A little girl asked her father ,' How did human race appear ?

The father answered,' God made Adam and Eve and thy had children
and so was mankind made.'

Two days later the girl asked her mother the same question. The mother
answered,'many years ago there were monkeys from which the human
race evolved.'

The confused girl returned to her father and said.'Dad, how is it
possable that you told me the human race was created by God, and Mom
said thy beveloped from monkeys?'

The father answered , ' Well dear it is very simple. I told you about
my side of the family and your Mother told you about hers.'

Interesting! Which does honor mankind the most, being the descendents of monkeys or the creation story? It is sort of impressive that some in their efforts to denounce God and the Bible have been willing to count themselves the descendents of monkeys. I realize some say they believe in God and the Bible and still believe they are descendents of monkeys, but why? May God have mercy on us.

Amos, even scientific theory doesn't say we evolved from monkeys. We have a common ancestor with other primates. In other words maybe monkeys evolved from Adam as well.

We are going to listen tonight to a man who tried to do away with creation from the scientific reasoning. In the research/data/scientific testing, he decided that science proved the creation. The topic tonight is scientific approach on fossils versus creation.Wish I could remember everything that he says. We've heard him before and it was awesome on a different subject about creation. One business man sets this up locally. This business man loves the Lord. calledoutPTL

I think Intelligent Design is the popular buzzword these days.

I understand that science has 2 types. 1)historical - past events 2)observable - has to be reaptable and measureable.

So my questions about evolution are 1)When was it observed? 2)What was observed in what stage?
3) When has it been repeated? 4)How did they measure it? calledoutPTL

3) When has it been repeated?

Have you ever seen mold grow out of bread? A stream carve out a bed? Rocks changing over time, plants mixing seeds and creating hybrids, man changing and improving (or going backwards depending on your point of view).

Evolution is happening all around us, all the time.

Speciation, the "vehicle" by which evolution "occurs" has been observed. One case is the speciation of mosquitoes in the subway tunnels in London.

However, I find it hard to believe that humans share a common ancestor with mammals, birds and reptiles.

However, I find it hard to believe that humans share a common ancestor with mammals, birds and reptiles.

And yet you find it easy to believe that one being created (is the father of) them all. Isn't that a common ancestor?

I do not think that a part of Henry Ford or Joe Chevrolet exists in every automobile driving down the highway. The existence of a Creator does not directly imply ancestral lineage, just as the existence of speciation cannot validate evolution.

TP.. Gene said something about evolution one time.. something about there can be small changes... BUT not major ones that happen. I forget what that's called... but to me it explains why some of those changes can happen.

I don’t know if this makes sense to anyone here, but theory has it that the reason we get goose bumps when we are cold is because when we had much more hair on our bodies millions of years ago, goose bumps caused it to stand up thereby creating better insulation. A vestige of evolution.

Again, a theory.

This is probably a dumb question.. but how would an animals hair standing up straighter make it so the animal would be warmer? I would think if the hair was up straighter.. it would allow the cold air to get closer to the skin....

Without regard to the origin of life, I've never understood why anyone would refuse to accept the theory of evolution by natural selection.

As a simple farming example, in Mississippi where I grew up they can no longer use the same chemicals to kill cotton boll weevils as they did a decade ago. Why? Evolution through natural selection. Boll weevils that had genetic mutations that made them immune to the chemicals were able to survive and produce offspring when the "normal" boll weevils died from exposure to the spray. Their offspring that received the mutated dominant genes also survived and eventually they became the dominant species that now require different chemicals to kill.

Take black rabbits that have a genetic mutation that makes them occasionally produce a white rabbit. Put the parents in the Arctic where there is snow year around with polar bears and other predators. Black rabbits are easy targets, white rabbits blend into the snow. Go back in 5 years and do you think you'll find a population of black rabbits or white rabbits? Folks, that's evolution through natural selection.

What's so complicated or difficult about that simple concept? Why do you think there are more and more anti-biotic resistant strains of bacteria today? Divine intervention? Magic? Doesn't it make logical sense that the bacteria that have genetic mutations that allow them to survive the anti-biotic drugs have evolved through natural selection and will survive?

