New Paper "The Spark and the Case for Progressive Creation"
Astrobiology from a Christian Perspective
Part III: The Spark and the Case for Progressive Creation
Excerpt;
Most 'creationists' tend to focus on the natural selection or 'survival of the fittest' portion of Darwin's Theory for attack. Instead, I will examine the 'continuous thread' portion. There are several problems with that part. One is that paleontologists have long sought 'missing links' and have always come up short; they have found no 'half fish/half frog', no 'half frog/half ferret', nor 'half ape/half Adam' with any degree of certainty. The absence of such evidence should not be interpreted as the evidence of absence, however.
Another, although weaker, argument centers on the fact that 'primitive' life forms presently exist side by side with more highly 'evolved' life forms. If survival of the fittest is the motivating force behind evolution, how is it that the less fit life forms still exist? An answer could be that, assuming a more or less uniform distribution of a particular species over an ever expanding area, there are apt to be an uneven distribution of environments with pockets of benign, neutral, and harsh conditions including natural enemies as well as factors promoting gene mutations. At the very least, however, the word 'survival' needs be replaced with 'thriving' so that the phrase reads "thriving of the fittest".
http://homepage.mac.com/quantumpork/pages/astro_progressive.html
This is an interesting paper.
God bless,
Dennis
Part III: The Spark and the Case for Progressive Creation
Excerpt;
Most 'creationists' tend to focus on the natural selection or 'survival of the fittest' portion of Darwin's Theory for attack. Instead, I will examine the 'continuous thread' portion. There are several problems with that part. One is that paleontologists have long sought 'missing links' and have always come up short; they have found no 'half fish/half frog', no 'half frog/half ferret', nor 'half ape/half Adam' with any degree of certainty. The absence of such evidence should not be interpreted as the evidence of absence, however.
Another, although weaker, argument centers on the fact that 'primitive' life forms presently exist side by side with more highly 'evolved' life forms. If survival of the fittest is the motivating force behind evolution, how is it that the less fit life forms still exist? An answer could be that, assuming a more or less uniform distribution of a particular species over an ever expanding area, there are apt to be an uneven distribution of environments with pockets of benign, neutral, and harsh conditions including natural enemies as well as factors promoting gene mutations. At the very least, however, the word 'survival' needs be replaced with 'thriving' so that the phrase reads "thriving of the fittest".
http://homepage.mac.com/quantumpork/pages/astro_progressive.html
This is an interesting paper.
God bless,
Dennis
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Brandon L. Lee on -
Hey Dennis, It has been a while... (Vindicated Vigilante)
I have a new theory I would like to run by you... The theory of Common DNA
Why do two trees of the same exact species, ten feet apart, look different? (Why do two children living in the same house have different personalities? Are they not exposed to different conditions, environmental conditions?) Do things in motion not stay in motion unless acted on by an outside force?
When comparing the DNA of an animal on the surface of the earth and one from the bottom of the ocean do they not look vastly different, almost as if from different planets?
We know DNA is changed by exposure to radiation and chemicals. So maybe instead of common ancestry, maybe our DNA is similar or different because of common exposure to environmental conditions?
Maybe the reason the trees are different is because of an intelligence guiding the personalities in nature?
Natural selection is fairly sound but it is driven by death not reproduction. "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny ? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father" Matthew 10:29. I believe it would be futile to attack it.
I hope this proves useful, as I know it will, your brother in Love & Peace
Sincerly,
Brandon L. Lee
"In science the credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not the man to whom the idea first occurs." Sir Francis Darwin (1848 - 1925)
p.s. we never had the chance to catch up since you banned me from the Bryant Mcgill form... My kid is doing well and as far as we know the drugs have had no affect on his development. Thank you for your prayers.
-
Permalink Reply by Brandon L. Lee on
-
So in a sense the changes in DNA are calculable but because of the infinite number of environmental conditions the numbers are too astronomical. The same as the calculation for energy.
I have devised a experiment to test this hypothesis. I will get several generations of bacteria and expose them to a set number of environmental conditions. For example: one clone to slightly higher levels of uv rays, another clone to cold, and another clone to a chemical of some type. Over several thousand generations I will see if a mutation occurs. If so they would have been guided by the environment.
© 2009 Created by Bryant McGill
