The Brain Is Incredibly Complex–Evidence of a Creator!

The Brain Is Incredibly Complex–Evidence of a Creator!

“I  will give thanks to you because I have been so amazingly and miraculously made. Your works are miraculous, and my soul is fully aware of this”—Psalm 139:14 GWT

The brain is incredibly complex, far more complex than humans can understand at present, as the following BBC article gives evidence of. While modern science generally does not recognize or acknowledge a divine Creator, scientific evidence does give us more and more factual information to support what the Bible says about  “the Lord God Almighty”, “who created all things” (Revelation 4:8,11).

Fly brain breakthrough ‘huge leap’ to unlock human mind — Pallab Ghosh

BBC —October 2, 2024—-Science Correspondent@BBCPallab
MRC/Nature Wiring diagram of fly brain showing a complex mesh of different coloured tiny connections and sinews against a black background.MRC/Nature
 
As beautiful as it is complex, the fly’s brain has more than 130,000 wires with 50 million intricate connections

They can walk, hover and the males can even sing love songs to woo mates – all this with a brain that’s tinier than a pinhead.”

Talk about “miniaturization”? — This is unbelievable! “How countless are your works, Yahweh, all of them made so wisely! The earth is full of your creatures” (Psalm 104:24 NJB).

“Now for the first time scientists researching the brain of a fly have identified the position, shape and connections of every single one of its 130,000 cells and 50 million connections.

It’s the most detailed analysis of the brain of an adult animal ever produced.

One leading brain specialist independent of the new research described the breakthrough as a “huge leap” in our understanding of our own brains.

One of the research leaders said it would shed new light into “the mechanism of thought”.

Dr Gregory Jefferis, of the Medical Research Council’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge told BBC News that currently we have no idea how the network of brain cells in each of our heads enables us to interact with each other and the world around us.”

Wait a minute did you notice, “currently we have no idea how the network of brain cells in each of our heads enables us to interact with each other and the world around us”? Yet, they claim that the brain formed through evolutionary processes? 

“What are the connections? How do the signals flow through the system that can let us process the information to recognise your face, that lets you hear my voice and turn these words into electrical signals?

“The mapping of the fly brain is really remarkable and will help us get a real grasp of how our own brains work.”

We have a million times as many brain cells, or neurons, than the fruit fly which was studied. So how can the wiring diagram of an insect brain help scientists learn how we think?

The images the scientists have produced, which have been published in the journal Nature, show a tangle of wiring that is as beautiful as it is complex.

Its shape and structure holds the key to explaining how such a tiny organ can carry out so many powerful computational tasks. Developing a computer the size of a poppy seed capable of all these tasks is way beyond the ability of modern science.

Dr Mala Murthy, another of the project’s co-leaders, from Princeton University, said the new wiring diagram, known scientifically as a connectome, would be “transformative for neuroscientists”.

“It will help researchers trying to better understand how a healthy brain works. In the future we hope that it will be possible to compare what happens when things go wrong in our brains.”

That is a view backed by Dr Lucia Prieto Godino, a group leader in brain research at the Francis Crick Institute in London, who is independent of the research team.

“Researchers have completed the connectomes of a simple worm which has 300 wires and a maggot which has three thousand, but having a complete connectome of something with 130,000 wires is an amazing technical feat which paves the way for finding the connectomes for larger brains such as the mouse and maybe in several decades our own.”

The researchers have been able to identify separate circuits for many individual functions and show how they are connected.

The wires involved with movement for example are at the base of the brain, whereas those for processing vision are towards the side. There are many more neurons involved in the latter because seeing requires much more computational power.

While scientists already knew about the separate circuits they did not know how they were connected together.

Why are flies so difficult to swat?

Other researchers are already using the circuit diagrams, for example to work out why flies are so difficult to swat.

The vision circuits detect which direction your rolled up newspaper is coming from, and they pass on the signal to the fly’s legs.

But crucially, they send a stronger jumping signal to the legs facing away from the object of their imminent demise. So you could say they jump away without even having to think – literally faster than the speed of thought.

This finding may explain why we lumbering humans seldom squash flies.

Gwyndaf Hughes/BBC News Instrument for slicing fly brainsGwyndaf Hughes/BBC News
 
The fly brain slicer: it was cut into 7,000 incredbly thin pieces using this microscopic knife

The wiring diagram was made by slicing up a fly brain using what is essentially a microscopic cheese grater, photographing each of the 7,000 slices and digitally putting them altogether. Then the Princeton team applied artificial intelligence to extract the shapes and connections of all the neurons. But the AI wasn’t perfect – the researchers still had to fix over three million mistakes by hand.

This in itself was a technical tour de force, but the job was only half done. The map on its own was meaningless unless there was a description of what each wire was supposed to do, according to Dr Philipp Schlegel, who is also from the Medical Research Council’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology.

“This data is a bit like Google Maps but for brains: the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings.

What?– “the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings.” How could this possibly be –unless it was designed?

“Describing the neurons is like adding the names for streets and towns, business opening times, phone numbers, reviews, etc. to the map. You need both for it to be really useful.”

