Workch:
Evolution as a fact is absolute. We may not fully understand it but we are sure with numerous evidence that all living species evolve

Theory simply means in the face of no better arguments, we accept this for now.

Does this make sense?

MightySparrow:


You are right.

But Evolution theory is not absolute just as the the others mentioned. All these are called theories and none of them is a final truth.

Truth is a final, unchangeable fact.
Anyway, as I said, the Bible predicted, knowledge shall increase but not as to nullify the essence called God.

Science is a good attempt by man to understand creation. We have surprises everyday at the frontier of knowledge!

there's also never going to be a day when science will find out that creation happened literally like in the book of genesis. It's why you should not take the bible literally, you will be battling to accept facts and realities

MightySparrow:



Theory simply means in the face of no better arguments, we accept this for now.

Does this make sense?

yes, but it doesn't not mean that what the theory tries to explain changes.and most times, these theories are not change outrightly, they are edited as we learn more.

E.g. Atomic theory can be be fallable but Atoms cannot change and be replaced with something else. Atom is fact

Theory of relativity can be fallable but gravity is fact, it doednr change. It cannot be replaced with another thing.

Cell theory may change but cells can't change


Theory of evolution may change and it has changed several times but all tried explaning a fact called evolution. Evolution will never be replaced by creation as explained by the Bible

Workch:
Theory if evolution does not says that humans evolved from monkeys.

What it simple explains is that "in a poplalation of organisms with variable pool, genes frequency change over many generations. This gene versatility is caused by mutations and gene recombinations and these gene fluctuations is triggered by environmental selection called natural selection. Over many generations, numerous fluctuations in gene frequency results in speciation, which means that one or more species in the parent species will not longer be genetically capable of mating with one of its relative to produce fertile offpsrings"

Basically the key words are, variation, mutation, gene recombination, natural selection and speciation. We have observe every bit of this and repeated evidence exist.

In human we have observed mutations, gene recombinations, variation and natural selection. We also have evidence in terms of DNA that humans did not just pop up from thing air

Indeed it’s a simplification to say “humans evolved from monkeys”. Regardless, evolution as pertains to humans and other species we see today is a theory not a fact as with viruses etc. Hence why scientists say “evolution is a theory and a fact”. So just correcting the “theory of a fact called evolution” you said in your previous post that implied evolution as a whole was a fact.

Despite that, you are right in that the theory of evolution is not a mere hunch. Scientists have studied various facts we see today and have extremely strong reasons and evidence to believe that that is how humans and other species we see today came to be.

That doesn’t change my faith personally but I’ll save that conversation for another day. Still worn out from the last one lol ❤️

Workch:
there's also never going to be a day when science will find out that creation happened literally like in the book of genesis. It's why you should not take the bible literally, you will be battling to accept facts and realities

I will take Bible literally. I believe that God that created things in the beginning has not stopped. How do you convince me against someone whose had one leg shorter than the other getting the shorter grow to meet the other. Or somebody grew inches taller.


I have enjoyed something's myself. That is why I can't reason like Europeans. They too had the same experiences in the past. They brought Christianity to us. Now they are abandoning it.

Aemmyjah:

Noooo
Whiteman have become powerful and wise and they want to feel they are the most intelligent in the planet and they bring up a new religion of evolution so they know they are the real gods. Unstable fools want to follow and belong and join the democratic party of intelligent people
We are following whiteman concept
Whose concept are they following?

I think they're just following the concept they discovered on their own!

wegevv:


Indeed it’s a simplification to say “humans evolved from monkeys”. Regardless, evolution as pertains to humans and other species we see today is a theory not a fact as with viruses etc. Hence why scientists say “evolution is a theory and a fact”. So just correcting the “theory of a fact called evolution” you said in your previous post that implied evolution as a whole was a fact.

I think you don't understand what I meant.
I already started it, evolution is a theory because a theory existed called theory of evolution. The fact call called evolution is what it explains.
There's no basis for any debate here that you are trying to create because I'm not arguing this.

Despite that, you are right in that the theory of evolution is not a mere hunch. Scientists have studied various facts we see today and have extremely strong reasons and evidence to believe that that is how humans and other species we see today came to be.

That doesn’t change my faith personally but I’ll save that conversation for another day. Still worn out from the last one lol ❤️

good, I have seen many Christians who accept evolution as well and I'm impressed.
If your likes are the majority, maybe we may not have seen many people leave Christianity. In the presence of literalist, who are majority in Africa, they see facts like evolution and try to deny it, many people will start doubting Christianity because of their actions

Workch:
yes, but it doesn't not mean that what the theory tries to explain changes.and most times, these theories are not change outrightly, they are edited as we learn more.

