You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

2
-2

[–] logos_ethos 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

You are trying to connect a basic observation about reproduction to a discussion of morality, in a child like way, I might add. Evolution does not violate cause and effect. Only when you add an unnecessary creator into the picture does cause and effect become violated.

Evolution is why a new flu vaccine is created every season. Do you think that a creator is making a new strain of flu every year? We have the science of evolution to understand life. The medical field uses it because it works. It does not violate laws of physics. The thermodynamics argument that you used applies to a closed system that does not receive additional energy. The ecosystem on Earth receives an abundance of energy from the sun, which is why that argument does not apply.

You talk about immoral actions. Have you read the Old Testament? To quote Richard Dawkins:

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

If the God of the Old Testament were a person, any moral nation would give him the death penalty.

I used the erosion of a rock via water as an example of how a long running and imperceptible process is real, even if you cannot perceive changes while watching this process right in front of you. The smoothness part of this metaphor assumes that smoothness was a goal in contrast to the rough shape that rocks normally have. The metaphor was not intended to have more meaning beyond this. Metaphors are limited like that.

I am just describing reproduction as it is commonly understood. Thinks like this picture are far more substantiated than a creator ever will be. If a creator created those things, such a tree would not tie together neatly like that. Also, we have a fossil record to prove this. Evolution is falsifiable. All it takes to falsify evolution is to have the wrong species show up in the wrong part of the timeline. That has not happened, and it would happen frequently if evolution were false.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] logos_ethos 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You are projecting. You are being intellectually dishonest & laughable, and you think that I am doing what you are doing. So you accuse me of doing what you are doing. I am not. I am being honest and factual.

Evolution does not create new flus

Yes, it does. If you practiced health care based on creationism instead of science, you would hurt people and eventually be sued for medical malpractice. From a Mayo Clinic section called "Why do I need to get vaccinated every year?":

New flu vaccines are released every year to keep up with rapidly adapting flu viruses. Because flu viruses evolve so quickly, last year's vaccine may not protect you from this year's viruses.

Are you really going to argue against the medical establishment and reputable sites like the Mayo Clinic?

Reproduction often creates mutations, so over time, mutations accumulate. This is why life needs selection mechanisms to keep the good and discard the bad. After very many reproduction cycles, there might be a few mutations that increase fitness for the current environment. The selection mechanisms do not differentiate between a "good copy" or a bad copy with a good mutation. If the organism with these is more successful, it tends to reproduce more. If the organism is less successful, it tends to reproduce less. The population size with good reproductive rates increase, and the population size with poor reproductive rates decrease. It is an established fact that evolution occurs. The theory of evolution is about the history and the details.

Some people accept microevolution but not macroevolution. But if you accept one, you must accept the other because macroevolution is just a long series of microevolution.