BBC News Pallab Ghosh's brain scanBBC News
 
Scans can show the wiring of this human brain – but even the very best show only a tiny fraction of all that is there

The fly connectome is available to any scientist that wants to use it to guide their research. Dr Schlegel believes that the world of neuroscience will see “an avalanche of discoveries in the next couple of years” thanks to this new map.

A human brain is so much larger than the fly’s, and we don’t yet have the technology to capture all the information about its wiring.

But the researchers believe that perhaps in 30 years it may be possible to have a human connectome. The fly brain, they say, is a start of a new, deeper understanding of how our own minds work.

The research has been conducted by a large international collaboration of scientists, called the FlyWire Consortium.”

Humans are just “scratching the surface” in understanding how the brain works. But there is “one perfect in knowledge” who already knows all about it because he designed and created it, “the Almighty” (Job 36:4 NAB; 37:23 NAB) 

22 thoughts on “The Brain Is Incredibly Complex–Evidence of a Creator!

  1. BA1: The Brain Is Incredibly Complex–Evidence of a Creator!

    GW1: This is false.

    BA1: “I will give thanks to you because I have been so amazingly and miraculously made. Your works are miraculous, and my soul is fully aware of this”—Psalm 139:14 GWT

    GW1: Begs the question. Uses offbeat Bible version.

    BA1: The brain is incredibly complex, far more complex than humans can understand at present, as the following BBC article gives evidence of. While modern science generally does not recognize or acknowledge a divine Creator, scientific evidence does give us more and more factual information to support what the Bible says about “the Lord God Almighty”, “who created all things” (Revelation 4:8,11).

    GW1: Begs the question. Also, it has already been proven that God does not exist.

    BA1: Fly brain breakthrough ‘huge leap’ to unlock human mind — Pallab Ghosh

    GW1: It is helpful to study the fly brain.

    BA1: “As beautiful as it is complex, the fly’s brain has more than 130,000 wires with 50 million intricate connections. They can walk, hover and the males can even sing love songs to woo mates – all this with a brain that’s tinier than a pinhead.”

    GW1: This is remarkable, but the human brain is far more complex.

    BA1: Talk about “miniaturization”? — This is unbelievable!

    GW1: No, it is not unbelievable. It is knowable because we have the evidence.

    BA1: “How countless are your works, Yahweh, all of them made so wisely! The earth is full of your creatures” (Psalm 104:24 NJB).

    GW1: Begs the question. Also, it has already been proven that God does not exist.

    BA1: “Now for the first time scientists researching the brain of a fly have identified the position, shape and connections of every single one of its 130,000 cells and 50 million connections. It’s the most detailed analysis of the brain of an adult animal ever produced.

    GW1: Scientists do good work. They increase our knowledge of the world.

    BA1: One leading brain specialist independent of the new research described the breakthrough as a “huge leap” in our understanding of our own brains. One of the research leaders said it would shed new light into “the mechanism of thought”.

    GW1: Yes, because fly brains resemble human brains in some respects, this research helps us to better understand human brains.

    BA1: Dr Gregory Jefferis, of the Medical Research Council’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge told BBC News that currently we have no idea how the network of brain cells in each of our heads enables us to interact with each other and the world around us.”

    GW1: This is just false. We have some idea of this or we have many ideas of this. But we don’t yet have knowledge of this.

    BA1: Wait a minute did you notice, “currently we have no idea how the network of brain cells in each of our heads enables us to interact with each other and the world around us”? Yet, they claim that the brain formed through evolutionary processes?

    GW1: Here, you are confusing two different questions, one about mechanism and one about development, and assuming they have the same answer.

    BA1: “What are the connections? How do the signals flow through the system that can let us process the information to recognise your face, that lets you hear my voice and turn these words into electrical signals?

    GW: Here you seem to be referring to the Hard Problem of Consciousness, firs proposed by Australian philosopher David Chalmers. The problem has not yet been solved.

    BA1: “The mapping of the fly brain is really remarkable and will help us get a real grasp of how our own brains work.”

    GW1: I agree, but this has nothing to do with God who doesn’t exist.

    BA1: We have a million times as many brain cells, or neurons, than the fruit fly which was studied. So how can the wiring diagram of an insect brain help scientists learn how we think?

    GW1: It can help us because these brains have some things in common.

    BA1: The images the scientists have produced, which have been published in the journal Nature, show a tangle of wiring that is as beautiful as it is complex.

    GW1: I agree.

    BA1: Its shape and structure holds the key to explaining how such a tiny organ can carry out so many powerful computational tasks. Developing a computer the size of a poppy seed capable of all these tasks is way beyond the ability of modern science.

    GW1: This is probably false. One day, scientists and engineers will probably do it. But the fly brain has been developed through evolution, not by designers.

    BA1: Dr Mala Murthy, another of the project’s co-leaders, from Princeton University, said the new wiring diagram, known scientifically as a connectome, would be “transformative for neuroscientists”. “It will help researchers trying to better understand how a healthy brain works. In the future we hope that it will be possible to compare what happens when things go wrong in our brains.”

    GW1: Yes, I agree.

