![]() |
![]() |
Is this a dumb question: What was the most recent new species that evolved? Shouldn't new species come into existence regularly as the world ages? Can they predict the next species that will evolve into something new? (monkey to man took x years, so whale to ? should be coming soon).
Sheldon's shirt on Big Bang Theory:
This will likely happen?
Or will Michael Phelps lead us in this direction:
![]()
Won't speak for Guisslap, but that is the exact position of the philosophical naturalist. They refuse to believe in the supernatural out of principle. They only see things they can't explain yet, but they have ardent faith that one day we'll be able to explain them…they're certainly right about that last part.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
I also experienced that confusion between what was "spiritual" and what was "emotional". As you know, I graduated in biology and then went on to get a master's degree in theology. What I've come to believe is that well meaning people made "getting saved" into a formula. Fueled by a simplistic view of "once saved always saved", they put emotional pressure on us to walk the isle without really explaining to us what the Bible said about conversion, Christ, and holiness. As a result, we've got a whole generation of folks who had an emotional experience without them being truly converted…all the while, being told that they were converted.
Last edited by johnnylightnin; 03-31-2014 at 10:08 PM.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
Couldn't tell you the most recent but you can look up recent speciations if you are curious. Macroevolution probably isn't as sexy as you are picturing though. These things happen over long time scales and are not very predictable. Mutation rates are, but the events surrounding adaptation and selection are complex phenomena that cannot reasonably predicted at this stage. We can study the history of them though through
DNA and the fossil records and such.
For me, it takes a lot more faith to believe the evolution theory that somehow created (evolved) all the different species, that have somehow stayed within its own kind, after being "evolved", than it does to believe there is actually a creator that put all this in place. It takes faith to believe either way, but evolution is much harder for me to buy into.
When can I be Wolverine? I want to either be Wolverine, of maybe produce a Wolverine.
Faith does not necessarily mean blind faith. Faith can be, and often is, corroborated by evidence. I'd even submit that's there's a great deal of evidence for the Biblical account.
Evidence, you see, does not draw its own conclusions. Evidence can only confirm or refute an existing assumption or hypothesis. I've often found, in my profession, that two reasonable individuals can be presented with the same facts and arrive at opposite conclusions, owing largely to the underlying worldview of each.
If I've already decided that Kiwi Techster does not exist, then it doesn't matter if his alleged offspring vouches for him. I will simply write her off as deceived or crazy or a liar.
But if I believe in Kiwi Techster's existence, then the personal testimony of his daughter will serve to underscore that.