E.g. Atomic theory can be be fallable but Atoms cannot change and be replaced with something else. Atom is fact

Theory of relativity can be fallable but gravity is fact, it doednr change. It cannot be replaced with another thing.

Cell theory may change but cells can't change


Theory of evolution may change and it has changed several times but all tried explaning a fact called evolution. Evolution will never be replaced by creation as explained by the Bible

My thought. Thanks.

Aemmyjah:


Who brought evolution to you? Blackman?

What has ethnicity or intercontinentalism got to do with the leadership of my organization? I have only one leader and that is Jesus Christ
I worship with my fellow man and belong to the most united force here in earth, no prejudice in terms of skin color or tribalism or language
Atheists themselves have no such unity

Lemme ask you now, how many AFRICANS are leading figures in promoting the philosophy of evolution?
Verily verily, I say unto thee, de play

You are the one playing the "whiteman" "blackman" card not me so I assume your deck is stacked. LoLz.

What has "ethnicity or intercontinentalism" got to do with the theory of evolution?

Workch:
Evolution always existed before Darwin. It's just Darwin own that sesm more plausible, Darwin was ever wrong in many thing.
Do you prefer to be a total ignoramus?

It's white ment that brought Christianity to you. These white people are leaving it because they realized that they were wrong

Can you prove evolution?
Evolution has so many unanswered questions but they say we should not question it
Even without religion, life in itself points toward and intelligent Creator
How many white men have left Christianity and which white men are you talking about?
De play

Workch:
Evolution as a fact is absolute. We may not fully understand it but we are sure with numerous evidence that all living species evolve

Things evolve.
Can we ever trace the first language spoken?

How, where, when.?

Why are all living things except few have male and female. At what point did it start?
Evolution seems to me to take care of only species not emotions, language, spirituality etc.
Apart from biological sciences, these also are fields of study.
There are so much knowledge also in these fields.

For example, in cat family, there different species. Are to still expect different variants. Or we going to help nature to do that?
There is cross - breeding going on. Has evolution been having agent's like human to work?

MightySparrow:



I don't think you did elementary science.

Hypothesis
Theory
Law

What are they and differences

Dalton Atomic Theory
Relativity Theory
Theory of Everything.

Can you explain these in line of your thought?

LoLz. Someone that doesn't even know what a theory is. Guy rest abeg. It would be a waste trying to educate you when with the resources of the internet at your disposal you can't even look up something as basic as the meaning of scientific theory.

Aemmyjah:


See mumu
Before the Whiteman came, there was no worship in Africa?
Now, my point is not on whether the mode of worship was true or false
The universality of religion and how it shapes man only gives proof to a god or God. Meaning that there is God and man has this consciousness to know and worship him.

There are many things Darwin said regarding evolution that if not found within 100 years, his entire theory should be considered false. They have not been found but people are still following the scientific philosophy of Darwin's evolution and saying those that don't accept their school of thought are unintelligent. Makes sense!

Name the god you were worshipping before "whiteman" brought your current god to you. LoLz.

Quote the place Darwin said such things.

Workch:
I think you don't understand what I meant.
I already started it, evolution is a theory because a theory existed called theory of evolution. The fact call called evolution is what it explains.
There's no basis for any debate here that you are trying to create because I'm not arguing this.

good, I have seen many Christians who accept evolution as well and I'm impressed.
If your likes are the majority, maybe we may not have seen many people leave Christianity. In the presence of literalist, who are majority in Africa, they see facts like evolution and try to deny it, many people will start doubting Christianity because of their actions

I think you’re still conflating the “theory of evolution” with the facts that the theory is based on lol.

I say this because of your last paragraph; I don’t know many Christians who reject the facts that the theory of evolution are based on. I only know those who reject the “theory of evolution” itself. There’s a difference between those two things because you can acknowledge the facts and reject the theory.

Many of those who reject the “theory of evolution” chose to explain the facts that the theory is based on in a different way.

paxonel:
but I don't mention gender confusion?

Saying we should follow the ways of the Europeans is enough to bring it up.

vdestro:


God is a name and has always been a name no described in any language.

LoLz! The name of the god you were worshipping before "whiteman" came to give you your current god is just plain god? Which language was using god as the name of the god they worshipped? Yoruba? Igbo? Edo? Hausa? Fulani? Tiv? Igbira? Nupe? Which one? Bwahahahahaha!

Aemmyjah:

How many white men have left Christianity and which white men are you talking about?
De play

Ọmọ no follow them drag that one o!

They know everything about their demigods in atheism even they can defend any statement made by their demigods it's only the Bible that's faulty to them!

LordReed:


Name the god you were worshipping before "whiteman" brought your current god to you. LoLz.