    BA1: That is a view backed by Dr Lucia Prieto Godino, a group leader in brain research at the Francis Crick Institute in London, who is independent of the research team. “Researchers have completed the connectomes of a simple worm which has 300 wires and a maggot which has three thousand, but having a complete connectome of something with 130,000 wires is an amazing technical feat which paves the way for finding the connectomes for larger brains such as the mouse and maybe in several decades our own.”

    GW1: Yes, I agree.

    BA1: The researchers have been able to identify separate circuits for many individual functions and show how they are connected. The wires involved with movement for example are at the base of the brain, whereas those for processing vision are towards the side. There are many more neurons involved in the latter because seeing requires much more computational power. While scientists already knew about the separate circuits they did not know how they were connected together.

    GW1: Yes, I agree.

    BA1: Other researchers are already using the circuit diagrams, for example to work out why flies are so difficult to swat. The vision circuits detect which direction your rolled up newspaper is coming from, and they pass on the signal to the fly’s legs. But crucially, they send a stronger jumping signal to the legs facing away from the object of their imminent demise. So you could say they jump away without even having to think – literally faster than the speed of thought. This finding may explain why we lumbering humans seldom squash flies.

    GW1: An alternative interpretation is that these flies are thinking, just very efficiently for the task at hand.

    BA1: The fly brain slicer: it was cut into 7,000 incredbly thin pieces using this microscopic knife. The wiring diagram was made by slicing up a fly brain using what is essentially a microscopic cheese grater, photographing each of the 7,000 slices and digitally putting them altogether. Then the Princeton team applied artificial intelligence to extract the shapes and connections of all the neurons. But the AI wasn’t perfect – the researchers still had to fix over three million mistakes by hand.

    GW1: Good work by these scientists and engineers! But God has not yet been mentioned.

    BA1: This in itself was a technical tour de force, but the job was only half done. The map on its own was meaningless unless there was a description of what each wire was supposed to do, according to Dr Philipp Schlegel, who is also from the Medical Research Council’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology.

    GW1: False. The map on its own was not meaningless. That is an exaggeration.

    BA1: “This data is a bit like Google Maps but for brains: the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings. What?– “the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings.” How could this possibly be –unless it was designed?

    GW1: It could be because of evolution. Read Richard Dawkins’ book – The Blind Watchmaker – for more information about this.

    BA1: “Describing the neurons is like adding the names for streets and towns, business opening times, phone numbers, reviews, etc. to the map. You need both for it to be really useful.”

    GW1: A little is useful, more is more useful.

    BA1: Scans can show the wiring of this human brain – but even the very best show only a tiny fraction of all that is there.

    GW1: So far, this is the case.

    BA1: The fly connectome is available to any scientist that wants to use it to guide their research. Dr Schlegel believes that the world of neuroscience will see “an avalanche of discoveries in the next couple of years” thanks to this new map.

    GW1: I agree.

    BA1: A human brain is so much larger than the fly’s, and we don’t yet have the technology to capture all the information about its wiring.

    GW1: Yes, not yet, but in the future we probably will.

    BA1: But the researchers believe that perhaps in 30 years it may be possible to have a human connectome. The fly brain, they say, is a start of a new, deeper understanding of how our own minds work.

    GW1: Yes, I am very optimistic about this research.

    BA1: The research has been conducted by a large international collaboration of scientists, called the FlyWire Consortium.”

    GW1: It is remarkable what human persons can do, when they cooperate, free of superstition.

    BA1: Humans are just “scratching the surface” in understanding how the brain works. But there is “one perfect in knowledge” who already knows all about it because he designed and created it, “the Almighty” (Job 36:4 NAB; 37:23 NAB)

    GW1: False. We have many proofs that God does not exist.

    1. BA1: “This data is a bit like Google Maps but for brains: the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings. What?– “the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings.” How could this possibly be –unless it was designed?

      GW1: It could be because of evolution. Read Richard Dawkins’ book – The Blind Watchmaker – for more information about this.

      Impossible! “Wiring diagram[s]”, “structures’, “streets and buildings”, do not come about because of evolution. They come about because of design and deliberate actions by people with minds.
      “Every house is built by someone [not “blind” evolution], but God is the builder of everything” (Hebrews 3:4 NIV). Atheists are in denial of the obvious!

      1. BA1: “This data is a bit like Google Maps but for brains: the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings. What?– “the raw wiring diagram between neurons is like knowing which structures correspond to streets and buildings.” How could this possibly be –unless it was designed?

        GW1: It could be because of evolution. Read Richard Dawkins’ book – The Blind Watchmaker – for more information about this.

        BA2: Impossible! “Wiring diagram[s]”, “structures’, “streets and buildings”, do not come about because of evolution. They come about because of design and deliberate actions by people with minds.

        GW2: The terms “wiring diagram” and “streets and buildings” are just metaphors in this case. The term “structures” is a valid term. Neurons and their connections are structures, biological ones. It is impossible that God designed human brains. Why? Because it has been proven that God does not exist. However, it is possible that advanced aliens from a different solar system designed human brains, but there is just no good evidence for this at the present time.

        BA2: “Every house is built by someone [not “blind” evolution], but God is the builder of everything” (Hebrews 3:4 NIV). Atheists are in denial of the obvious!

