Re: Tom Bethell is Heroically Confused Again

On Aug 28, 12:49 pm, mc...@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
snip

The question of "how we got here" is covered by such sciences as
reproductive biology. Reproductive biology gives an explanation
for the origins of individuals without reference to divine
intervention. As far as the "chance" factor, genetics tells us that
our genetic makeup is a chance combination from our parents,
with some random mutations.

What you call chance is actually limited variability based on
preexisting traits, traits which were carried by Adam.

That isn't possible. There aren't enough gene loci for all the traits
of modern humans to be carried by one individual.

We all know
that brown is a dominant trait and blue, or lack of color is
recessive.

That depends on what is brown, and what is blue. The trait for blue
eyes is a recessive trait, and undoubtedly a mutation.

If you have a child with two recessive traits the
phenotype will be expressed. Genetics is about inheritance of already
existing traits.

Plus any mutations that create new traits.


On the other hand the religious tenet, or teaching
of evolution,


Teaching evolution is not a religious tenet. It's a reasonable means
of passing on information.

teaches us that animals gain new traits, traits that
weren't previously held by the ancestor.

By mutations, which are well known occurances.


For instance, nobody would
say that the first monkey had any exclusively human traits in it
whatsoever,

Exactly what are "exclusively human" traits?


that could be passed down to the subsequent generation, to
finally be expressed. Nor did that first primeval proto-cell. That
mythological pink proto-cell, the proto-cell of the gaps, did not have
a single monkey gene within it.

Actually, there are no "monkey genes". All life forms have genes,
which developed from the original self replicators. Modern monkeys
have DNA sequences that probably did occur in the first life form to
use DNA.


So when by chance, as you call it, a human being has inherited brown
hair, that determination could only be possible because the parent had
brown hair genes to pass on.

Or, there was a mutation that produced the brown hair trait.


So this "chance" is limited to the
meager givens.

Plus all the new traits added by mutations.

Also, there are givens that aren't due to chance.

Such as?

The human will inherit characteristics that aren't subject to chance.

Such as?


However, if there are defects then those may be passed on. But these
characteristics which aren't subject to chance are, the development of
a back bone, flesh and blood, nose, et cetera.


What they are subject to, is natural selection.



But this doctrine of evolution, this religious tenet, is rather a
matter of faith.

Making false claims doesn't make them true.


It states that the universe is self-creating and
that man is a part of nature and is the result of a continuous
process, not by any act of God.

Actually, evolution doesn't say anything about God, and certianly
doesn't say that humans are not the result of an act of God. If
humans are God's creation, he must have used evolution as his means of
creation.


DJT

.

Relevant Pages