Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals

Sort of ... I would say whatever fantastic explanations their vivid imaginations dream up are meaningless because they can't be tested. Anyone can talk.If someone claimed to know how to produce a eukaryote from a prokaryote, for example, I would accept their explanation when they actually produce a eukaryote from a prokaryote. Darwinist scientists claim that the evolutionary process that allows a dog to be produced from a wolf is the same evolutionary process that produced the history and diversification of life on earth.These scientists also claim that, because they understand the evolutionary process that allows a dog to be produced from a wolf, they therefore understand the evolutionary process that produced the history and diversification of life on earth.But give the evolutionary scientists of the world the task of producing a eukaryote from a prokaryote ... or an amphibian from a fish ... or a reptile from an amphibian ... and they wouldn't have the foggiest; they wouldn't even know how to get to first base. That proves they don't know how life evolved over deep time. Their simplistic nineteenth-century theory fails miserably. ... and the irony is, none of those achievements required Darwinian theory. LOL

They can research and theorize and talk all they like, but until someone actually produces a eurkaryote from a prokaryote, they can't claim to know how that evolution happened.Abiogenesis science faces the same problem: Until someone actually produces a viable organism from inanimate matter, no one can claim to know how abiogenesis occurred ... all the research and theorizing and talk in the world is irrelevant.Scientists can't even demonstrate that eurkaryotes did in fact
evolve from prokaryotes, much less know how it happened.

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

Edited by Dredge, .

No ... but plenty claim to know how evolution works.This seems like a logical conclusion to me:
If someone knows a lot about micro-evolution but doesn't know a thing about how any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded, that person can't claim to know how evolution works.

These are probably the same scientists who claim to know how evolution works, but couldn't describe how any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record even got to first base. What I think is "*****" is claiming to know how evolution works without being to describe even the first step of any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record. (***** = s-i-l-l-y)
​ I'm not disputing that. I accept the scientifc evidence that suggests life on earth has been evolving over perhaps billions of years. ... and yet science is as incapable of describing how macro-transitions in the fossil record proceeded as it was in 1859. In other words, science still doesn't know how evolution works. I accept that Darwinian evolution is the best scientific explanation for what produced the history of life on earth. But as for knowing how evolution produced life on earth, that cannot ever be known ... which means no one can ever claim to know how evolution works.

Edited by Dredge, .

  The task I mentioned is quite obviously impossible ... just as it's impossible to understand - know - how a macro-evolutionary transition that occurred millions of years ago progressed.No one can possily know what steps were involved, let alone know how evolutionary mechanisms produced those steps.

  My philosophy and religion have nothing to do with my argument. Moreover, I accept the scientific evidence that suggests life on earth has evolved over perhaps billions of years.But as for knowing how it evolved ... well, that's clearly impossible. The only way to know how eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes is to take a prokaryote and produce an eukaryote from it ... which is obviously impossible. Therefore it's impossible to ever know how eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes.
Scientists can't even demonstrate that eukaryotes did in fact evolve from prokaryotes, much less know how it happened. Big deal. Forming a hypothesis is not the same as knowing ... not even close.It's impossible to know what steps were involved in any macro-transition that occurred millions of years ago, much less know how evolutionary mechanisms produced those steps."dark" evolution is what I call it. Feel free to use that term in future.​

Splendid. Well, if you know how evolution works, please describe how a whale's blowhole evolved. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.Please describe how birds evolved from reptiles. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.Please describe how amphibians evolved from fish. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.

Edited by Dredge, .

Amazing! How did they go back in time and observe those transitions? For that is the only way anyone can know what processes were involved.
​ Yes, I agree that every evolutionary biologist knows that's the theory. But we all know that a theory is neither a fact nor truth nor knowledge.

Edited by Dredge, .

... but what a pity no one can prove that known micro-evolutionary mechanisms are responsible for producing the macro-evolutionary transitions evident in the fossil record.

Really? Wow.
In that case, please describe how a whale's blowhole evolved. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.Please describe how birds evolved from reptiles. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.Please describe how amphibians evolved from fish. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps. As dumb as I am ( my IQ is less than 10), I actually undertstand the theory you describe.
But did you know that reciting a theory doesn't demonstrate that that you know anything, much less know what happened millions of years ago? That's pretty deep. I'll have to give it some thought. Thank you very much for that wonderful and sage advice. Your wisdom is astounding. You noticed too? Sadly, you're not the first person to tell me that. Deep down, I know it's true. Already done. For god's sake? Which one?

Edited by Dredge, .

Please explain how you can claim to know "pretty well" how evolution works, if you can't describe how any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded?

Edited by Dredge, .

There is no contradiction at all. I can accept that life on earth evolved without knowing (or anyone knowing) the first thing about how evolution works. I think the the only way to know how macro-evolutionary transitions happened millions of years ago is to have directly observed them ... which is impossible. Can you prove that? If you don't know the specific details of the process, how can you claim to know how evolution works?If I claimed to know how to split an atom, but couldn't describe the details of the process, I wouldn't expect anyone to believe my claim. How could anyone know how to produce eukaryotes from prokaryotes without actually doing it? Sounds fair enuf.

So on one hand you claim to you claim to know how evolution works, but on the other hand you admit you don't know how of the any of the macro-evolutionary transitions I mentioned proceeded.Seems to me like your hands have built a contradiction. Can you describe how even one macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded?

Hang on, let me get this straight ... you claim to know how evolution works, but you can't describe the process involved in any of the macro-evolutionary transitions I mentioned?Can you describe the process involved in any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record?

You claim to know how evolution works, so please describe the process involved in the evolution of an amphibian's double-circulation heart from a fish's single-circulation heart, including the steps involved how natural selection and what environmental pressures produced those steps.I look forward to a demonstration of your knowledge of evolution.Many thanks.