        GW2: The human brain is not a house. The universe is not a house. And God does not exist. This has been proven many times, even by little ole me.

        1. The term “structures” is a valid term. Neurons and their connections are structures, biological ones.
          Good! Excellent!
          There are, therefore, two possibilities:
          1. The aforesaid structures are designed
          2. The aforesaid structures are not designed
          GW–It is possible that advanced aliens from a different solar system designed human brains
          Based on your reasoning, “it is possible” Trump won the 2020 election.

          BA2: “Every house is built by someone [not “blind” evolution], but God is the builder of everything” (Hebrews 3:4 NIV). Atheists are in denial of the obvious!
          GW2: The human brain is not a house. The universe is not a house.
          Structures, houses and the universe all give evidence of design.
          To think otherwise is illogical.

          1. GW3: The term “structures” is a valid term. Neurons and their connections are structures, biological ones.

            BA4: Good! Excellent!

            GW4: We agree on that point.

            BA4: There are, therefore, two possibilities:
            1. The aforesaid structures are designed
            2. The aforesaid structures are not designed

            GW4: Yes, that is correct.

            GW3: It is possible that advanced aliens from a different solar system designed human brains

            BA4: Based on your reasoning, “it is possible” Trump won the 2020 election.

            GW4: No, that is not possible. He lost. However, it is possible that aliens designed human brains. I would estimate the probability at about .00001 or less.

            BA2: “Every house is built by someone [not “blind” evolution], but God is the builder of everything” (Hebrews 3:4 NIV). Atheists are in denial of the obvious!

            GW2: The human brain is not a house. The universe is not a house.

            BA2: Structures, houses and the universe all give evidence of design.

            GW2: We know houses were designed and built by human persons. It is highly likely that the universe is eternal and was not designed and built by any person, divine or otherwise. Structures may or may not be designed and built by persons. You must look at the evidence for each structure.

            BA2: To think otherwise is illogical.

            GW2: No, you are thinking illogically. For the logical thinking, see my above explanation. There is no good evidence that human brains were designed by God. In fact, we know God does not exist. This has been proven.

          2. GW—There is no good evidence that human brains were designed by God.
            BA—Even fly brains are so intricate and complex, yet work amazingly well, even in their miniaturization, as the article shows, they had to have been designed.
            GW—it is possible that aliens designed human brains. I would estimate the probability at about .00001 or less.
            BA—You admit that design of brains is possible.
            The Bible mentions the mind many times. For example:
            “Who has put wisdom in the inward parts or given understanding to the mind?”—Job 38:36 ESV
            Since the brain, even of a fly gives powerful evidence of design, how about the far more complex human brain?
            No matter how much time elapsed, it could never develop through evolution.

  2. GW2: There is no good evidence that human brains were designed by God.
    BA3: Even fly brains are so intricate and complex, yet work amazingly well, even in their miniaturization, as the article shows, they had to have been designed.
    GW3: False. They did not “have to be designed.” You have no proof of that. Both fly and human brains are almost certainly the products of evolution.

    GW2: it is possible that aliens designed human brains. I would estimate the probability at about .00001 or less.
    BA3: You admit that design of brains is possible.
    GW3: Yes, of course, but not by God. Many persons and I have proven that God does not exist. Just as two plus two does not equal five, God does not exist. These are just facts about reality.

    BA3: The Bible mentions the mind many times.
    GW3: The mind is not the same as the brain.

    BA3: For example: “Who has put wisdom in the inward parts or given understanding to the mind?”—Job 38:36 ESV
    GW3: Minds achieve understanding through exposure to the world and rational thinking.

    BA3: Since the brain, even of a fly gives powerful evidence of design, how about the far more complex human brain?
    GW3: Your premise is false. Complexity by itself is not sufficient evidence of design and production by an intelligent agent. You need more evidence than that. What other kinds of evidence are needed? Presentation of the designer would be useful, don’t you think? What about presentation of blueprints, models, prototypes, laboratories, or factories? What about legitimate witnesses to the design and production? Think for a moment about the design and production of the first Ford automobile.

    BA3: No matter how much time elapsed, it could never develop through evolution.
    GW3: Yes it could. The workings of evolution are well known. All that is required are mutations, reproduction, natural selection, and some time. There are some other secondary mechanisms of evolution.

    1. GW3: Your premise is false. Complexity by itself is not sufficient evidence of design and production by an intelligent agent. You need more evidence than that. What other kinds of evidence are needed? Presentation of the designer would be useful, don’t you think? What about presentation of blueprints, models, prototypes, laboratories, or factories? What about legitimate witnesses to the design and production? Think for a moment about the design and production of the first Ford automobile.
      When someone sees the first Ford auto for the first time, no reasonable person concludes it wasn’t designed. In fact, such reasoning that it wasn’t designed is absurd in the highest degree.
      A3: No matter how much time elapsed, it could never develop through evolution.
      GW3: Yes it could. The workings of evolution are well known. All that is required are mutations, reproduction, natural selection, and some time. There are some other secondary mechanisms of evolution.
      No mutations, reproduction, natural selection, has ever produced any new organism, or body features, that is beneficial.
      Macro-evolution is a myth!

