Audie wrote:Why do you say evolution is not natural selection acting on mutations?
I didn't say that but rather "It certainly isn't a black and white natural selection acting on random mutations as Darwin proposed."
If that is all you mean by ToE then no need to go further. Most here accept that.
But, I'm sure that is not all you want us Christians to accept.
Audie wrote:And why do you wish to use labels like "naturalism"? Calling ToE "naturalism"
(in disguise) doesnt seem helpful in any way.
In any discussion I've seen to date, lips start curling over the moment God is mentioned.
So, that says to me, clearly the issue is not rejection of ToE -- but most likely more that one is rejecting Naturalism.
Such that, if there are issues with Naturalistic Evolution, the hairs stand on end.
Those who'd believe in Theistic Evolution have a way out in many instances.
Since the seemingly impossible could be done if the initial life and "settings" were
finely tuned in the beginning.
God still needs to work within the laws of nature though since Theistic Evolution says God doesn't intervene after creating that initial seed of life.
So any impossibilities in natural laws would still present issues for Theistic Evolution.
On the other hand, Naturalistic Evolutionists are quite happy to believe in the most enormous odds against them.
I've seen it with fine tuning arguments we often present. They often just say something like, no matter how improbable, the fact we're here shows that the improbable happened (which really begs the question).
To be clear, by Naturalism -- I am not talking about mere natural laws and processes -- but the philosophical position that prejudicially (imo) draws a boundary between what is "natural" and "supernatural". In particular, Naturalists positively exclude the possibility of God acting in the universe.
Which reminds me, you didn't answer my question: "Do you consider belief in God as more unscientific to no belief in God?"
If you feel that belief is God is less scientific than no belief in God, then that says to me you've confused science with your philsophy about the world.
Audie wrote:Id agree that PC, yec, oec, gap, are all beliefs. They are all front end loaded, with the assumption that there is a god pulling the strings.
ToE is naturalism and therefore just a belief, if that suits you as a way to get out of it, fine. ToE is naturalism and naturalism can be dismissed. Ok...
ToE as Atheists throw the term is often just about Naturalism (a philosophy) in disguise.
Therefore I think it is as front end loaded as PC, YEC, OEC, Gap or what-have-you...
That is, if you think front loading is adding Theism into the equation.
Science is no respecter of philosophical positions.
Scientific data isn't any more or less Theistic or Atheistic. It is just what it is.
Therefore, if one gets annoyed at the mere mention of someone drawing a personal conclusion of God based upon where the see the facts of reality point, then that is a philosophical peeve -- not a scientific one.
Interestingly I found out according to some recent polls, that over 50% of scientists believe in God or some supernatural being, 30% are Atheist and 20% remain agnostic. Go figure. Maybe the apparent schism between belief in God or true design and science are only in the eyes of a vocal Atheist pop culture.
Audie wrote:All symbiosis is mutual of course.
Audie wrote:What is it about convergent evolution or symbiosis that seems to you to call for supernatural intervention?
It points towards a very improbable, bordering on impossible, feat to account for naturally.
This to me it points towards a true designer behind it all.
But, as I've said previously.
To those who don't believe God exists... no matter how impossible something is to naturally occur, the fact we are here is evidence to them that however impossible it was for life the naturally evolved unplanned and unguided (symbiosis, the same organs or like that independently "evolved" several times) -- the impossible must have happened.
I don't place my faith in Naturalism though. I think it is a better gamble to place my belief in God.
Audie wrote:You said you have some sort of data, can you be specific?
Happy to, I'll present something specific if you like a bit later.
I'm the house wife today so got to make some dinner.
RickD would be proud of me embracing my femininity.
Personally think men are better cooks.