nwabekeyi:
thanks a lot for your contributions, trust me when I say that we have same ideology

Lol. I sensed that from the topic

helinues:


Lol. I sensed that from the topic

kindly watch out for the next series of Cosmos (possible worlds) by Neil Tyson Degrasse.
You also try to see the older series (cosmos:The spacetime oddeysey) if you haven't seen it.

Its mind blowing

nwabekeyi:
kindly watch out for the next series of Cosmos (possible worlds) by Neil Tyson Degrasse.
You also try to see the older series (cosmos:The spacetime oddeysey).

Its mind blowing

Neil Tyson and Michio Kaku are my favourites.

OpenYourEyes1:


This is Development not Evolution. It is unique to only humans otherwise birds and apes that depend on Primitive tools should have developed advanced tools as well.



Again this is Development.
IPad morphing into Laptop(which is not possible) is evolution.

Now i know the extent to which you understand evolution.

Check out creation.com to see what some scientists have to say about evolution.

kindly watch out for the next series of Cosmos (possible worlds) by Neil Tyson Degrasse.
You also try to see the older series (cosmos:The spacetime oddeysey) if you haven't seen it.

Its mind blowing

You can download and watch all new episodes Cosmos: Possible worlds and all other ones Cosmos:The spacetime Oddeysey here https://tvseriespage.info/cosmos/

OpenYourEyes1:


Example of something evolving?

You. Though it is very very slow evolution.

Evolution is the only reasonable explanation to existence of humanity. The evidences are overwhelming in science

I'm a scientist, specialized in biochemistry with a special interest in nucleotide biochemistry.

The issue of evolution and creationism has been a bone of contention over years and surveys has been carried out in different countries to account for the percentages that believe in either of the two.

This is a project I'm working on and I believe nairaland holds a substantial sample size for me to get a figure from Nigeria.

DO YOU BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION OR CREATIONISM? GIVE REASONS FOR YOUR ANSWER. Thanks everyone as you participate in this survey.

Choose from the following options:
1. I don't believe in evolution because it's against my religion
2. I don believe in evolution because I don't know how it works
3.I believe in evolution but I don't know how it works
4. I believe in evolution and I know how it works.

Seun, mynd44 and lalasticlala can kindly help us to move this to front page, so we can get more participants. It's a work l intend using for my current research. Thanks

Pls I will add my own reply like this: I don't believe in evolution, I know how it works, but it does not make any sense to me. Even religion apart, it makes no sense.

JMAN05:


Pls I will add my own reply like this: I don't believe in evolution, I know how it works, but it does not make any sense to me. Even religion apart, it makes no sense.

You have to know how it works for it to make sense.

If evolution doesn’t make sense to you then why do you think chloroquine can no longer kill malaria parasite?

How do you think people get immunity for covid19?

Why do you think we can’t find absolute cure for HIV and flu?

Evolution has all the answers

ThinkFreely:
You have to know how it works for it to make sense.

If evolution doesn’t make sense to you then why do you think chloroquine can no longer kill malaria parasite?

How do you think people get immunity for covid19?

Why do you think we can’t find absolute cure for HIV and flu?

Evolution has all the answers

The op is about how life came about.

JMAN05:


The op is about how life came about.

That is another story entirely.

Evolution doesn’t answer how life came about. I think you really do not understand it.

Abiogenesis is what explains origin of life.

JMAN05:


The op is about how life came about.

Nir then it’s fact that evolution gives answer to all those listed.

Why do you think you can only suffer from measles, Viral hepatitis A and B once?

How do you think Coronavirus came to be?

Why do you think Africans can metabolize certain drugs while Chinese can’t?

Evolution can answer all...

That’s why I trust it than creation

JMAN05:


Pls I will add my own reply like this: I don't believe in evolution, I know how it works, but it does not make any sense to me. Even religion apart, it makes no sense.

I respect your honesty.

