I find it odd how people jump to conclusions about the theory of evolution.

@SoulKey The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection doesn't care about postulations about gods. it doesn't take them into account in any way whatsoever... it doesn't need to.

@SoulKey Do you believe in a flat Earth?

@newjaninev2 Natural Selection process observed in the offspring is also the design of God, the creator of their progenitors.

@Diotrephes 😂😂😂

@SoulKey [quote]Natural Selection process[/quote]

Natural Selection is the inevitable result of sex and death within a constantly changing environment... not much of a 'process', and certainly not something in need of a 'designer'.

Best look elsewhere if you need to keep your magical entity employed.

@newjaninev2 What you did here is good example. Instead of the word Process you used the word result, and then went on saying the same thing I said, minus God of coarse.

@SoulKey The [i]process[/i] is Evolution. The [i]mechanism[/i] driving that process is Natural Selection. The [i]components[/i] forming that mechanism are sex, death, and a constantly changing environment.

Nothing else is needed.
Absolutely nothing else.

Your magical entity is omitted simply because it's not needed.
It's an unnecessary complication that explains [i]nothing[/i] (not even itself).

@newjaninev2 natural selection refers to living organisms like survival of the fittest. Therefore the organisms need to exist first. Natural selection is step 2

@Axeroberts Yes, that's called abiogenesis... a different topic.

Evolution is what happens [i]after[/i] abiogenesis.

Incidentally... Natural Selection refers to, at most, survival of the [i]reproductively[/i] fittest [i]genes[/i]... and whether or not a gene is reproductively fit changes from environment to environment, and from generation to generation, given that part of a gene's environment also contains other genes (fellow travellers, as it were, not all of who remain fit)

@newjaninev2 [quote]. While the hypothetical process of spontaneous generation was disproved as early as the 17th century and decisively rejected in the 19th century, abiogenesis has been neither proved nor disproved.Sep 5, 2023 [/quote]

@Axeroberts Yes, that's correct... there's muct activity and discussion around the actual mechanism for the abiogenesis that occurred here on Earth.

It's quite a busy and productive field.

Of course, before discussing life we should perhaps define it.

I offer: a self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution.

@newjaninev2 i think you finally understand me. There was some sort of mechanism or catalyst. Perhaps it's the properties of the individual molecules themselves that they are able to arrange themselves in a certain way

@newjaninev2 The interesting thing about abiogenesis is why it was a one-time thing? It must have occured in the ancient sea in order for life to have spread onto the land around the world at about the same time.

Why is there no evidence of abiogenesis happening now?

@Axeroberts Molecules are [i]compelled[/i] to arrange thenselves in certain ways... it's merely an artefact of their physical properties.

@Diotrephes We don't know that it was one-time... abiogenesis may have occurred on Earth many times, and in different ways, before the current situation became predominant.

A different pathway may be in effect even as we chat here, but humans haven't existed long enough, and will not exist long enough, to see it.

There might be life elsewhere in the Solar System (we're actively looking, as you know). If abiogenesis has occurred elsewhere in the universe (by whatever pathway) we'll never know, of course.

@Diotrephes 😀

@newjaninev2 Creation of life argument simply put. It's Order vs Chaos. Planned vs Random. Forceful vs Effortless. Meaningful vs Meaningless. I'm with the former, the theory of evolution endorses the later.

@SoulKey
How things are today isn't order... it's just how things are today. If things were not as they are today, they would be different. That's so self-evident as to be trivial.

Planned implies intent. What was intended, and what had the intent?

I have no idea what you mean by 'forceful vs effortless'. Please clarify that for me.

'Meaningful' defined by who? About what? Are you saying that you find some sort of 'meaning' about the universe as a whole, or your part of it in particular, or your transitory existence therein, or... what?

The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection endorses nothing.
The Theory [i]completely, consistently, and coherently,[/i] describes what happened on Earth following the appearance of life.
It is evidence-based and demonstrably accords with observed reality.