Replies

No. Like begats like, implies no change between offspring and their parents. It is static, essentially the same as cloning.

That is what you creationist and ID'ers are implying, that change can't occur.

So all us enlightened evolutionist have to do is show a change between parents and offspring and we disprove your theory : )

Straw man alright! I haven't talked to any creationist or IDer who says or even implies that changes cannot occur. I've seen them occur myself, having grown up on a small family farm. Even if you can find some Creationist or IDer who says that no change can occur, most don't say that and to say that in general they do say so is a lie, then to attack them as having said that is a straw man.

Furthermore, you're relying on the logically bankrupt idea that if something can happen a little ways it can and did happen a long ways. But such an assumption is just not true!

It is entirely plausible that God created different kinds of creatures with built-in quality control (in other words the ones that aren't as healthy die off, leaving the less genetically corrupted ones) which is exactly what we see. The fact that they are influenced by genetic drift and different looking varieties of each kind emerge is not proof that they were not created as distinct fully developed kinds.

It would help you if you were to get over this "All or nothing" mentality. To you it looks like either offspring are absolute perfect copies of their parents or everything evolved - and of course you look at it in this light because it makes the one view look absurd - but in reality, there is no reason whatsoever that there isn't a third option, which is that God did create them, and they are influenced by genetic drift. It's not "ID or Change." Both ideas allow for the kind of evolution I've seen (some call it microevolution). If one wishes to divide it into a mutually exclusive scene, then it would be "It is ID or ASBE." (where ASBE means All Species By Evolution).

-Jesse

I haven't talked to any creationist or IDer who says or even implies that changes cannot occur. I've seen them occur myself, having grown up on a small family farm.

So you agree with the Theory of Evolution then, good.

Furthermore, you're relying on the logically bankrupt idea that if something can happen a little ways it can and did happen a long ways. But such an assumption is just not true!

Why do you think that small changes over a long period of time can't add up to large changes?

It is entirely plausible that God created different kinds of creatures with built-in quality control (in other words the ones that aren't as healthy die off, leaving the less genetically corrupted ones) which is exactly what we see. The fact that they are influenced by genetic drift and different looking varieties of each kind emerge is not proof that they were not created as distinct fully developed kinds.

Isn't that just another way of saying that God can do anything?

It would help you if you were to get over this "All or nothing" mentality. To you it looks like either offspring are absolute perfect copies of their parents or everything evolved - and of course you look at it in this light because it makes the one view look absurd - but in reality, there is no reason whatsoever that there isn't a third option, which is that God did create them, and they are influenced by genetic drift.

So you do believe in evolution? Why the debate?

Both ideas allow for the kind of evolution I've seen (some call it microevolution). If one wishes to divide it into a mutually exclusive scene, then it would be "It is ID or ASBE." (where ASBE means All Species By Evolution).

So you believe in evolution within a species. How about evolution within a Genus or Family? Would you agree that is possible? Where do you draw the line?

The only real difference between you and a true evolutionist is where they draw the line. A true creationist must draw the line at no change and a true evolutionist doesn't draw a line at all.