BOTH EVOLUTION AND CREATION HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM THAT MAKE THEM ENDED UP LOOKING LIKE SOMETHING built ON FAITH

EVOLUTION: THE FIRST EVER ORGANISM WAS MADE FROM WHAT ACTUALLY ,HOW CAN A NON LIVING ORGANISM EVOLVE TO FORM LIVING COMPLEX ORGANISM OK EVEN THOUGH WE BELIEVES ITS POSSIBLE THEN HOW DOES THE FIRST EVER THING WHETHER LIVING OR NOT LIVING CAME TO EXISTENCE

CREATION: THEN THE FIRST EVER THING WAS CREATED ,HUMAN WAS CREATED,, BY WHO ACTUALLY. BY GOD. ... THEN WHERE DO GOD COME FROM ? ITS LET TO BELIEVE

I BELIEVE IN CREATION AND spirituality BUT FOR EVOLUTION AND CREATION THEY ACTUALLY LOOKS THE SAME ,,,FAITH

ThinkFreely:
Nir then it’s fact that evolution gives answer to all those listed.

Why do you think you can only suffer from measles, Viral hepatitis A and B once?

How do you think Coronavirus came to be?

Why do you think Africans can metabolize certain drugs while Chinese can’t?

Evolution can answer all...

That’s why I trust it than creation

The op is obviously not talking about microevolution. He is rather discussing evolution as a source of Life versus creation, that is, God making all things.

That's being the case, I do not think that evolution is really the source of life. Personally, that doesn't make any sense to me. That was basically my point.

Actually, there could be changes within an organism or a specie. The Bible is not against this. But that life came through evolution, that is against the Bible. Even without the Bible, the point in itself that evolutionist makes to prove their point is not convincing. Besides, they avoid abiogenesis, which is not reasonable to me.

JMAN05:


The op is obviously not talking about microevolution. He is rather discussing evolution as a source of Life versus creation, that is, God making all things.

That's being the case, I do not think that evolution is really the source of life. Personally, that doesn't make any sense to me. That was basically my point.

Actually, there could be changes within an organism or a specie. The Bible is not against this. But that life came through evolution, that is against the Bible. Even without the Bible, the point in itself that evolutionist makes to prove their point is not convincing. Besides, they avoid abiogenesis, which is not reasonable to me.

Evolution doesn’t talk about source of life. Wtf is microevolution? Evolution is evolution in any case.

ThinkFreely:
That is another story entirely.

Evolution doesn’t answer how life came about. I think you really do not understand it.

Abiogenesis is what explains origin of life.

That's the problem. The op have that view. The thread itself combines the two. He wants to know wether life came through creation or through evolution.

Now, when you want to talk about why life can't come about through evolution, using the reasoning that life can't emerge from non-living things, Evolutionist will tell you that that is abiogenesis. how can you then be making a case for Life through evolution when you don't want to discuss abiogenesis?

You practically should not then be talking about evolution versus creation. Because that would make no sense.

ThinkFreely:
Evolution doesn’t talk about source of life. Wtf is microevolution? Evolution is evolution in any case.

Then you shouldn't be in this discussion. You can't compare evolution to creation when you can't tell us anything about abiogenesis. The op began from a faulty premise.

JMAN05:


That's the problem. The op have that view. The thread itself combines the two. He wants to know wether life came through creation or through evolution.

Now, when you want to talk about why life can't come about through evolution, using the reasoning that life can't emerge from non-living things, Evolutionist will tell you that that is abiogenesis. how can you then be making a case for Life through evolution when you don't want to discuss abiogenesis?

You practically should not then be talking about evolution versus creation. Because that would make no sense.

Abiogenesis is not completely understood but evolution is completely understood. The idea of abiogenesis is just a result of a common sense that since life evolves from another life, there must have been a point in time when life must have come from an inanimate.
It’s difficult to completely proof abiogenesis because you may have to simulate the exact environmental condition that gave rise to the first living cell but evolution is well established and the evidences are irrefutable in science.

Abiogensis is built on logic, if evolution is a fact that we know and it tells us that new species can form over a period of time due to changing environmental condition, it’s illogical to say that life has always been in existence. Life must have emanated from inanimate at some point.

JMAN05:


Then you shouldn't be in this discussion. You can't compare evolution to creation when you can't tell us anything about abiogenesis. The op began from a faulty premise.

