Creationists dealt a blow

[MustafaMc]

We also feel that God would sing out in joy, and all the angles would trumpet if man became enlightened enough to understand how Allah did it, or at least how our meagerness’ could understand it.

My sentiments exactly. I believe that this is the very point of Allah teaching Adam the "names" of things in Quran 2:31-33 He taught Adam the names of all things; then He presented the things to the angels and said: "Tell Me the names of those if what you say is true?" "Glory to You," they replied, "we have no knowledge except what You have taught us: in fact You are the One who is perfect in knowledge and wisdom." Allah said: "O Adam! Tell them the names." When Adam told them the names, Allah said: "Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of the heavens and the earth and I know what you reveal and what you conceal?" For me, my scientific knowledge enhances my belief in the Creator. The very genetic principles that evolutionists combine with the theory of unguided evolution to "disprove" God's existence in fact enhances my belief in Him and His creativity.

The only question is “Do you believe in a higher power” The Bible, Koran, and all other great books try to show us how to love, respect, and honor each other.

That, my friend, is the central argument between classical evolutionists and creationists. It's all about our belief or lack of belief in the existence of God.

It is not contradictory for a theist to also believe in evolution (with "Intelligent Design") as a viable theory as to how "creation" happened and continues to happen. Neither is it unreasonable to believe that Allah fashioned man of clay straight away and then after a period of time breathed life into him. This is in fact is much easier for me to "swallow" than the ludicrous answers to questions such as, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

 

[root]

It is not contradictory for a theist to also believe in evolution (with "Intelligent Design") as a viable theory as to how "creation"

Again, those that simply do not understand the theory of evolution and are just against it because (everyone else is within thier social circles). I say this harshly or otherwise. Evolution DOES NOT seek to explain creation. The theory of evolution only concerns itself with how life evolves and not how it began.

 

[Woodrow]

Better check and see if the sky is falling.

I agree with Root, for probably the first time.

Evolution DOES NOT seek to explain creation.

In simplicity evolution is an explanation as to why some people have blue eyes, it is not an explanation as to how people came about.

 

[root]

Better check and see if the sky is falling.

I agree with Root, for probably the first time.

Excellent, however I am just about to disagree with you.....

Evolution DOES NOT seek to explain creation.

Correct, creation of first organic life.......

In simplicity evolution is an explanation as to why some people have blue eyes, it is not an explanation as to how people came about.

Evolution does seek to explain how people came about, it does not seek to explain how the first single celled life came to be.......

 

[MustafaMc]

Again, those that simply do not understand the theory of evolution and are just against it because (everyone else is within thier social circles). I say this harshly or otherwise. Evolution DOES NOT seek to explain creation. The theory of evolution only concerns itself with how life evolves and not how it began.

Since I apparently don't understand the theory of evolution, perhaps, you can explain how a single celled organism can evolve without a Higher Power through different progressively higher life forms into humans. An additional explanation is also required for how that primal single celled organism came into existence.

 

[MustafaMc]

It is not contradictory for a theist to also believe in evolution (with "Intelligent Design") as a viable theory as to how "creation" happened and continues to happen.

By creation, I didn't mean the original seminal event, rather the establishment of each uniquely sexually compatible species of higher living organisms that either presently exists or has since become extinct.

 

[Pygoscelis]

An additional explanation is also required for how that primal single celled organism came into existence.

Perhaps, but you'd then not be discussing evolution, as root and woodrow both just pointed out.

 

[ajazz]

Assalamalikum!

One question.

If we evolved from apes why do we still have apes????????


.

 

[Pygoscelis]

We don't have the same apes.

They too have changed.

 

[جوري]

Guess the ones that didn't make the full leap just couldn't get lucky...

 

[Malaikah]

Evolution does seek to explain how people came about, it does not seek to explain how the first single celled life came to be.......

Are you sure? This seems contrary to much of what I have studied at university.

Or are you implying that the question of where the first cell came from is a separate field to evolution?

By the way, the theory of evolution does not claim that humans evolved from apes, rather the theory claims they evolved from a common ancestor.

 

[Woodrow]

Are you sure? This seems contrary to much of what I have studied at university.

Or are you implying that the question of where the first cell came from is a separate field to evolution?

By the way, the theory of evolution does not claim that humans evolved from apes, rather the theory claims they evolved from a common ancestor.

Minor disagreement here. Semantics in recent years has really confused the definition of Evolution.

Evolution simply means things age and/or change.

Evolution=Change No explanation as to what or to how.

The various theories of evolution are not explanations or attempts at an explanation of the existance of Evolution. All theories about Evolution are an attempt to explain already observed facts.

They are explanations as to HOW evolution occurs, not if it occurs.

Changes in organisms do occur. Parents have children that grow taller or shorter. etc. If you Check into all religious scriptures, our ancient ancestors were different then us. They were not the same size, they did not have the same life expectancy, etc. These changes are EVOLUTION.

The question is how Evolution occurs and what was the true ancestor of what. Those explantaions are the "Theories of Evolution"

Us Theists believe that all evolutional changes are explained in our Scriptures. As a Muslim I believe the Qur'an and the Ahadith explain how evolutional changes occur.

Darwinian theory simply says that the changes were the result of natural selection. His work on the origin of species is based primarly on his observations of the Galapagos Island flora and fauna. The critters are no longer the same as their main land ancestors. That is no problem. They are still the same critters. The Marine Iguana of the Galapagos is still just as much of an Iguana as it's mainland relatives are. Yes, a new species, but not a new life form.

