5/ Some say .... however,
i] Some say; the rocks suggest life started soon after conditions were right, and this indicates life will start whenever conditions are right, on any planet.
- However it also what one might well expect of a creators work sessions, "its ready let's get started".
All that is on show here is the punctuality of the Creator.
ii] Some say; similar forms in unrelated types indicate a 'convergent evolution' process as a fairly common occurrence.
- However it is also what one might well expect of a creator's working using plain common sense, in any manufacture the artisan will avoid 're-inventing the wheel'. If a problem has been solved effectively somewhere else then modify the solution to the new requirement. Lets be blunt, you don't have to be Almighty to work this one out, most apprentices learn it.
So when trying to identify a specie there are often non-diagnostic features for example webbed feet are not just on ducks and canine teeth not just in dogs. DNA and RNA seem to be in most life forms even those which reproduce very differently.
All that is on show here is the common sense of the Creator.
iii] Some say; evolution moved by jumps and periods of less action as evidenced by the rocks.
- However the term ' punctuated equilibrium' fits the result/production output of/in any intelligent(s) solving the problems on a path of progress: Research & Design work, development of products we buy over the years. Note also how often a technology explosion (in application) dubs a period of use; Iron age, Bronze age, Space age, Gas light, Industrial revolution, Electronic age, chained to kitchen sink & consumerism. Effort may be consistent output evidence is not,
solving(it is not), solving(it is not), solving(it is not), leap(its almost everywhere), solving(next still thinking) ...
iv] Some say; small steps at a time improving a life form's chances of survival.
- However what about immune system response or bone fracture healing? These systems operate on a ' what if' logic, by near intelligent performance these tackle events which can happen generations apart, fight in recognition of the new event.
Some systems in Nature are forethought one would expect this of a creation.
v] Some say; Because some factor became available something or other developed. This is heard in a number of forms.
- However this is little amiss, whilst any required resource must be available the existence of a resource will not cause its own exploitation. Availability alone does not cause utilisation.
vi] Some say; Evidence for evolution is abundant, overwhelming.
- However, popular mention is not evidence and human experience of falling for well circulated ideas really is abundant; it's why advertising works, “All publicity is good publicity!” The evolution idea is now tagged onto many works, when the work in question is only allied to it not proving it. To be fair this human mistake can be made by both sides of any dispute, the idea circulates among its own feeding on itself.
Of this evidence:
-Is it subject to interpretation by other viewpoints?
-Is the item unique or often repeated?
-Is it independent or based on other theory?
-Has there been a practical/commercial spin off to prove validity or a demonstration of the principle at work?
vii] Some say; Belief in a creator is outdated.
However, why is it these modern Merlins the most informed men of six millennia, have failed to convince so many even in the most technological nations of today's World?
-Technology requires artisans the people who actually make things & make the things work, such people are more likely to understand in terms of creation; it's what they do.
-A failure to provide adequate demonstration of chance achieving practical tasks.
-God seems to grant personal requests here and there.
-Evolution does not explain the apparent battle between good & evil, anywhere you can meet the saintly or demonic.
-Just a small spanner in the works, there have been and still are scientists who believe in Creation.
vii] Some say; Evolution means life forms improve or get better.
So why is it Medicine is one of our primary sciences?
There are doctrinal differences in religions just as there are sub-theories to evolutional thought; but each group tends to have a common idea.
In the believer's view man has fallen he is imperfect, sinning, on the way down, in need of help to get back. To the evolutionist man is the pinnacle earth life form ascending.
To take an example, I now wear glasses/spectacles just to improve visual focus. The eye's performance is so very good and we help it along so often. As with many bodily deteriorations it is easy to see the state of a fallen from grace condition. But how could it evolve to such an immaculate standard, when humans are so short lived, eyes fail with age and many have never had A1 vision?
viii] There Millions of years in human History:
However what of the Human Dynamic, humans progress always have. The Biblical 6,000 years may also seem short, but compare that with what we know of human spiritedness. A rousing speech and they will achieve almost anything; “Once more to the brink ...” or the Moon in a decade. Six thousand years is plenty of time.
When they invented a new ‘arrow head’ would they not compete to try others?
Or would they sit in their cave and do nothing more for a thousand plus years?
Which sounds like the human race you know?
Next: 6/Linkage device-to-device