1 hr 2 min
The Genesis Correction: Eden’s Orchard of Life | Godless Engineer & Stephanie Lawrence Debate The NonSequitur Show
-
- Society & Culture
Are fundamentalist Christians missing the forest for the tree? Stephanie Lawrence thinks so. They claim that there wasn’t just ONE tree of life, but an entire orchard of them. The following text is an brief explanation put forth by Lawrence: Kinds is a concept that goes in with an orchard of life as opposed to a single phylogenic tree of life. I attached a picture of it. Q: where does one draw the line for what a kind is? A: it is unknown (nobody was here), but can be as broad as: |bacteria|fungus|animal|plant| Or as specific as a species itself (keeping in mind speciation happens and renaming of the same organism, but usually the colloquial name doesn't change, i.e. Mosquito. Or A random combination of specific and broad. It is unknowable to know if for example if all felines are related or not, or what is related to what all together. It is really not a matter of what's related to what, even the original kinds may have not been related. Kinds is not a classification system and isn't meant to replace taxonomy. It's a concept, it goes with multiple phylogenic trees as shown in the picture. It's reasoning is by eliminating the single tree for reasons listed here. There are problems with a single tree: 1) it assumes abiogenesis, an unfalsifiable claim, as opposed to nature's kinds. 2) it can't explain in detail how the butterfly or mushroom evolved from microorganisms 3) it assumes only naturalistic origins of life. 4) it can't explain in detail how bacteria became eukaryotes with all the implications with it. 5) it assumes change in allele frequency is a driving force for the microbe-to-man evolution, while changes in allele frequency can exist, it may be that i isn't a power that can evolve a sea sponge into a human over time and environmental pressures. 6) it can't account for the evolution of consciousness, there is no reason life can't exist on earth AS IS without consciousness. Kinds with the orchard of life require a non naturalistic worldview and more of a mystical worldview, likely a consciousness based one Kinds are non biblical.
---
Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nonseqshow/message
Are fundamentalist Christians missing the forest for the tree? Stephanie Lawrence thinks so. They claim that there wasn’t just ONE tree of life, but an entire orchard of them. The following text is an brief explanation put forth by Lawrence: Kinds is a concept that goes in with an orchard of life as opposed to a single phylogenic tree of life. I attached a picture of it. Q: where does one draw the line for what a kind is? A: it is unknown (nobody was here), but can be as broad as: |bacteria|fungus|animal|plant| Or as specific as a species itself (keeping in mind speciation happens and renaming of the same organism, but usually the colloquial name doesn't change, i.e. Mosquito. Or A random combination of specific and broad. It is unknowable to know if for example if all felines are related or not, or what is related to what all together. It is really not a matter of what's related to what, even the original kinds may have not been related. Kinds is not a classification system and isn't meant to replace taxonomy. It's a concept, it goes with multiple phylogenic trees as shown in the picture. It's reasoning is by eliminating the single tree for reasons listed here. There are problems with a single tree: 1) it assumes abiogenesis, an unfalsifiable claim, as opposed to nature's kinds. 2) it can't explain in detail how the butterfly or mushroom evolved from microorganisms 3) it assumes only naturalistic origins of life. 4) it can't explain in detail how bacteria became eukaryotes with all the implications with it. 5) it assumes change in allele frequency is a driving force for the microbe-to-man evolution, while changes in allele frequency can exist, it may be that i isn't a power that can evolve a sea sponge into a human over time and environmental pressures. 6) it can't account for the evolution of consciousness, there is no reason life can't exist on earth AS IS without consciousness. Kinds with the orchard of life require a non naturalistic worldview and more of a mystical worldview, likely a consciousness based one Kinds are non biblical.
---
Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nonseqshow/message
1 hr 2 min