Evolution vs God

Ray Comfort’s new, short documentary.


.
.
Daniel’s Thoughts and Questions :

Science: The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural universe by method and observation.

Abiogenesis: The unobservable, non-testable philosophy of how life arose in the universe.

Common Descent: The unobservable, non-testable philosophy that living organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor.

A) Yes, Evolutionists exercise a lot of faith in their personal philosophies.

Intelligent Design: The unobservable, non-testable philosophy that an intelligent first cause designed the universe and the life therein.

Judeo/Christian Creation: The unobservable, non-testable philosophy that God, the One revealed in the Bible, created and designed the universe and all life therein.

B) Yes, ID Proponents, Jews, and Christians exercise a lot of faith in their personal philosophies.

C) Scientists draw conclusions and reason from observable data and evidence interpreting the results.  The scientists apply those interpreted conclusions and results in a variety of ways.  Scientists do not always agree in their conclusions, interpretation of evidence and data,  or in the application of their findings.

D) Scientists are humans who do not know everything, and they have personal bias, personal opinions, can have selfish motives, make mistakes, and are often wrong in their development of a hypothesis.

E) There are some scientists who believe data and evidence supports their personal philosophy of abiogenesis and Common Descent.

F) There are some scientists who believe data and evidence supports their personal philosophy of Intelligent Design.

G) There are some scientists who are Jews and/or Christians who believe data and evidence supports their personal philosophy of Biblical Creation.

H) My conclusion?  Personal philosophy does not determine the credibility of a scientist or their scientific work.  Philosophy should be taught in philosophy class, not the science classroom.

Question #1: The Cambrian Explosion.  What version of abiogenesis does it support?

Question #2: Human genetics proves that all living humans descended from one man and one woman.  How does that impact your personal philosophy?

Question #3:  Genetic Homeostasis.  For you, which philosophy does it support?  A single tree of life that defines Common Descent?  Multiple trees of life that are defined by species (kinds).

Species: a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring.

Question #4:  Natural selection is blind, and it can not plan fully functional, complex systems.  Mutations in DNA do exist, but depending on the severity it can kill an organism.  Some mutations have zero purpose or function.  Chance, in regard to and the form of mutations, provides genetic variation, which is the raw material that natural selection has to work with.

If you believe in Macroevolution/Common Descent, taking chances for viable and beneficial mutation  into consideration, how did all creatures/organisms on Earth happen to evolve such complex systems all together in such a limited amount of time (542 million years)?  What is the chance for even a single organism to have a mutation that is not severe enough to kill it, but that it has a positive benefit giving the organism an edge to survive?  Now think about every single organism on the planet.

Question #5: Is soft tissue Macroevolution observable or testable?

Question #6: Is the Macroevolution of microscopic life observable or testable?

Question #7: If all life (as we know it) descended from a common ancestor, how could there be life in extremely hostile environments (that would kill every normal organism) like the hydrothermal vents of the Atlantic Ocean?  How would natural selection based on chance mutation explain it?

“The water that spews forth from hydrothermal vents can reach temperatures of 662 degrees Fahrenheit (350 degrees Celsius) and is rich in chemicals such as sulfur and salt.”

Question #8: “The first step in defining irreducible complexity is to specify both the function of the system and all system components” (Behe, Darwin’s Blackbox, p42).

Biochemistry and the extreme complexity of microscopic life is a real challenge to Evolution.  As specified, natural selection is blind and can not plan fully functional complex systems.

An organism has a fully functional system (with subsystems).  If you remove a subsystem that will destroy the function of that system.  Even removing one component from a subsystem can devastate the subsystem, which will have a destructive impact on the overall system.  If breaking the system will kill the organism, how did that evolve based on principles of natural selection?

Simply taking the original system and removing parts to design a different, similiar system with a different function is not an answer.  The organism is still dead.

Stating that components of systems and subsystems have other functions does not answer the question.  The organism is still dead.

There are proteins that have one single function.  For example, antibodies.  Remove the antibodies from the immune system, and the immune system is broken.  The organism dies.

Take a molecule out of a protein.  It is no longer a viable protein for its specific function.

Question #9: Mutualism Symbiosis is close and often long-term interaction between two or more different biological species for the benefit of both organisms.  If a mutualistic symbiotic relationship exists that would kill either organism if the other were removed, how could that have evolved by natural selection?

For example, the insects such as bees and plants make up a mutualistic system.  How would natural selection principles explain the development of a flower to attract insects for reproductive purposes?  How many generations would it take?  Or that a bee would evolve to utilize nector for honey production?  And how would a “side effect” evolve so that the bee carries pollen for the reproduction of the plant?

Question #10: How did the universe come into existence?  This would be at the point where nothing existed.  No vacuum, no fabric of space, no matter, no energy, no stars, and no planets etc.

Question #11: In regard to undesigned abiogenesis, what was the environment and environmental factors that caused spontaneous formation of life?  What was that life and what was it made of?

Question #12: How does a species’ male and female organisms evolve independent and simultaneously, so that there is a viable reproductive system for reproduction?

Advertisements

About Daniel Silas

www.danielsilas.com
This entry was posted in Atheism, Evangelism, Evolution, Science and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s