Evolution is the process of advancement- perfection- fine tuned by all of the laws of the universe.  It may be a slow process, but I will ask, as many atheists have in trying to prove evolution itself (which is not in contention):  How can you not walk a mile by taking one step at a time?

How can perfection not be formed through evolution, given enough time?  It can't not be.  Perfection is the inevitable and proven outcome of evolution.  That perfection that evolution forms it god himself.  Evolution, as such, proves the formation and origin of god.

What you describe isn't evolution at all.  Perfection isn't a scientific concept.  Perfection is a completely subjective value judgment.  What is perfect for one person isn't necessarily perfect for another.  Evolution is a process of gradual changes subject to selection pressures.  Natural forces alter the genetic makeup of living creatures over generations.  These alterations in the DNA of the offspring of living creatures affects how they are able to survive in their environment.  Changes that help a creator survive are more likely to be passed on.  Changes that hurt a creature’s chance for survival die out.  Changes that are neutral can go either way.  None of this leads to perfection.  

If human beings were designed by a a creature that loved us you would think that we would be designed is such a way as to remain healthy all of our lives.  At the very least you would think that people would only become sick by some fault of their own.  This is not the cases.  Many people are born sick, and all of us have frailties in our bodies that could have been avoided if we were in some way designed.   Many people have bad backs because our backs are incredibly vulnerable to different problems.  If there was some kind of designer you would think that some of these frailties could have been avoided.   

Also, evolution cannot be leading to perfection because evolution is not leading anywhere.  Evolution doesn't have a goal.  It is a natural process just like rain, wind, or gravity.  It doesn't have any conscious objective any more then gravity has an objective of pulling things down.  Evolution describes the survival of whatever works.  Whatever genetic traits help a creature survive and produce more children are the genetic traits that stay around.  Those traits aren't necessarily leading to anyplace, because (over generation) those traits change with the environment the animals are living in, and the environment the animals live in is constantly changing.   

Nothing you said describes evolution, or leads to the conclusion that things are becoming 'perfect'.  

 

 

Perfection depends on the circumstance- but it isn't a scientific concept?

If I have a square peg, and a square hole, I can use a tunneling electron microscope to determine that both of these are made of carbon nanofibers, without a molecule out of place, to the exact size needed.  How is this not a perfect fit?

Maybe perfection is rare- so rare that we never really find *true* perfection around us- so it has been relegated to an opinion.  A matter of what degree of perfection is required in order for each person to consider it perfect. 

Sometimes, as you've effectively said, something can be perfect in one way, and imperfect in another- like a white moth in the snow vs. a black moth on soot.

But a colour changing moth would be more perfect in *both* circumstances.

 

Just because you've never seen a colour changing moth- never seen a perfect peg (for any given perfect hole- obviously a round peg for a square hole isn't perfect)- that doesn't mean they don't exist.

In fact, we can demonstrate that these things are possible, and as such, a powerful motive force like evolution- which is the most powerful force in the universe- will inevitably achieve that perfection.

 

 

These things are the processes by which evolution functions- and I have never denied evolution but have maintained that it proves god.  And in fact, evolution is the most powerful force in the universe- it is the force *of* god.

We can't remain healthy all of our lives, because it is the sickness itself that refines us and drives progress- which perfect us into angels- and eventually, come rapture, into god himself.

Of course god loves us; which is why he gifts us as being part of this process- part of him.  Otherwise, we would just be like ceramic dolls on a shelf- preserved and pointless.  God has given us purpose as a part of himself- that is the greatest love possible.

 

Evolution is a force, and all forces have results.  Gravity pulls things together.  Light exchanges and diffuses energy. etc.  Evolution is a logical result of the nature of the universe itself, like all forces, set into place by god at creation (the big bang).

