have, either. You're just making up a script in your own mind.

Evolution doesn't preclude and foreclose acceptance of theism of any kind. Prior to the understanding of evolution, there was no way to understand the development of complex creatures without supernatural intervention, so evolution opened a window for many "god of the gaps" to actually become the atheists they would have always otherwise been (and were often labeled "deists").

That is a far different statement from asserting that evolution precludes and forecloses acceptance of theism of any kind.

No wonder talking to you is like banging your head against a wall.

[_beastie]

Yes, I too misread the title and thought it would be about the evolution of Coggins.

That would be an incredibly short thread.

[_Dr. Shades]

Evolution is not incompatible with LDS doctrine in any way.

Ever been through the temple ceremony?

[_Doctor Steuss]

[...]
Get outta my thread unless you're willing to say something snarky to Coggins.

Well, this isn't necessarily to Coggins, but hopefully it's snarky enought to be in your thread...



Evolution IS Intelligent Design. Instead of naming the designer “G-d,” Evolutionists have just chosen a more fancy sounding deity named “Deoxyribonucleic acid.”

(If anyone needs me, I will be drinking some high gravity Steal Reserve in order to test my new theory of intelligent falling down).

[_Moniker]

[...]
Get outta my thread unless you're willing to say something snarky to Coggins.

Well, this isn't necessarily to Coggins, but hopefully it's snarky enought to be in your thread...



Evolution IS Intelligent Design. Instead of naming the designer “G-d,” Evolutionists have just chosen a more fancy sounding deity named “Deoxyribonucleic acid.”

(If anyone needs me, I will be drinking some high gravity Steal Reserve in order to test my new theory of intelligent falling down).

Right, and when I start to worship and pray to "Deoxyribonucleic acid" then we'll be on par.

[_LCD2YOU]

What I want to do is point out the differences in the strawman "evolution" then what Evolution is. Like like Gravity, Evolution is a fact and a theory.

"Real" Evolution is "change in allelle frquency over time". That's it. "Abiogenesis", life from complex life-like chemical processes is not Evolution but there are very close parrellels between them. Those "non-living chemical processes" that were best able to "reproduce and continue to catalyze other chemicals" did flourish.

Evolution doesn't care about:

Where the Universe came from.

How the Stars formed.

What made this Solar System.

Why the Earth is here.

In a nutshell, evolution IS NOT arbitrary and the addage "Survival of the Fittest" is mis-characterized. It really should be "Survival of those most suited to survive". There are "random acts" that influence evolution but the genes most likely to be passed on are those in an animal more suited to survive. Granted, there are mis-copies and errors in the genome that lead to death or unwanted changes. Still most copy errors are neutral to the creature. A few, very few errors are beneficial.

Even then "beneficial mutations" are in the eye of the beholder. In a cold climate, a change in the genome that has a way for the creature to trap body heat to stay warm is good. In a desert, a creature who has a gene that traps in their body heat so they don't cool down is dead, a.k.a. "a bad mutation".

As for humans and monkeys, we did not come from monkeys. Humans and the great apes have common ancestors. The human, bonobo and chimp genome is so close (closer than what people consider "the cat family") that they are considering dropping the "Pan Troglodyte" for chimps and making them "Homo Bonobo" and "Homo Chimp" or something like that.

[_Moniker]

What I want to do is point out the differences in the strawman "evolution" then what Evolution is. Like like Gravity, Evolution is a fact and a theory.

"Real" Evolution is "change in allelle frquency over time". That's it. "Abiogenesis", life from complex life-like chemical processes is not Evolution but there are very close parrellels between them. Those "non-living chemical processes" that were best able to "reproduce and continue to catalyze other chemicals" did flourish.

Evolution doesn't care about:

Where the Universe came from.

How the Stars formed.

What made this Solar System.

Why the Earth is here.

In a nutshell, evolution IS NOT arbitrary and the addage "Survival of the Fittest" is mis-characterized. It really should be "Survival of those most suited to survive". There are "random acts" that influence evolution but the genes most likely to be passed on are those in an animal more suited to survive. Granted, there are mis-copies and errors in the genome that lead to death or unwanted changes. Still most copy errors are neutral to the creature. A few, very few errors are beneficial.

Even then "beneficial mutations" are in the eye of the beholder. In a cold climate, a change in the genome that has a way for the creature to trap body heat to stay warm is good. In a desert, a creature who has a gene that traps in their body heat so they don't cool down is dead, a.k.a. "a bad mutation".

As for humans and monkeys, we did not come from monkeys. Humans and the great apes have common ancestors. The human, bonobo and chimp genome is so close (closer than what people consider "the cat family") that they are considering dropping the "Pan Troglodyte" for chimps and making them "Homo Bonobo" and "Homo Chimp" or something like that.

Uh, can you please stick to the topic of this thread? We're here to fuss at Coggins. Please try again with some snarkiness added. ;)

by the way, I like you!

[_LCD2YOU]

Uh, can you please stick to the topic of this thread? We're here to fuss at Coggins. Please try again with some snarkiness added. ;)

Well, I could say something about, "taking matters into one's own hand", "internet porn sites" and "seeding the crud in the keyboard". Is that better? ;D

by the way, I like you!

Thanks Moniker, just don't tell the wife. :D