The idea of creation is totally baseless since it’s suggest that every organism has remained the same since creation. That’s a far cry from the reality.

Abiogenesis is the logical explanation to what presided evolution.

I think the op doesn’t understand this. A lot of people really do not understand this

ThinkFreely:
Abiogenesis is not completely understood but evolution is completely understood. The idea of abiogenesis is just a result of a common sense that since life evolves from another life, there must have been a point in time when life must have come from an inanimate.
It’s difficult to completely proof abiogenesis because you may have to simulate the exact environmental condition that gave rise to the first living cell but evolution is well established and the evidences are irrefutable in science.

Abiogensis is built on logic, if evolution is a fact that we know and it tells us that new species can form over a period of time due to changing environmental condition, it’s illogical to say that life has always been in existence. Life must have emanated from inanimate at some point.

No. That logic doesn't follow. You cannot say since there are changes in species, then that life must have come from inanimates at some point. Such happening is highly improbable. Accepting it needs more faith than accepting a creator.

Do not think that all questions as to how humans evolved is entirely answered. It lives valid questions that up until now is still debated. So, do not consider all aspects of evolution to be irrefutable. Most of these theories are accepted just to find another way around the existence of an intelligent creator.

ThinkFreely:
The idea of creation is totally baseless since it’s suggest that every organism has remained the same since creation. That’s a far cry from the reality.

Abiogenesis is the logical explanation to what presided evolution.

I think the op doesn’t understand this. A lot of people really do not understand this

Well, I wonder why you would say that. Creation does not posit that all organisms have stood the same since creation. The allows for changes within a an organism, what we might call evolution in modern times. Only that we do not know the limit of what the Bible considers "kinds". (Gen 1:11)

JMAN05:


No. That logic doesn't follow. You cannot say since there are changes in species, then that life must have come from inanimates at some point. Such happening is highly improbable. Accepting it needs more faith than accepting a creator.

Do not think that all questions as to how humans evolved is entirely answered. It lives valid questions that up until now is still debated. So, do not consider all aspects of evolution to be irrefutable. Most of these theories are accepted just to find another way around the existence of an intelligent creator.

So what other logical explanation do you have for the origin of evolving species?

In science, evolution is fact. It’s irrefutable unless just for the purpose of argument. The evidences are overwhelming and experiments conducted multiple times backs it.

We simply cannot do anything in biological and medical science without the knowledge of evolution serving as a basis.

JMAN05:


Now, when you want to talk about why life can't come about through evolution, using the reasoning that life can't emerge from non-living things,

Excuse me please, but did "non-living" waters not "bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven"?

And were humans not formed out of the "non-living" dust of the ground?

Reconsider please.

ThinkFreely:
So what other logical explanation to you have for the origin of evolving species?

In science, evolution is fact. It’s irrefutable unless just for the purpose of argument. The evidences are overwhelming and experiments conducted multiple times backs it.

We simply cannot do anything in biological and medical science without the knowledge evolution serving as a basis.

And any society that tries to do almost anything "without the knowledge evolution serving as a basis" will not develop nor evolve and shall be called a third world society because it has no water in its taps and no light to see and great numbers of its young would be unemployed and starving and snippering and dead!

budaatum:

Excuse me please, but did "non-living" waters not "bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven"?

And were humans not formed out of the "non-living" dust of the ground?

Reconsider please.

That is called a miracle. However evolution does not believe in that. So it is scientifically impossible, that is the point.

ThinkFreely:
So what other logical explanation do you have for the origin of evolving species?

In science, evolution is fact. It’s irrefutable unless just for the purpose of argument. The evidences are overwhelming and experiments conducted multiple times backs it.

We simply cannot do anything in biological and medical science without the knowledge of evolution serving as a basis.

That is what I'm saying. so evolution is a sort of another way around the belief in a creator. That is just how I see it. this does not mean that all experiments as you said, supports it. There are valid questions that evolution till date cannot answer. One example is what happened in what is called the Cambrian period.

JMAN05:


That is called a miracle. However evolution does not believe in that. So it is scientifically impossible, that is the point.

