Is evolution proven science or theory

[T-Rock]

Only want to establish the initial conditions that give rise to life are governed by laws of nature, e.g. thermodynamics and that once established that symbiosis gave rise to the emergence of the multicellular eukaryotes

Everything in the universe is under law, but hopefully not Shariah

Evolution defies the first and second laws of thermodynamics, the laws of conservation of mass & energy, and the law of increasing entropy.

According to thermodynamics, nothing can arise from nothing and increase in quantity, but only decrease, in disorder.

[ajls]

not to derail this discussion, because I find it both educational and fascinating, but I've never understood the 'either/or' when it comes to Darwinism v. Creationism. Why can't it be be both? the "Creator" began life, and then it has evolved (i.e. adapted) to life on Earth as necessary? Species either adapt/mutate for survival or they die off to make room for other species more adaptable to environment. Why is it that "Faith" and science cannot co-exist?

[T-Rock]

Why is it that "Faith" and science cannot co-exist?

It can, and is why people seek truth. Both sides are guilty of bias though. However, researching both sides will eventually bring forth truth.

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by ajls

not to derail this discussion, because I find it both educational and fascinating, but I've never understood the 'either/or' when it comes to Darwinism v. Creationism. Why can't it be be both? the "Creator" began life, and then it has evolved (i.e. adapted) to life on Earth as necessary? Species either adapt/mutate for survival or they die off to make room for other species more adaptable to environment. Why is it that "Faith" and science cannot co-exist?

Thread is about the science related to evolution, not Darwinism v. Creation.

Please don't shatter the fragile dialogue we have going.
Some of us have waited years for just such a discussion on this site.

Please...

[bluebb]

Genesis 1

New International Version (NIV)
The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Thread is about the science related to evolution, not Darwinism v. Creation.

Please don't shatter the fragile dialogue we have going.
Some of us have waited years for just such a discussion on this site.

Please...

lol

[PedOncoDoc]

Originally Posted by bluebb

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day....

...11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

I am fascinated by creation stories from around the world, especially in parallels/consistencies between creation stories from cultures that had no contact with eachother. While I do believe in a higher power (call it God, YHWH, Ain Sof, etc., whatever), I believe that after the initial spark of creation occurred, much of our universe was allowed develop on its own. (Insert the joke questioning intelligent design with regards to the close proximity of the anus and genitalia here.)

There are some inconsistencies in the strict JudeoChristian creation story which I highighted with the quote above-

There was light and darkness, and the light was called day and the darkness called night. What is the source of said light? It is not described or identified.

The plants were then made before the sun. Either the light that was created on the first day was sufficient for photosynthesis, the plants did not require photosynthesis upon creation and later developed this requirement, someone got his days mixed up (the author, not Creator) and the sun was made before the vegetation, or the story is flawed in some other way.

The creation of the sun and moon on the 4th day - the story implies that, in the absence of the sun, day would still be light (see the first day). It also identifies the moon as a source of light - but we clearly know that the moon merely relects the light of the sun and is not a light in and of itself. The translation you quote states that the sun and moon serve "to separate light from darkness", but God had already done so on day 1 - "he separated the light from the darkness".

Faith is something that must transcend logic and reasoning - the infinite is confined by these 2 measures, and expecting ourselves as finite beings to have the ability to understand it all seems like a fool's errand to me.

YMMV...

[PRB]

Gents,
Not on topic.....please comment upon Darwinism as a theory or science....

[sinjefe]

Originally Posted by PRB

Gents,
Not on topic.....please comment upon Darwinism as a theory or science....

Did you really think you were going to keep this as an on-track, scientific discussion?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by sinjefe

Did you really think you were going to keep this as an on-track, scientific discussion?

And so it goes...

Richard

[PRB]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

My understanding is that there are also some misconceptions regarding evolution, for example that it has never been observed. Evolution has been observed, some examples would be pesticide-resistant insects that have developed, and a bacteria that has evolved to feed on nylon (a completely human creation). Evolution doesn't mean that a creature will make a sudden leap, for example going from an insect to a lizard. It is very gradual changes over time due to various factors such as the environment.

Here is a link on some misconceptions. On the side, you will find a link to a creationist's rebuttal of said link, along with a rebuttal to the creationist's rebuttal:

LINK

Read the text about micro evolving...it is a replication of 'existing' parental DNA or a reduction of DNA. That is called mutation....for Darwinism to exist, new DNA would have to be 'made' that is other than inherited parental DNA to include HOX DNA....this has never been observed and goes against the laws of DNA...the barrier code, mutation weakness and natural selection....Macro evolution has never been observed...only inter species changes......totally dif scientifically.

BTW, Neanderthal was reclassified in the Homo Sapien cat years ago.....once again, having strains of other human DNA is not unusual depending upon exposure.

I was unaware we were 'great apes' tho....if so then we can mate with them and produce reproducing appettes? I don't think so actually.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by PRB

....for Darwinism to exist, new DNA would have to be 'made' that is other than inherited parental DNA to include HOX DNA....this has never been observed

Nutshelled.

[PRB]

Richard,
To argue that Darwinism is a false theory in no way says another is fact. Why is that the case?

[PRB]

Macro evolution would be a species jump...one species changing into another...i.e an Ape developing into a human as in Darwinism. This would entail huge additions in beneficial DNA and the HOX DNA which goes against what we know of the protective process built into our DNA...this has never been observed in any form, DNA or fossil.
Micro evol is simply a mutation within the same species. i.e. blind underground stream fish...they mutated due to environment...thru the loss of DNA (that is key..the loss of not the addition too).
Other mutations are in resistant bacteria etc...but they restack already existing DNA or lose DNA thru mutation....they do not grow totally new DNA.
Micro evol has always been the fallback explanation for macro evolution even tho the two are not one and the same...it is a bait and switch argument.
All mamals have very similar DNA.....
"London: Scientists have sequenced the genome of the pig, showing the swine and humans share 112 DNA mutations linked to a range of disease including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, which may be useful in fighting diseases."
A watermelon is 98% water....so is a Jelly fish...so is a snowcone....very simple stats can be very deceiving.

[PRB]

One claim often made is that new species creation has never been observed, for example in fruit flies, that only new types of fruit fly are created, but not a different species. But this is incorrect. New fruit fly species have very much been created by scientists through experimentation. Different species of fruit fly as in if you try to mate the newer ones produced through experimentation with the original types used, they cannot produce off-spring. Just because something is a different species doesn't mean it isn't still the same type of creature.

That's my point...they cannot produce offspring...that is the barrier code in DNA...that exists and is observable and one of the reasons Darwinism is false.
Unnatural mutations (mules, beefalo etc) cannot reproduce, natural selection...kills the mutation....that is the built in prot device that Darwin had no idea existed