Quote the place Darwin said such things.

https://www.icr.org/article/a-150-years-later-fossils-still-dont-help-darwin/

There are other ones
Ask Wiki
Ask AI

It's 150 years already
Una still de carry Apostle darwin for shoulder

paxonel:

They have a common ancestor means that there is an extinct primate species(which is still not known) that both homosapien and monkeys or Ape originated from. That extinct primate is their common ancestor and the origin human evolution, not monkey's or Ape.

You can Google the question "Are humans evolved from Ape or monkey's ?"
Read the article from Wikipedia

Are you saying that In other words, that monkeys, apes and human beings were brothers who had a common parent (ancestor) now extinct?

Aemmyjah:


https://www.icr.org/article/a-150-years-later-fossils-still-dont-help-darwin/

There are other ones
Ask Wiki
Ask AI

It's 150 years already
Una still de carry Apostle darwin for shoulder

LMAO! Association of quote miners. The question Darwin posed and ANSWERED in the same book? Bwahahahaha.

vdestro:


Are you saying that In other words, that monkeys, apes and human beings were brothers who had a common parent (ancestor) now extinct?

the words brothers and parent cannot be used in this context as they never lived together as a family and they will never do so

vdestro:


Saying we should follow the ways of the Europeans is enough to bring it up.

the op was specific enough to discuss evolution, not gender confusion

paxonel:
the words brothers and parent cannot be used in this context as they never lived together as a family and they will never do so

A brother is still a brother even if they never lived together in the same house as polygamy and separation has proven.

So indeed, it is your claim that apes, monkeys and humans had the same extinct parents?

Like I said, I have a BSc. Industrial Chemistry, I didn’t tell you I have a Bsc. In Physics or Astronomy but you seem not know understand that knowledge of how chemicals react is not enough to explain the idea you’re putting forward. You still need to use concepts in other fields to try to first establish the basis for a chemical reaction. I know many people just go to the internet and read a lot of things only to come out sounding like they actually have a clue about how things works in reality so I don’t expect anyone to sound ignorant about these things, I just want to question them based on feasibility of these ideas.

Reading about supernova and having an idea about it is not the same as understanding whether the idea is feasible. I can read a lot on the internet but that doesn’t mean I think any of them is possible.

Also, why will I talk about evolution without first talking about abiogenesis? How can evolution occur without abiogenesis? Do you think it’s an intelligent approach to start talking about evolution without talking about abiogenesis? I know many of you people have been captivated with the idea of evolution and your minds have been fully captured by proponents of evolution, but what you fail to realise is that life must first exist before it can evolve. Just as you were first born before you grew and knew all the theories that you have packed up in your head.

I think talking about evolution without first establishing abiogenesis is not an intelligent approach to discovering the truth. I know many people who call themselves scientists are just delusional and may not realise this. I’m not saying you’re delusional even though there’s a high tendency you might be, but I’m simply affording you the opportunity to discus the basics first. After we’ve finished with abiogenesis then we can start on evolution.

We must first discus the basics before we progress. You were not born an adult, were you? And no one will even be born without sex and pregnancy. It’s stupid to talk about birth and shy away from sex and pregnancy. Just as it’s also stupid to force evolution as truth without first fully concluding on abiogenesis.

Also, like you said, the Adam and Eve is the reasonable alternative to all this story about evolution and abiogenesis if a person truly understands it. But I don’t want to talk about that yet bc you’ve already confirmed that it’s a waste of time to try to change a fool’s mind. So let’s keep discussing your idea until you realise the flaws in it then perhaps we might try the alternative.

Is that fine with you?

Workch:
if you understand how supernova works, then you should not be asking me.
Since you understand how it works, can you kindly discuss the problems you have with the idea of supernova it can created a planet. I will love to hear from you.

I know that's where you are going to, because it's the only alternative idea most people, especially Christians who have issue with evolution or abiogenesis try to sell.

Bro, You will observe that I am ignoring a lot of people on this thread because they are just bent on baseless argument. The moment I observe that one is a foolish person who always argue baselessly and never stays in th topic, I will ignore the person. I am here to debate substance and not argue with scientifically illiterate people who will never grasp basic concepts.
It's difficult to win an argument with an intelligent but it's impossible to win an argument against a fooool. You know why? Fooolll don't change their mind, they are just bent on arguing and validating their opinion irrespective. So I don't even bother arguing with one.

The reason why I'm saying this is because you have started showing gross misunderstanding of the actual concept we are discussing and you are assumming that you understand it hence the reason you are asking me many irrelevant questions that do not really relate to the topic: the topic is evolution, you have taken me to abiogenesis and the formation of planet and supernova, I don't have strength for the endless back and forth you are about starting. I don't want to think that you re a foooll because the purpose of argument is to learn and not to drive your own opinon. If you don't know the difference between Evolution and abiogenesis, you can browse reliable sources on Google, we don't have to argue about it.

