Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The overwhelming evidence that Evolution has occurred can be ignored because we don't know the ultimate origins of life. True or false? [Spirituality & Religion]

Poll - Total Votes: 28
True
False
Show Results
You can only vote on one answer.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SatanBurger · 36-40, F Best Comment
False. I've always suspected the origin of life to be the chaos factor but it's a logical fallacy to say that since we don't know the origins of life, that "must" mean evolution has to be incorrect.

There could still be a scientific explanation that is close to evolution for the origins of life, we just haven't found it yet.

Rejecting something as false for what we don't know yet would be dismissing things that we [b][c=#7700B2]already[/c][/b] DO know about evolution, which a person can do but they'd be intellectually dishonest in doing so.
@SatanBurger


Very well put
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@SatanBurger @Pikachu Again, you dismiss the obvious and go with the uncertain. Evolution was and never will be fact. The Word of God clearly states that life comes from life and that life is the Lord God, Yahweh.
@GodSpeed63

*yawn*

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions.

You can't debate evolution, you can't explain why we need to know how life began in order to observe that it has evolved.
All you can do is quote your book and condescend.

Your bore me.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 Again you speak as if abiogenesis and evolution are inextricably bound together, and that inability to account for one somehow falsifies the other.

I will again point out to you that [i]they are two separate topics[/i].

Abiogenesis deals with the origin of life.

Evolution accounts for what happens once life has begun.

We know that life began on this planet. That's a given (or are you saying that there's no life on Earth?).

The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection completely, comprehensively, and coherently accounts for the evidence around what has occurred [i]since[/i] then
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 I have now explained to you several times that abiogenesis and evolution are two separate topics, and yet you continue to make the basic error of conflating them.

I'm a patient woman, so I will ask you now... what part of my explanation is causing such confusion in you?

Which particular parts of my explanation are you finding difficult?
Bushranger · 70-79, M
@GodSpeed63 Have you ever, and I mean ever, read any scientific book or document related to evolution? And I don't mean the stuff put out by creationists or "intelligent designers".
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@GodSpeed63 Whoever wrote that was misinformed. Just like with pregnancy (life comes from life,) with death can come life also, it's what allows some micro-organisms to grow and maintain the ecological system. There's even been some discussion on non decomposed frozen lands that if they ever thawed could release really harmful gas build up:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982216305954
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@SatanBurger [quote]Whoever wrote that was misinformed. Just like with pregnancy (life comes from life,) with death can come life also,[/quote]

Death cannot come unless one is living in the first place. One that has never lived cannot die. It's impossible that life can come from non-life. That is the law of science.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@GodSpeed63 If life can't come from non life, who made your God in your theory? If you say God has always been around as the answer, what makes you think that the world couldn't have also just been around? Please don't use the bible, I want an actual answer from your own mind and not some person we don't know 3,000 years ago.
@SatanBurger

Trying to make him validate a special pleading argument?
Y'all about to get preached at 😉
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@Pikachu [quote]If life can't come from non life, who made your God in your theory?[/quote]

Yahweh was never created by man or god. He was, and is, and ever will be the only one true God who lives forever. It's not a theory, it's fact.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@GodSpeed63 OMG just answer my freaking questions:

[quote]If life can't come from non life, who made your God in your theory? If you say God has always been around as the answer, what makes you think that the world couldn't have also just been around? Please don't use the bible, I want an actual answer from your own mind and not some person we don't know 3,000 years ago.[/quote]
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 If it's in any way valid for you to say that your god was never created, then it's [i]equally[/i] valid to say that the universe was never created... in which case your god becomes surplus to requirements.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@SatanBurger [quote]If life can't come from non life, who made your God in your theory?[/quote]

Yahweh was never created by man or god. He was and is and ever will be the one ture God who lives forever. This is not a theory, it's fact.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@GodSpeed63 If Yahweh was never created by anyone or anything then what makes you think the universe has to be created. You kind of refute your own hypothesis.
@SatanBurger

lol i nailed it.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@SatanBurger Not if you consider the stars. They had a starting point and science would indicate that they have a termination date as well.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Pikachu I thought the same thing just now lol.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@Pikachu [quote]Y'all about to get preached at[/quote]

Galatians 6:7-8 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.

The Word of God.
@GodSpeed63

[quote]The Word of God.
[/quote]

[i]Prove[/i] it 😁
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 The universe began expanding around 13.7 billion years ago, making possible both spacetime and the matter we now see... but that doesn't mean that was the beginning of whatever began to expand.

If it's in any way valid for you to say that was created, but whatever created it was never created, then it's equally valid to say that whatever began to expand was never created... in which case the supposed creator thing becomes surplus to requirements