      1. GW3: Your premise is false. Complexity by itself is not sufficient evidence of design and production by an intelligent agent. You need more evidence than that. What other kinds of evidence are needed? Presentation of the designer would be useful, don’t you think? What about presentation of blueprints, models, prototypes, laboratories, or factories? What about legitimate witnesses to the design and production? Think for a moment about the design and production of the first Ford automobile.
        BA4: When someone sees the first Ford auto for the first time, no reasonable person concludes it wasn’t designed. In fact, such reasoning that it wasn’t designed is absurd in the highest degree.
        GW4: But why? Because we have lots of evidence that it was designed and produced by intelligent agents, i.e. human persons. You can’t say the same for a human brain.

        A3: No matter how much time elapsed, it could never develop through evolution.
        GW3: Yes it could. The workings of evolution are well known. All that is required are mutations, reproduction, natural selection, and some time. There are some other secondary mechanisms of evolution.
        A4: No mutations, reproduction, natural selection, has ever produced any new organism, or body features, that is beneficial.
        GW4: False. Mutations will lead to body changes that are beneficial, harmful, or neutral with respect to the survival, reproduction, and well being of the organism. Those that are harmful will lead to early death, but those that are beneficial or neutral will be retained. That is how evolution works.

        A4: Macro-evolution is a myth!
        GW4: Evolution is true. You are living in a world before 1859. You are stuck with books 2-3 thousand years old.

        GW4: BTW, God doesn’t exist. We now know this. It has been proven.

        1. GW4: False. Mutations will lead to body changes that are beneficial, harmful, or neutral with respect to the survival, reproduction, and well being of the organism. Those that are harmful will lead to early death, but those that are beneficial or neutral will be retained. That is how evolution works.
          BA—No new species or organs have ever been produced by macro-evolution. You cannot document a single one. A4: Macro-evolution is a myth!
          GW4: Evolution is true. You are living in a world before 1859. You are stuck with books 2-3 thousand years old.
          The Bible is always more accurate than the latest news or scientific findings, because it is “inspired by God.

          1. GW4: False. Mutations will lead to body changes that are beneficial, harmful, or neutral with respect to the survival, reproduction, and well being of the organism. Those that are harmful will lead to early death, but those that are beneficial or neutral will be retained. That is how evolution works.

            BA5: No new species or organs have ever been produced by macro-evolution. You cannot document a single one.

            GW5: Every species and organ now in existence is the product of evolution! This is a fact. Take humans, for example. When life began 3.5 billions of years ago on the Earth, there were no humans. Now there are 8 billion. So, homo sapiens was produced through evolution.

            A4: Macro-evolution is a myth!

            GW4: Evolution is true. You are living in a world before 1859. You are stuck with books 2-3 thousand years old.

            A4: The Bible is always more accurate than the latest news or scientific findings, because it is “inspired by God.”

            GW4: False. The Bible is full of falsehoods, even the first verse – Genesis 1:1, which I quoted to you earlier. God does not exist. We now know this. It has been proven. You have not found any errors in any of my proofs and evaded most of them.

            GW4: Also, you and I are not experts in biology, but the consensus of experts (roughly 98%) in this area is that evolution is true. The authors of Genesis were not experts in biology and they did not even mention evolution. So, I am going to agree with the modern consensus. You may continue to agree with the thinkers of 2-3 thousand years ago who knew almost nothing about biology. You are just out of step with the modern world.

          2. GW—Mutations will lead to body changes that are beneficial,
            BA—Not a shred of documented scientific evidence in support of such wild assertion!
            GW—When life began 3.5 billions of years ago on the Earth, there were no humans.
            BA—True, no humans existed when life began on earth. Since life has been proven to only come from pre-existing life, and not non-living matter nor from outer space, the only viable option is that it was created (Genesis 1:1-2:4,19).
            GW—homo sapiens was produced through evolution.
            BA—Documented scientific evidence proves your assertion impossible.
            Gw—The authors of Genesis were not experts in biology
            BA—No, but the Creator, the author of Genesis, is! (Psalm 104:24).
            GW—they did not even mention evolution.
            BA— No, of course not, because macro-evolution is a myth. Bible writers “did not follow cleverly devised myths” (2 Peter 1:16 NAB), like macro-evolution.
            GW—So, I am going to agree with the modern consensus.
            BA—Sure, just like most people did when the “experts” said the earth was flat, supported by elephants, or Atlas, etc., and the center of the universe! We’re just dumb enough to believe in God’s Word, the Bible, which, in spite of the “experts”, thousands of years ago said the earth was round, and “over empty space; he suspends the earth upon nothing” (Isaiah 40:22 NIV; 26:7 NIV).

  3. GW5: Mutations will lead to body changes that are beneficial,
    BA6: Not a shred of documented scientific evidence in support of such wild assertion!
    GW6: Some mutations, but not all, will lead to body changes that are beneficial. There is a great deal of evidence in support of this assertion. I bet you still haven’t read even one of the books on evolution that I recommended to you. It is obvious that you are greatly ignorant of evolutionary biology.