Since you will never agree with me on this topic, I want to know what you think about thr Adam and Eve story (which is still a topic related to evolution since its the alternative that biblical literalists from Africa see as an alternative) from the Bible, probably maybe you can change my mind.

After this comment, if you don't stay on the topic and discuss it exhaustive by actually researching about it on Google before you make any comment, you will observe that you may not get responses from me anymore.

paxonel:
the op was specific enough to discuss evolution, not gender confusion

Yes, he was and we are following up on it until you brought in the following of the Europeans, which means, Africans should also follow their paths of gender confusion.

That option of “I don’t know if it’s true or false” does not exist for you because even in your confused state about reality, you’ve already concluded that the Adam and Eve story is untrue.

How can you conclude easily when you don’t even know anything? The moment you passed a judgment about one story, you’re indirectly upholding the alternative story, but then, how can you uphold something you’re not even sure of its authenticity? Is that irritating ?

This is why questions must be asked to help you realise your error, my friend.

Also, the topic must not be evolution alone, because evolution is just a surface value topic. We cannot evolve unless we first exist. So why talk about our evolution when we don’t even know how life existed? That’s not a wise way to start to know something. You start from the basics. From there, you can progress. I’m bringing abiogenesis into account so we can start from the basics. So when we finish with abiogenesis then we can progress into evolution. But we cannot progress unless we discovered if abiogenesis even happened at all.

Life is not a school exam where you can easily leave question 1 and start with question 2. With life, the basics come first and you can’t start from the middle. So let’s start from the beginning, my friend.

I know you want to close down the topic of abiogenesis bc you realise it’s absurdity. But then, if you believe in evolution, it’s to say you were first convinced about the process that birth life which started to evolve. You don’t have the RIGHT to say you don’t know if abiogenesis happened anymore.

Workch:
Don't you think that an option of I don't know if it's true or false exist?
Don't be streamlined with the way you reason.

the topic is about evolution and not abiogenesis. They are two different topics.
Abiogenesis is a strawman that is not even the actual topic. The actual topic is evolution

wegevv:


I think you’re still conflating the “theory of evolution” with the facts that the theory is based on lol.

I say this because of your last paragraph; I don’t know many Christians who reject the facts that the theory of evolution are based on. I only know those who reject the “theory of evolution” itself. There’s a difference between those two things because you can acknowledge the facts and reject the theory.

Many of those who reject the “theory of evolution” chose to explain the facts that the theory is based on in a different way.

Yes, I agree with you that you can acknowledge facts and reject the theory. Are you getting me point or what?

Is that not the essence of fallible tbeory?
Science will not be science if theory can not be rejected. How is that hard for you to grasp that I'm not disagreeing with you

MightySparrow:


Things evolve.
Can we ever trace the first language spoken?

sincerely, lets stay on the topic. I don't know how the emergence of the first language got to do with biological evolution.
We cannot achieve anything in hmthis conversation if you keep digressing.

How, where, when.?

Why are all living things except few have male and female. At what point did it start?

I don't know, this doesn't mean that evoli9is not fact as observed and explained to you earlier, we still don't understand every bit of it and that's a genuine admission

Evolution seems to me to take care of only species not emotions, language, spirituality etc.

you are correct

Apart from biological sciences, these also are fields of study.
There are so much knowledge also in these fields.

For example, in cat family, there different species. Are to still expect different variants. Or we going to help nature to do that?
There is cross - breeding going on. Has evolution been having agent's like human to work?

I don't understand the question here, kindly rephrase

LordReed:


Name the god you were worshipping before "whiteman" brought your current god to you. LoLz.

Quote the place Darwin said such things.

Go and ask ifa who your ancestors were worshipping. Not me. I'm not interested

Darwin himself, in his On the Origin of Species, said, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

Go and read chapter 6 of Darwin's book, Origin I don't quote nonsense like you

LordReed:



Quote the place Darwin said such things.

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case.

You will not find it. Servant of Baba Darwin

LordReed:


Name the god you were worshipping before "whiteman" brought your current god to you. LoLz.

Quote the place Darwin said such things.

Page 189, Origin of Species by your master, Baba Charles Darwin

Aemmyjah:


Go and ask ifa who your ancestors were worshipping. Not me. I'm not interested

Darwin himself, in his On the Origin of Species, said, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

Go and read chapter 6 of Darwin's book, Origin I don't quote nonsense like you

LMAO! So you agree that the god you were worshipping is not the same as the god the "whiteman" brought to you.

Bwahahahahaha! Oga you have not read chapter 6 of Origin of Species. If you have what is the next sentence after the one you quoted?