Evolution falsifies God/s?

What I meant was if evolution were true, then that would nullify a great portion of the book of Genesis. If those chapters were suspect, then why wouldn't Gen. 1:1 be suspect? And on and on it goes, where the disbelief stops, no one knows.Thus I should have clarified that (Darwinian) evolution would disprove a Christian God, since the Bible would no longer be reliable, but I suppose it wouldn't shut the door on other gods. The Christian God is the only God I work with though, so my choices of deities are limited in that regard.How much evolution would I require? An amount equal to 1CNRhK.

I think I've answered most of your post in my replies to Dr. Adequate, so I'll just quickly repeat it here.If evolution were true, then that would negate a Christian God, but you're right, many other religions would probably not be damaged by it. But completed within 6 days? There's the rub (for Christians anyways).

That's a tad bit of elephant hurling right there Coyote. Not by a country mile (and they're longer out here - we evolve them that way).

Since the Bible reveals Jesus to be God, then it becomes impossible to separate the two - if you're a follower of Christ that is. If, on the other hand, you're Thomas Jefferson and think the Bible is fodder for scrap-booking, well good luck with that.

Yes and yes. No. But go ahead, I have a feeling this this thread is about to take off in all sorts of interesting directions anyways.

I'm very happen to learn all of that.It doesn't change the fact, however, that natural selection of beneficial genes also includes the vastly greater number of deleterious genes. Mutations are almost always harmful and they are cumulative (i.e. the ratio of bad genes to good genes grows with every generation). Natural selection does not clean that gene mess up.

Fair enough.As a creationist, I don't dispute "horizontal" evolution, or finches with differing beaks for example. That is not a problem from a Christian perspective, because in the end, those creatures are still finches.However I do not subscribe to "vertical" evolution, which claims that we all have a common ancestor. There would need to be a source for all of that increasing genetic information, but so far your side has not provided it.

Oh c'mon now... are you guys going to ask me to leave this thread as well? If I start my own thread, will you still tell me what I can and cannot respond with?

So shall it be.In the meantime, let me restate my position to get us back on track: I maintain that Darwinian evolution (goo-to-zoo-to-you), if found to be true, would decimate the Christian religion. I'm not sure about other religions though, they might be able to make it work.

I'm not sure what the little soliloquy was all about, but re: Darwinian evolution I would have to say that no it has not been proven. If anything, it's been proven to be absolutely impossible (see my off-topic post above re: genetic mutations).

I replied in kind. I viewed your post as an opinion, and since I don't believe in your version of evolution, I replied back with my own opinion. To demand substance, you need to be able to provide it first.

I'm tempted to give you one of those little green balls for grouping Stalin's purges with the Kardashians! But alas, your fallacy prevents me from doing so:How do you, as an atheist, bemoan malaria, the Holocaust, tapeworms or yes, even the Kardashians? If everything is just matter anyways, then really, what does it all matter? How do you attribute worth to anything?

You miss the point.If God doesn't exist, then you need to find some natural atheistic way of accounting for all those altruistic feelings you just cited. Natural selection?

Funny, I was thinking the same about you. If you can't defend the Darwinian evolutionary model, then that can only leave one other answer. In which case all the sciences - physics, geology, cosmology and logic itself - must come from God. Computational Evolution Experiments Reveal a Net Loss of Genetic Information Despite SelectionThe infamous peppered moth? You offer that up as proof of Darwinian evolution? The reason you keep hearing us say things like "a finch is still a finch" or "a dog is still a dog" is because you and your ilk have failed once again to produce any example of a creature developing new information. The peppered moth is an example of classic evolution - where natural selection takes what genetic info it already has available to it and merely rearranges the deck chairs a bit. Ultimately though, that Titanic is going to sink (genetic collapse). Rearranging already existing genetic information does not create new information. Natural selection does not occur at the molecular level, where mutations occur, but rather on the entire organism as a whole. Please explain how selection could remove only the deleterious mutations. Wrong, it's you who conflates and obfuscates the meanings and I believe it's intentional. You know your "theory" is flawed, but without it you'll be forced to admit there is a God, so you rally the troops and circle the wagons around this beaten and dead "evolutionary" horse.Here's what real evolution is: natural selection working with existing genetic information (no new info).Your version of evolution: natural selection creating new genetic information over billions of years.

Good one. I don't doubt that. I'm sure you value people, I'm sure most atheists do in fact, but you have no basis to - not from an evolutionary perspective anyways. How could natural selection account for honesty? What benefit could honesty possibly offer to be selected from the genetic herd? Or the notion of right and wrong - do you think animals care whether some other animal is honest or whether they are right or wrong? They're animals - they don't care. No that wouldn't matter to me. If God made us out of legos, we would still have value because we would have been made in His image. But I can account for that thinking because I believe that our value comes from God, an atheist believes we are essentially stardust - and there's no basis for any real intrinsic value there.