I know some of you balk at a scholarly view of things, but without going as far as claiming the origin of life is through evolution by natural selection, how can you ignore the overwhelming evidence of evolution through natural selection as a process that is happening?

Well, I suppose when bole wevils start turning into rabbits I'll condider the notion.

<<Well, I suppose when bole wevils start turning into rabbits I'll condider the notion.>>

Gene - so then specifically, you deny that evolution through natural selection occurs?

I'm truly curious...give your explanation of how things change over time? Say, for example, how did Asians, Africans and Caucasians come to have very distinct appearances when presumably they share common ancestry with Adam and Eve? I realize that I'm talking about a species that shares a common DNA, but for even that difference you must have an explanation.

I am unclear on my own opinion on the origin of life, but the point I'm trying to make is that I wish people would not throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to evolution. Evolution as a natural process is well, natural, and there is nothing evil or non-Biblical in the concept.

When I started to university, the biggest concern from the Holdeman brotherhood was that I would get sucked into believing evolution. I came to realize later that none of them even knew what it was. They just had grown up believing it was an inherently evil thing and that it meant that people came from monkeys.

While it's not my personal belief, I believe that believing that God created the world literally as described in Genesis can completely reconcile with Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.

>>but how would an animals hair standing up straighter make it so the animal would be warmer? I would think if the hair was up straighter.. it would allow the cold air to get closer to the skin.…<<

Actually, Lark, it has the opposite effect. By the hair standing up, a layer of warm air is created close to the skin

Psytrancer-

I agree, many critics of evolution have no clue what it actually is. Speciation and natural selection are observable and in no way contradict intelligent design, as long as they are viewed in the light by which they are observed. The problem comes when short term observations are used to determine what happened millions of years ago.

What you said about the H fearing that you would begin to believe in evolution reminds me of what they say when I tell them my degree is in Political Science. (“So are you going to be a politician?”) (umm…no)

<<What you said about the H fearing that you would begin to believe in evolution reminds me of what they say when I tell them my degree is in Political Science. (“So are you going to be a politician?”) (umm…no)>>

LOL - I'm sorry to admit I would have been one of those until I took an introductory political science course in university. That sinful word politics took on an entirely different meaning when I came to the startling realization that if you take any group of people....well....politics.

By the way, I was dreading my poli-sci requirement, and it turned out to be one of the most engaging and interesting uni courses I ever took.

Poly sci was fun until this (my last) semester. I have a international conflicts class that I really do not care for.

Psy Ya know the bole wevils a very adaptive bug .
So much so thy made a song about it .

Joe
Do you think it may be possible to explain to any given Holdeman minister how politics drive a closed society such as the H church?
Furthermore, do you think said minister may be able to comprehend?

OS-
I (or you) would be able to explain this to pretty much any minister. They are after all the leaders, and are not there by any accident.
I have an uncle who is a H minister, and I believe that he is very well aware of how politics drive a closed society. He is a very intelligent man, and while we differ on many viewpoints, he is able to carry on a conversation about a lot of surprising topics. Perhaps this is due to time spent in the Mission/unit in NYC, or his experience brushing shoulders with the "world" in the medical field. My uncle was quite well aware of what political science was about, and far more educated about other aspects of society than the average H.

Moved this post to a new thread.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/419882/thread/1209435980/last-1209438987/Creation%2Cnatural+selection+and+God

Kevin.. ty .. interesting..

Psy, here is what I don't beleive. I don't beleive there in an increase in information through beneficial random mutations that are then carrried on to offspring through natural selection. Do people change over time? Yes, they adapt. As far as I can tell adaptation is more often than not associated with a loss of information, not a gain. I don't beleive "evolution through natural selection" can be logicly reconciled to Scripture either, for guided random creation is an oxymoron.

If naturalistic evolution is truely a sufficient explanation then it will run on its own power. To attach it to God to "work through" would be like attaching a tractor to a horse and having the horse pull it in neutral to plow the field. If it's not a sufficient explanation then what does God, or anyone else, need it for?