    GW5: When life began 3.5 billions of years ago on the Earth, there were no humans.
    BA6: True, no humans existed when life began on earth.
    GW6: We agree on this point. So, humans had to come about in some way! We just differ on what we believe or know was the way.
    BA6: Since life has been proven to only come from pre-existing life,
    GW6: That is a false statement. Your word “only” makes it false. It has been proven that living things do come from other living things, but it has not been proven that they ONLY come from living things.
    BA6: and not non-living matter nor from outer space,…
    GW6: Actually, it has been proven that organic molecules have come from outer space to the Earth, and these molecules may have played a role in the formation of life on Earth.
    BA6: the only viable option is that it was created (Genesis 1:1-2:4,19).
    GW6: False again! Another viable option is that life arose from nonlife through natural structures and processes on the Earth, such as collisions of organic molecules, differential chemical bonding, and the infusion of energy, such as light and electricity.

    GW5: homo sapiens was produced through evolution.
    BA6: Documented scientific evidence proves your assertion impossible.
    GW6: False again! Biologists have proven that my assertion is not only possible, but proven. On the other hand, we know that your assertion – “God designed and produced homo sapiens” – is false. We have proven that God does not exist!

    GW5: The authors of Genesis were not experts in biology
    BA6: No, but the Creator, the author of Genesis, is! (Psalm 104:24).
    GW6: If God did exist and was the author of Genesis, then he would be an expert in all of biology. But unfortunately for all of us, God does not exist. This has been proven.

    GW5: they did not even mention evolution.
    BA6: No, of course not, because macro-evolution is a myth.
    GW6: No, all evolution is true! But the authors of Genesis didn’t even mention micro-evolution, which you accept as true. So, Genesis is deficient, was written by human beings, and was not influenced by God who would have known better and included it.

    BA6: Bible writers “did not follow cleverly devised myths” (2 Peter 1:16 NAB), like macro-evolution.
    GW6: At that time evolution was not an idea to be “followed” by the Bible writers. Evolution wasn’t confirmed until Darwin’s publication of “On the Origin of Species” in 1859.

    GW5: So, I am going to agree with the modern consensus.
    BA6: Sure, just like most people did when the “experts” said the earth was flat, supported by elephants, or Atlas, etc., and the center of the universe!
    GW6: I’m not convinced that there were any scientific experts when Genesis was written. If there were, I don’t know what the consensus of them was at that time. There is no documentation of any consensus.

    BA6: We’re just dumb enough to believe in God’s Word, the Bible, which, in spite of the “experts”,…
    GW6: Human beings vary in intelligence, rational thinking, and knowledge. In ancient times most people believed that God did exist, but now we know he doesn’t. This has been proven. In ancient times people had no idea about evolution, but now we have proven that evolution is true.

    BA6: …thousands of years ago said the earth was round, and “over empty space; he suspends the earth upon nothing” (Isaiah 40:22 NIV; 26:7 NIV).
    GW6: Through philosophy, science, and history we have increased our knowledge of the universe, the Earth, life, and humanity. Old ideas are replaced when new evidence is discovered. That’s the way Reason works. But religion is based on faith, which doesn’t work.

    1. GW6: Some mutations, but not all, will lead to body changes that are beneficial. There is a great deal of evidence in support of this assertion. I bet you still haven’t read even one of the books on evolution that I recommended to you. It is obvious that you are greatly ignorant of evolutionary biology.
      Not a single “beneficial” mutation has ever been documented.
      BA6: Since life has been proven to only come from pre-existing life,
      GW6: That is a false statement. Your word “only” makes it false. It has been proven that living things do come from other living things, but it has not been proven that they ONLY come from living things.
      Life has never been documented to come from anything but living things.
      BA6: the only viable option is that it was created (Genesis 1:1-2:4,19).
      GW6: False again! Another viable option is that life arose from nonlife through natural structures and processes on the Earth, such as collisions of organic molecules, differential chemical bonding, and the infusion of energy, such as light and electricity
      Pure speculation.
      BA6: No, of course not, because macro-evolution is a myth.
      GW6: No, all evolution is true! But the authors of Genesis didn’t even mention micro-evolution, which you accept as true. So, Genesis is deficient, was written by human beings, and was not influenced by God who would have known better and included it.
      False. The concept of Micro-evolution is, in effect, acknowledged in Genesis 30:32-42; 30:8-10; Leviticus 19:19; Deuteronomy 22:9; Romans 11:17-24.
      GW5: homo sapiens was produced through evolution.
      BA6: Documented scientific evidence proves your assertion impossible.
      GW6: False again! Biologists have proven that my assertion is not only possible, but proven.
      Not a single shred of evidence has ever been produced to document such.
      BA6: …thousands of years ago said the earth was round, and “over empty space; he suspends the earth upon nothing” (Isaiah 40:22 NIV; 26:7 NIV).
      GW6: Through philosophy, science, and history we have increased our knowledge of the universe, the Earth, life, and humanity. Old ideas are replaced when new evidence is discovered. That’s the way Reason works. But religion is based on faith, which doesn’t work.
      The Bible was many hundreds of years ahead of human ‘philosophy, science, and Reason’.

