Does evolution contradict the idea of theistic creation?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Are you saying that no carnivore can survive on a vegetarian diet?

I suppose one could perform an experiment on wild lions: deprive them of all game, prevent them from migrating to where there is game, and then see whether they: a) start eating grass, or b) starve. MIght be ethically dubious though.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
If you assume that God exists, he is the omniscient creator of everything is he not? What would make you assume that he did not put natural causes into place to start off with?

If the process looks exactly like natural causes operating naturally, then adding God to the explanation explains nothing; it only adds a Great Big Mystery to the explanation.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I said not such thing. Learn to read.

Your exact words to KJ: "...you come along, with practically no science education to speak of..."

Argumentum ad Hominem.

Originally posted by moonbus
I suppose one could perform an experiment on wild lions: deprive them of all game, prevent them from migrating to where there is game, and then see whether they: a) start eating grass, or b) starve. MIght be ethically dubious though.

Has been done. And they survived.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Your exact words to KJ: "...you come along, with practically no science education to speak of..."

Argumentum ad Hominem.

Wrong.
1. I did not say anything about credentials as you falsely claimed.
2. It is not 'Argumentum ad Hominem' in any way, shape or form.
Read my post again more carefully this time and try and understand what I was saying.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Argumentum ad Hominem
2. It is not 'Argumentum ad Hominem' in any way, shape or form.
Read my post again more carefully this time and try and understand what I was saying.[/b]

Go ahead and keep denying it as you always do. Its plain and obvious to see. For everyone but yourself.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Go ahead and keep denying it as you always do. Its plain and obvious to see. For everyone but yourself.

If it were 'plain and obvious' then you would have no problem actually quoting me mentioning 'academic credentials' and you would have no problem demonstrating that I had used an 'Argumentum ad Hominem'.
No, it is plain and obvious that you are wrong, and your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired (either that or you just flat out lied).

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Has been done. And they survived.

Link, please.

Any evidence lions voluntarily eat grass so long as antelopes are available?

Originally posted by moonbus
Link, please.

Any evidence lions voluntarily eat grass so long as antelopes are available?

Dandelions exist without eating grass or antelopes. (Have run my own experiments on this and can confirm it is the case).

Originally posted by twhitehead
If it were 'plain and obvious' then you would have no problem actually quoting me mentioning 'academic credentials' and you would have no problem demonstrating that I had used an 'Argumentum ad Hominem'.
No, it is plain and obvious that you are wrong, and your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired (either that or you just flat out lied).

Your exact words to KJ: "...you come along, with practically no science education to speak of..."

Are you actually denying that the above statement was referrring to KJs academic credentials??? LOL...

Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive and circumstantial): the fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.

Originally posted by finnegan
Why is it hard to imagine dinosaurs? They are there in the fossil record. Not at all hard to imagine. They are not there in the bible however and you know it.

The evolution of vision is not complicated at all which is why it has evolved a number of times independently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

I've no issue imagining dinosaurs, I do have an issue thinking they evolved after the leap
from non-living material turning into life, then going through the evolutionary process.

Originally posted by moonbus
Link, please.

Any evidence lions voluntarily eat grass so long as antelopes are available?

Westbeau, G., Little Tyke: the story of a gentle vegetarian lioness, Theosophical Publishing House, IL, USA, 1986. (Information is drawn from pp. 3–6, 17, 32–35, 59–60, 113–114.)

Originally posted by moonbus
Originally posted by KellyJay
[b]Yet you believe that when ages ago according to the theory there was no living creatures with the ability to see that some how this blind process was able to give life that ability?

There was no giving of abilities; there was eating and being eaten. The creatures in which seeing happened to develop got a ...[text shortened]... rdly matters) is wildly at variance with the fossil record and any coherent body of natural law.[/b]

Truth be told your views on life I think require more faith than anything on God and all that
surrounds Him. I accept God created everything in this universe and God Himself is
eternal without a beginning. You don't have even a remote idea how everything started,
where did it all come from, at best you got a process and it can take you back so far and
than you are stumped.

I believe God created the universe and this planet to support life, you don't have reason or
cause on how or why its all here. I believe God created this planet and put life on it in such
away that it would reproduce and there was an abundant food supply waiting for it, and
all the right conditions to support life. You have a theory that the whole universe from the
macro to the micro had everything lined up just right to produce life here, THEN without
any reason too it just starts to reproduce, WHILE it is in an eviroment that lets it live, IN
THE MIDST of living where a food supply was, and on and on. Yes, you have faith!

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Westbeau, G., Little Tyke: the story of a gentle vegetarian lioness, Theosophical Publishing House, IL, USA, 1986. (Information is drawn from pp. 3–6, 17, 32–35, 59–60, 113–114.)

Yes, I thought so. A tame lion, not a wild one, spoon-fed by humans. It would have died within days if turned loose.

Imagine the following scenario: the ark has touched down on Mt. Ararat, the flood waters are just starting to recede. Noah lets the 2 antelopes out first to scamper off and try to find something to graze on. What they are going to eat is a mystery, since the savannah won't have recovered so soon after a devastating flood which wiped out all life (except what was on board the ark). Noah keeps the lions back a while to let the antelopes 'be fruitful and multiply'. He cajoles the hungry lions every day: "wait just a little longer, let them re-populate, then you can munch them again." Every day for months and months.

The gestation period of lions is 105 - 110 days, which is about 3.66 months; the gestation period of antelopes is 240 or so days, which is 7 - 9 months. A lioness typically throws a litter of 2 - 4 cubs, whereas an antelope doe throws a single calf.

Simple arithmetic indicates that the antelopes will not re-populate fast enough to stay alive with lions about, even if given a head-start of one rutting season.

Obvious conclusion: the story of Noah's ark is just that, a story. Didn't really happen.

http://www.theanimalspot.com/lion.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blesbok
http://www.krugerpark.co.za/africa_sable_antelope.html

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Dandelions exist without eating grass or antelopes. (Have run my own experiments on this and can confirm it is the case).

This was after you had imbibed dandelion wine, was it?