The Current Status of Ewert's Dependency Graph of Life

[Meerkat_SK5]

@Faizal_Ali

Neither of those things are true. Every new species could have been created by a god yanking an example or two of an extant species up to heaven, messing around with their genomes, then sending them back down to earth to start a new species. I have spoken with some Muslims who think this is what happened with Adam and Eve, at least.

your objection is assuming that God only has the attribute of omnipotence, but obviously this cannot be the case if we are talking about the Christian God. For instance, the attributes of the Christian lGod have to work in accordance with each other in a logically consistent manner because he is who he is (i.e. the law of identity) and cannot not be who he is at the same time (i.e. law of non-contradiction). This means that God cannot make himself cease to exist because this would conflict with him being a necessary being. God cannot make a square circle because this would conflict with his omniscience. God cannot lie because it would conflict with his omnibenevolence. God cannot make a rock so heavy that he cannot lift because it would conflict with his omni-potency

God cannot create and develop a world that does not have God intimately involved in the process every step of the way because it would conflict with his “Personal’ nature. Moreover, previous experiments and observations suggest that God mimics the behavior of humans rather than Natural law. Thus, God must be true to “all” his attributes, because to do otherwise would be to deny his own self.

@John_Harshman

@Meerkat_SK5

As I explained before, common ancestry is considered linked to the concept of gradualism, and gradualism is intrinsically linked to natural selection via random mutations in regards to the development of life.

Neither of those links is true.

Alright, I’m raising the white flag. If you guys insist that random mutations and Gradualism are not intrisentically linked to the tree of life, then fine. I will let it go. But, I insist that the fossil record and human exceptionalism make the two aspects mutually exclusive as I explain further.

@John_Harshman

@Meerkat_SK5

The Phylogenetic Tree Topples | American Scientist

I’m going to guess that’s another article you haven’t actually read. Am I right?

No, I did read it

@John_Harshman

The evidence does no such thing, and your model is not consistent with the Genesis account.

Are you just going to assert this or are you actually going to explain and support these claims?

@John_Harshman

@Meerkat_SK5

I also made it clear that to say that the Adam and Eve story did not happen at all would be to directly challenge the divinity of Christ.

Another false claim.

How so? Or are you going to just repeat what you said before on this subject?

@John_Harshman

Your secondary sources are creationists who probably didn’t read it either. You are making unsupported assertions, and for that reason they can be easily dismissed. Why, after all this time encountering people who actually know about the subjects you are talking about, do you remain so arrogant?

Alright John, you are going to need to provide studies showing that the fossil record is just incomplete in regards to those sudden appearances. Until then, I am just going to respond with this…

@John_Harshman

If you’re appealing to unknown future results, all you’re doing is ignoring current results. We have to judge hypotheses based on data we have, not data we hope might turn up some day. In particular, the data we have are conclusive. And we are very, very unlikely to find a new mammal species that doesn’t fit into the nested hierarchy we already have. We know about almost all mammal species that exist.

Since there are a remarkable number of fossils that have been revealed over the years, there is no reason why this line of reasoning would not apply to the fossil record.as well.