"A miracle" is a phrase used to denote that one has not got a clue. And so it must be, that none of us have a clue, such that intelligent people say so, because, as it is written, "In the beginning", when "God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters", not one of us had yet been created to witness any of these things. But in our ignorant arrogance, we chose to believe whatever we manage to cook up inside our own heads and claim that is exactly how it all began.

If only we could just accept our limits. But if we did, we would not be curious, I guess, and just might still be naked and enslaved in Eden. We do know the limits of our sc[i]enses though.

Evolution does not believe what there is no scientific evidence for. That's why it rarely goes into how life began like you rightly accused the op of wrongly doing. And to be honest, Bible readers should not believe neither. The reason we are given two opposing creation myths in Genesis 1 and 2 is so we can question and reason and learn and understand and evolve, or rather, be reborn. Some would say that's seeking the Kingdom of God.

budaatum:

"A miracle" is a phrase used to denote that one has not got a clue. And so it must be, that none of us have a clue, such that intelligent people say so, because, as it is written, "In the beginning", when "God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters", not one of us had yet been created to witness any of these things. But in our ignorant arrogance, we chose to believe whatever we manage to cook up inside our own heads and claim that is exactly how it all began.

If only we could just accept our limits. But if we did, we would not be curious, I guess, and just might still be naked and enslaved in Eden. We do know the limits of our sc[i]enses though.

Evolution does not believe what there is no scientific evidence for. That's why it rarely goes into how life began like you rightly accused the op of wrongly doing. And to be honest, Bible readers should not believe neither. The reason we are given two opposing creation myths in Genesis 1 and 2 is so we can question and reason and learn and understand and evolve, or rather, be reborn. Some would say that's seeking the Kingdom of God.

Atleast that is what you believe about miracle. I don't agree with you. Miracles happen but some choose not to believe it. Their decision.

Evolution believes what there is no scientific evidence for. Evolution is much a hypothesis than theory. We just can't reproduce what they say, we only believe the "intelligent assumptions" that they bring forth. It is true that scientist seem to be more sincere to me than the many in Christendom. But not all things you see in the field of evolution you should just accept. There are many questions in these field than you think. There are fraudsters termed Evolutionist just like many fakes in Christendom. Some cook stories and deceive there fellow scientists. That's why I don't see evolution as a proved science. There are many assumptions especially when you transit to macroevolution.

JMAN05:


That is what I'm saying. so evolution is a sort of another way around the belief in a creator. That is just how I see it. this does not mean that all experiments as you said, supports it. There are valid questions that evolution till date cannot answer. One example is what happened in what is called the Cambrian period.

Its a not question of how you see it, it’s a question of what evidences suggest. You cannot deliberately ignore the million of questions evolution has answered because of a few ones it hasn’t.
Evolution doesn’t in anyway suggest the existence of any creator.

JMAN05:


Atleast that is what you believe about miracle. I don't agree with you. Miracles happen but some choose not to believe it. Their decision.

Evolution believes what there is no scientific evidence for. Evolution is much a hypothesis than theory. We just can't reproduce what they say, we only believe the "intelligent assumptions" that they bring forth. It is true that scientist seem to be more sincere to me than the many in Christendom. But not all things you see in the field of evolution you should just accept. There are many questions in these field than you think. There are fraudsters termed Evolutionist just like many fakes in Christendom. Some cook stories and deceive there fellow scientists. That's why I don't see evolution as a proved science. There are many assumptions especially when you transit to macroevolution.

One of the issues here is that people assume everyone else's mind works like their's works. Hence a believer believes everyone believes. And they assume that like them, one waits at the bottom of the mountain instead of going up it with Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel to look on God's face oneself.

Evolution is not just an hypothesis or a theory, but a fact, and Biblical too, though missed by most who read their Bible al a carte instead of starting at the Beginning and working their way page by page till the end so they see Yahweh evolve from fire and brimstone and drowning and turning to salt, into, forgive each other “seventy times seven times” and love your enemies moreso.

It is a lesson of our own evolution too, from mud, to logos indwelled beings. But I guess we must not know whom or what we are.

https://www.nairaland.com/5238668/evolution-101