  4. GW6: Some mutations, but not all, will lead to body changes that are beneficial. There is a great deal of evidence in support of this assertion. I bet you still haven’t read even one of the books on evolution that I recommended to you. It is obvious that you are greatly ignorant of evolutionary biology.
    BA7: Not a single “beneficial” mutation has ever been documented.
    GW7: False. You are here because of beneficial mutations.

    BA6: Since life has been proven to only come from pre-existing life,
    GW6: That is a false statement. Your word “only” makes it false. It has been proven that living things do come from other living things, but it has not been proven that they ONLY come from living things.
    BA7: Life has never been documented to come from anything but living things.
    GW7: Here you did a “bait and switch.” I refuted your first claim and so you offered a second one which is probably true.

    BA6: the only viable option is that it was created (Genesis 1:1-2:4,19).
    GW6: False again! Another viable option is that life arose from nonlife through natural structures and processes on the Earth, such as collisions of organic molecules, differential chemical bonding, and the infusion of energy, such as light and electricity
    BA7: Pure speculation.
    GW7: It is speculation, but it is a viable option. You said there were no viable options other than creation. So, your claim is refuted. Creation is speculation also.

    BA6: No, of course not, because macro-evolution is a myth.
    GW6: No, all evolution is true! But the authors of Genesis didn’t even mention micro-evolution, which you accept as true. So, Genesis is deficient, was written by human beings, and was not influenced by God who would have known better and included it.
    BA7: False. The concept of Micro-evolution is, in effect, acknowledged in Genesis 30:32-42; 30:8-10; Romans 11:17-24.
    GW7: False. You have quoted no verses here.

    GW5: homo sapiens was produced through evolution.
    BA6: Documented scientific evidence proves your assertion impossible.
    GW6: False again! Biologists have proven that my assertion is not only possible, but proven.
    BA7: Not a single shred of evidence has ever been produced to document such.
    GW7: False again! Evolution is supported by mounds of evidence and has been proven. I refer you once again to these five books:
    Why Evolution Is True? By Jerry Coyne
    The Greatest Show on Earth. By Richard Dawkins
    The Selfish Gene. By Richard Dawkins
    On the Origin of Species. By Charles Darwin
    The Book of Life: An Illustrated History of the Evolution of Life on Earth. by Stephen Jay Gould

    BA6: …thousands of years ago said the earth was round, and “over empty space; he suspends the earth upon nothing” (Isaiah 40:22 NIV; 26:7 NIV).
    GW6: Through philosophy, science, and history we have increased our knowledge of the universe, the Earth, life, and humanity. Old ideas are replaced when new evidence is discovered. That’s the way Reason works. But religion is based on faith, which doesn’t work.
    BA6: The Bible was many hundreds of years ahead of human ‘philosophy, science, and Reason’.
    GW6: Being “ahead” doesn’t make it better. It makes it worse since much progress has been made since the Bible was written.

    1. BA7: Not a single “beneficial” mutation has ever been documented.
      GW7: False. You are here because of beneficial mutations.
      Assertion. No evidence.
      BA7: Pure speculation.
      GW7: It is speculation, but it is a viable option. You said there were no viable options other than creation. So, your claim is refuted. Creation is speculation also.
      False. Design does not happen without creation, whether human or divine.
      BA7: False. The concept of Micro-evolution is, in effect, acknowledged in Genesis 30:32-42; 30:8-10; Romans 11:17-24.
      GW7: False. You have quoted no verses here.
      If you’re willing to look them up in your Bible, we have nothing to discuss.
      BA7: Not a single shred of evidence has ever been produced to document such.
      GW7: False again! Evolution is supported by mounds of evidence and has been proven. I refer you once again to these five books:
      Why Evolution Is True? By Jerry Coyne
      Coyne and Orr admitted in their 2004 book “Speciation”: ‘one does not expect to see full speciation to occur in so few generations”. If the origin of full species through Darwinian mechanisms takes too long to observe, where is the “overwhelming evidence” for the sine qua non of Darwinism? Evidence that cannot be found is not overwhelming evidence at all.
      GW—The Greatest Show on Earth. By Richard Dawkins
      Laughable!—Dawkins believes in the “Infinite Monkey Theorem”!
      GW—On the Origin of Species. By Charles Darwin
      Laughable!— His book showed nothing of this sort. Read what he wrote about the eye, for example.
      GW—The Book of Life: An Illustrated History of the Evolution of Life on Earth. by Stephen Jay Gould
      He’s another winner, who once called sociobiology a collection of “just-so stories” in which “virtuosity in invention replaces testability as the criterion for acceptance.”
      BA6: The Bible was many hundreds of years ahead of human ‘philosophy, science, and Reason’.
      GW6: Being “ahead” doesn’t make it better. It makes it worse since much progress has been made since the Bible was written.
      The Bible has made is still more up to date than the latest news, and/or discoveries.

      1. BA7: Not a single “beneficial” mutation has ever been documented.
        GW7: False. You are here because of beneficial mutations.
        BA8: Assertion. No evidence.
        GW8: All the necessary evidence is presented in those five books I recommended to you.