Gene-

When you throw an object off from a building, gravity determines that that object will eventually travel downward. However, if the object is for example a paper airplane, it will travel a different trajectory then a brick. Both objects are guided by gravity. However, the wings on the airplane, wind currents, humidity, etc., produce a random flight path. Of course, if you knew the exact angle of the wings, weight of the airplane, force of throw, elevation, etc., you could attempt to challenge my definition of random, but there would always be a large margin of error.

Guided Random Creationism is not an oxymoron, if you believe that God set the process in motion, towards a given end, through set process (evolution). While we may see it as randomness, God sees it as His master plan.

However, natural selection is not entirely random. Speciation is more random than natural selection. In fact, speciation could be called the “randomness” of natural selection. However, both natural selection and speciation are proven and observable.

The problem lies again, with interval data.

Thanks Joe, I'll ponder that a bit.

Kevin wrote: I don’t know if this makes sense to anyone here, but theory has it that the reason we get goose bumps when we are cold is because when we had much more hair on our bodies millions of years ago, goose bumps caused it to stand up thereby creating better insulation. A vestige of evolution.

Again, a theory. And again isn't measureable, history or repeatable. calledoutPTL

Peter ,Have you ever seen mold grow out of bread? Without being fed, this mole would die. What does mold evolve to???.A stream carve out a bed? Isn't this just a natural happening?????? Rocks changing over time, again a natural happening.?????? plants mixing seeds and creating hybrids Doesn't man doethis, not evolution???, man changing and improving (or going backwards depending on your point of view). Isn't this knowledge???? Not evolution, again man doing it, not evolution

Evolution is happening all around us, all the time. Haven't seen anything that would make me think this would evolve into something more than what it was. smile. calledoutPTL

Joe tell me more about the mosquitoes??? calledoutPTL

I’m sure you could find the study somewhere on-line, and I know that a similar study was done with bees of some kind.

When the underground subway tunnels were dug in London, mosquitoes began to inhabit the warm and moist climate. The tunnels remain at approximately the same temperature year round while the surface undergoes normal seasons. The mosquitoes in the tunnels do not go dormant in the winter months, but continue breeding; and therefore have reproduced many times more than the surface mosquitoes through the years. Today, the tunnel mosquitoes are distinctly different from the surface mosquitoes in appearance and mating habits. They have ceased to interbreed, and cannot produce fertile offspring. The reason for this is isolation. This depicts one of the four causes of speciation, reproductive isolation.

Pystander:Concerning about the cotton boll weevils. The human body was created to develope an imunity when exposed to certain things, even antibiotics. In fact so many people are taking antibiotics and growing resistant to them. Your immune system developes when exposed to things. For example, chicken pox or mumps. But that isn't what I'd call evolution.

This happens to humans as well, but it doesn't change a person into something else.(Talking about albino rabbits.)

But maybe I'm looking at the viewpoint theory, of man evolving from monkeys. The natural changing that doesn't change one species into another I don't have a problem with. The changing from say, plants and eventually changing into man is what I have a problem with. smile calledoutPTL

Thanks Joe, Did you know at one time in San Fransico, the Chinese that lived underground all the time without comming out in the sunlight, actually turned pale/white? But never heard that they couldn't reproduce though. Environment can change a species, but not into another species. calledoutPTL

Thank you all for taking the time to answer, I enjoyed the discussion. calledoutPTL

Scientists recognize three types of “life”

The most basic would be things like lichens
The second is plant life and bacteria
The third includes the animals, fish, insects, ect.

Hardcore evolutionists say that at one time all life was the same. Then it split into two groups (1 vs 2) and one of those split again (2) to form the third and most complex form of life.

There was a man who bred foxes- and tried to breed out the aggressive & “wild” nature in them. After only a few years of breeding only the tamest of the foxes, they begin to make different noises, and there coloring changed. They begin to look, sound and act like dogs.