Now when people use the theories of Natural Selection and combine them with observable facts and come to the conclusion that Humans were once Apes, that is speculation. That is not EVOLUTION. If it could be proven to be a fact then it could be termed Evolution.

 

[MustafaMc]

My understanding of evolution, differing from the previous post, can be summarized below:

American Heritage Dictionary definition "ev·o·lu·tion NOUN: A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. The process of developing. Gradual development. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny. "

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html#Q01

"Biological evolution refers to the cumulative changes that occur in a population over time..."

"A scientific theory stands until proven wrong -- it is never proven correct. The Darwinian theory of evolution has withstood the test of time.."

"Just as the tree of life illustrates, all organisms, both living and extinct, are related. Every branch of the tree represents a species, and every fork separating one species from another represents the common ancestor shared by these species...For example, scientists estimate that the common ancestor shared by humans and chimpanzees lived some 5 to 8 million years ago. Humans and bacteria obviously share a much more distant common ancestor, but our relationship to these single-celled organisms is no less real."

 

[Malaikah]

Now when people use the theories of Natural Selection and combine them with observable facts and come to the conclusion that Humans were once Apes, that is speculation. That is not EVOLUTION. If it could be proven to be a fact then it could be termed Evolution.

But no scientists claim that humans evolved from apes... they claim humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor... that was my point...

Or have I still misunderstood your point? :?

 

[Woodrow]

My understanding of evolution, differing from the previous post, can be summarized below:

American Heritage Dictionary definition "ev·o·lu·tion NOUN: A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. The process of developing. Gradual development. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny. "

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html#Q01

"Biological evolution refers to the cumulative changes that occur in a population over time..."

"A scientific theory stands until proven wrong -- it is never proven correct. The Darwinian theory of evolution has withstood the test of time.."

"Just as the tree of life illustrates, all organisms, both living and extinct, are related. Every branch of the tree represents a species, and every fork separating one species from another represents the common ancestor shared by these species...For example, scientists estimate that the common ancestor shared by humans and chimpanzees lived some 5 to 8 million years ago. Humans and bacteria obviously share a much more distant common ancestor, but our relationship to these single-celled organisms is no less real."

Quite interesting. I must say the definition has changed very much since the 1950's. It appears the Darwinians have had influence on the Lexicologists.

Maybe I need to learn modern English and pass 1950 style English off as a foreign lanuage.

 

[Woodrow]

But no scientists claim that humans evolved from apes... they claim humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor... that was my point...

Or have I still misunderstood your point? :?

Minor difference in semantics. I said people not scientists, in other words I was addressing popular concepts and not scientific fact.

 

[ajazz]

We don't have the same apes.

They too have changed.

yes exactly !!!!!!!!

Apes after evolving still remain Apes




.

 

[wilberhum]

yes exactly !!!!!!!!

Apes after evolving still remain Apes




.

Stick around a couple million years and you will see the difference.

 

[root]

Quote:
Originally Posted by root
Evolution does seek to explain how people came about, it does not seek to explain how the first single celled life came to be.......

Are you sure? This seems contrary to much of what I have studied at university.

Yes, quite sure......

Or are you implying that the question of where the first cell came from is a separate field to evolution?

It's a completely different set of theories, the top two contenders being;

1. Abiogenesis
2. Panspermia

I personally suspect panpermia which only pushes the question back a little further. However, abiogenesis still remains a strong contender. As far as I am lead to believe creation from clay (once heralded by the creationists) has lost much of it's scientific weight. Recent findings of clay found on asteroids may bring it back a level, but since we also found amino acid structure, alcohol and even organic matter on asteroids it will take a major discovery for creation from clay to make a come back. we have to wait and see.

A lot of thi9s discussion is about people demanding proof, a theologist once said and I agree. You can hypothosise the world is only full of white rabbits, it does not matter how many white rabbits you find, you can never prove it, you can however disprove it by finding one black rabbit or a rabbit of a differing colour. This is known as falsifying, within evolution this has never been achieved, the theory has never been falsifiesd. Creationist scientists, seek to falsify it by finding irreducible complexity structures, claiming that such a structure\system is so complex it must have a designer. when they are proved wrong, they simply move to the next apparently complex structure, I think this is wrong, they have been wrong many times and simply move onto the next scientific mystery. If your happy that this is science you believe them when they say it coukld not happen by chance, and then have that opinion overturned, then continue to believe the next structure is complex etc etc, then I guess you are already use to being wrong most of the time.

To me, I think it is an illogical position to hold, but I am without religion and you are, we are all content with our lives when we can make sense of the world around us, it could be quite traumatic I guess, if u wake up and suddenly the world around u is not how u have been believing it to be.

By the way, the theory of evolution does not claim that humans evolved from apes, rather the theory claims they evolved from a common ancestor.

Agreed, we still have apes because they are perfectly evolved to live within the environment that apes live in, one of the reasons why I dislike the term "intermediate species", since in effect sny species at anytime is highly evolved for it's environment at any given time. The finches of the gallipoli island (darwins finches) recently split into two seperate sub species evolving differing beaks to cope with differing food types, recently one of the sub species has collapsed as the food source changed yet again. Evolution in action.
__________________

 

[ajazz]

Stick around a couple million years and you will see the difference.

so you mean to say apes are yet to evolve into humans and take couple of millions years ??????????

as such you have invalidated the Darwin's theory of evolution

congratulation !!!!!


.