        BA7: Pure speculation.
        GW7: It is speculation, but it is a viable option. You said there were no viable options other than creation. So, your claim is refuted. Creation is speculation also.
        BA8: False. Design does not happen without creation, whether human or divine.
        GW8: False. Some designs are never created or produced.

        BA7: False. The concept of Micro-evolution is, in effect, acknowledged in Genesis 30:32-42; 30:8-10; Romans 11:17-24.
        GW7: False. You have quoted no verses here.
        BA8: If you’re willing to look them up in your Bible, we have nothing to discuss.
        GW8: You made the claim, so you have the burden of proof here.

        BA7: Not a single shred of evidence has ever been produced to document such.
        GW7: False again! Evolution is supported by mounds of evidence and has been proven. I refer you once again to these five books: Why Evolution Is True? By Jerry Coyne
        BA8: Coyne and Orr admitted in their 2004 book “Speciation”: ‘one does not expect to see full speciation to occur in so few generations”. If the origin of full species through Darwinian mechanisms takes too long to observe, where is the “overwhelming evidence” for the sine qua non of Darwinism? Evidence that cannot be found is not overwhelming evidence at all.
        GW9: One sees full speciation by looking across many generations, or more accurately one infers full speciation by examining evidence across many generations. A new species results from small changes and reproduction over time.

        GW7: The Greatest Show on Earth. By Richard Dawkins
        BA8: Laughable!—Dawkins believes in the “Infinite Monkey Theorem”!
        GW8: Your emotions are irrelevant. Quotation, citation, and link requires for your claim.

        GW7: On the Origin of Species. By Charles Darwin
        BA8: Laughable!— His book showed nothing of this sort. Read what he wrote about the eye, for example.
        GW8: Again, your emotions are irrelevant. Read what he wrote about speciation, for example.

        GW7: The Book of Life: An Illustrated History of the Evolution of Life on Earth. by Stephen Jay Gould
        BA8: He’s another winner, who once called sociobiology a collection of “just-so stories” in which “virtuosity in invention replaces testability as the criterion for acceptance.”
        GW8: We aren’t discussing sociobiology. We are discussing evolution. Try to stay on the subject.

        BA6: The Bible was many hundreds of years ahead of human ‘philosophy, science, and Reason’.
        GW6: Being “ahead” doesn’t make it better. It makes it worse since much progress has been made since the Bible was written.
        BA8: The Bible has made is still more up to date than the latest news, and/or discoveries.
        GW8: False. Genesis 1:1 implies that God exists. But we now know that God does not exist. This has been proven. Therefore, all statements about God doing this or that in the Bible are simply false. Wishing that God did exist doesn’t make him exist.

        1. “Award-winning science writer Carl Zimmer explains the “creation” of the organ so complex that it baffled even Darwin.”—New York Academy of Sciences
          GW7: On the Origin of Species. By Charles Darwin
          BA8: Laughable!— His book showed nothing of this sort. Read what he wrote about the eye, for example.
          GW8: Again, your emotions are irrelevant. Read what he wrote about speciation, for example.

          “The eye to this day gives me a cold shudder,” Charles Darwin once wrote to a friend.
          If his theory of evolution was everything he thought it was, a complex organ such as the human eye could not lie beyond its reach. And no one appreciated the beautiful construction of the eye more than Darwin—from the way the lens was perfectly positioned to focus light onto the retina to the way the iris adjusted the amount of light that could enter the eye. In The Origin of Species, Darwin wrote that the idea of natural selection producing the eye “seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.”

          —-Quoted from The New York Academy of Sciences

          1. Many experts have come along AFTER Darwin to demonstrate how the human eye probably evolved. So, there is no problem here.

            Also, God does not exist. We now know this. It has been proven. I have developed at least a half dozen sound proofs of this.

  5. GW—Many experts have come along AFTER Darwin to demonstrate how the human eye probably evolved. So, there is no problem here.
    BA—“Probably” is a conjecture, “following their own imaginations” (Ezekiel 13:3 NLT), which is all that macro-evolution is.
    GW— “to demonstrate how the human eye probably evolved”.
    BA— This has never been, and cannot be, observed, or proven.

    1. GW8: Many experts have come along AFTER Darwin to demonstrate how the human eye probably evolved. So, there is no problem here.

      BA9: “Probably” is a conjecture,…

      GW9: All conjectures, including yours, have some probability of being true. When we say “probably” we mean “having a probability of being true of .5 or greater.” With the conjecture about the eye, I would say that it is about .99 likely that the eye evolved.

      BA9: “following their own imaginations” (Ezekiel 13:3 NLT), which is all that macro-evolution is.

      GW9: All conjectures, including yours, are the products of human imagination. Some of them, e.g. macro-evolution, are more likely to be true than others, e.g. special creation. We should estimate the probabilities of conjectures being true based on the quality and quantity of evidence. For example, the conjecture “God exists” has a ZERO probability of being true since it has been PROVEN to be false.

      GW8: “to demonstrate how the human eye probably evolved”.

      BA9: This has never been, and cannot be, observed, or proven.

      GW9: We can and have made observations which lead us to the conclusion that it is about .99 probable that the eye is the product of evolution. I will agree with the consensus of biologists on this, and not you. You are not a biologist.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com