Another scientist studied wild dogs in a city dump outside of Mexico City. He thought that perhaps the first domesticated dogs were in fact wolves. The tamest of the wolves would be the only ones that tolerated life in close proximity to man, thus effectively breeding out many aggressive and “wild” tendencies.

A donkey and a horse produce a mule, but a mule is sterile.

PTL- I agree with you, speciation and natural selection are real and observable, but believing that crocodiles and polar bears have a common ancestor is a bit of a stretch for me.

After all- if you were to take your wristwatch completely apart, put it in a shoebox, and shake it up for several billion years, I doubt that it would ever shake itself back into a functioning watch again.

Here's a thought experiment: The Bible teaches that when the Ark was completed that God sent two of every living thing into the Ark to be saved.

Here are some statistics: Current number of known spider species: 34,000. Current number of known species of frogs: 4,000. Current number of known bee species: 20,000. Ants: 12,000 species. Snakes: 2,400. Worms: 4,400. Dogs: 800 breeds. Birds: 9,000. Flies: 120,000 Beetles: 350,000. Butterflies: 170,000.

That only is the beginning of the list of living creatures that are known to be alive on the earth today. After you'd get the total list you'd multiply the total by two to get the mate for every species listed above.

I can think of three possibilities at this point:

A) There was an example of every single species alive on the earth today as a living, breathing creature on the Ark

B) There was a representative of each creature in the Ark. Since the flood they have evolved over time so that from a common bird you get things as diverse as a humming bird and an ostrich.

C) The story is a myth.

There is really no correct answer as Bible literalists, scientists and those in the middle will all come to different conclusions, but it's been a fun thought experiment for me to actually go through each scenario and think about the implications.

At the time of the grate flood , Do we beleave God at that point
no longer had the ability to creat any thing, any time there after ??

I beleave at the time of the Flood God wanted to show mankind he did not
want to lose what he had created to that point .

Had God wanted to get rid of something ? Perhaps it would have been
mankind .

God did not [ just like U ] want to lose that, that he cared enought
about to create .

I'm not so religous as to put God in a box and limit him from doing
any spectacular things now or in the future .

I do beleave he has the power and the love to save this sorry and
retiched being I am.

I just wonder why those who clame to be his follers don't have his
compassion , and love for what God created .

Pystander, love your thinking and imaginational mind!! You wrote, Here are some statistics: Current number of known spider species: 34,000. Current number of known species of frogs: 4,000. Current number of known bee species: 20,000. Ants: 12,000 species. Snakes: 2,400. Worms: 4,400. Dogs: 800 breeds. Birds: 9,000. Flies: 120,000 Beetles: 350,000. Butterflies: 170,000.

That only is the beginning of the list of living creatures that are known to be alive on the earth today. After you'd get the total list you'd multiply the total by two to get the mate for every species listed above.

Gen 7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, and every bird of every sort, 15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, where in is the breath of life. 16 And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the lord shut him in. ---Sounds like at least male and female of each 9,000 birds were on there!! Now Pystander, with your inquiring mind, think about the sanitation bit, the food problems, external noise, and entertainment! ----Isn't our God an awesome God thatcan take care of all that?? It ain't no whimpy God I serve!!!!!!!! Entertainment, why I think I'd be so overwhelmed by the fact that all these living creatures were doing what Adam wasgiven authoirity to do back in Gen 1:26-31 before I was put in the Garden of Eden! Plus seeing something I had never saw before such as rain from above and fountains under the earth gushing up would do me quite well!. calledoutPTL

Joe said, "After all, if you were to take your wristwatch completely apart, put it in a shoebox, and shake it up for several billion years, I doubt that it would ever shake itself back into a functioning watch again."

Your analogy is not really applicable, in my opinion. The watchmaker analogy was first invented by some Englishman before Darwin, and Darwin was initially very sympathetic to it. It is used tirelessly by creationist today, but here is what it doesn’t take into account:

The watch is made of dead material and doesn’t contain reproductive genes which pass on information to a new living organism. Information which due to mutations changes from time to time, and allows natural selection to reward the mutations which happen to allow it to adapt to its environment a little better.