That *result*, as I have demonstrated, is perfection.  It's inevitable perfection that comes about by satisfying fitness for all situations.  A moth that only lives in snow may be white, the one in the dark may be black- and in a million years, these may be the only distinct environments it will find.  Eventually, though, the moth will encounter an environment in which both may be needed at different times within its life- even different times in the day.  *That* moth will develop a fitness that involves changing colour, for example, and which will be a perfect fitness for all of those situations.

Keep going with that, over not millions, but billions, and trillions of years, and all of that suffering and pain are the tools that chisel away at imperfections, revealing a perfect form.  How, I ask again, can you not walk a mile one step at a time?

If you don't believe in the inevitability of evolutionary forms, look at convergent evolution.  Marsupial wolves and placental wolves- both very similar.  Dolphins and Sharks- even Ichthyosaurs.  These are forms that come about again and again because they approach perfection.

These are the round pegs that fit in the round holes, and the square pegs that fit into square holes.

But what of a peg which can fit into both kinds of holes by changing its nature?  That peg has a perfection in both cases, and is at least as perfect as each peg for each case- more perfect, period.

Call it what you will, though- you don't even have to use the word perfection.  You can use the word "suitability" or something.  The point is that evolution is a force in this direction, and saying it won't reach that point is like saying the moon will never fall.  The moon will fall, and eventually so will the Earth- and perfection, with life being driven to it by a force more powerful than all, must be reached- will be reached- has been reached, in god.

 

 

They're almost identical in that they are both forces which drive in a direction- in the case of gravity, towards other matter.  In the case of Evolution, towards divine perfection (or suitability to all things, if you want to use that term instead).

Perfection depends on definitions(I suppose everything does).  With the right definitions anything can be perfect.  The word perfect has a number of different definitions, but two of them seem relevant for this conversation.

1) conforming absolutely to the description or definition of an ideal type: a perfect sphere; a perfect gentleman.
2) entirely without any flaws, defects, or shortcomings: a perfect apple; the perfect crime.

I was referring to definition number two when I said perfection was subjective.  It is completely subject to human values and opinions.  If you define everything that exists exactly the way it is right now as being perfect then everything is perfect.    If you believe everything that exists being exactly the way it is as flawed then everything is flawed.  There is nothing scientific about the second definition of perfect. 



Like I said perfect depends on definitions.  According to definition one anything that exactly conforms to a definition is a perfect 'whatever was being defined'.  So if something conforms perfectly to the definition of a square then that thing could be called a perfect square.  If  a 'fit' is defined as having no excess space left over then what you described could be called a perfect fit.  Even if what you say does conform to the first definition of perfect it does not necessarily conforms to definition two. 



It's funny that you should bring up the example of the Peppered moths(I assume that’s what your talking about here), because they point to the exact opposite of what your saying.  If a perfect moth is defined as a moth who's color exactly conforms to the color of the surface it lands on then evolution isn't likely to ever produce perfect moths.

This is isn't immediately obvious, so I'll explain it.  The peppered moths used to be mostly white colored, because they generally lived on trees that were white colored.  Being the same color as the trees they lived on helped them survive by making it harder for birds to find them. 

Latter when those trees changed color because of soot birds were able to find them much easier.  If all of the moths had been 'perfect' (had their color exactly conform to the surface they landed on) then it is possible all of the moths would have been eaten by birds. 

Not all of the moths were the same color.  Some of the moths were darker then other moths.   When the trees changed color these moths had an advantage over there darker colored brethren.  The darker colored moths were able to reproduce making offspring that were also darker in color.  It was the 'imperfection' of the darker moths which allowed that species of moths to continue surviving when their environment changed.

What you are calling 'imperfection' would better be termed genetic diversity.  Genetic diversity is a good thing(for species) because it allows species to continue surviving when their environment changes.    If there was no genetic diversity we would likely all become extinct during the next large environment shift. 

A moth that can change it's color is not inevitable.   If the moths environment changes color often then changing color might be to the moths advantage; but if the moths environment doesn't change color or only changes color occasionally(over the span of many years) then it might be in the moth's best interest to lack the color changing ability.   Abilities are not free, being able to do things takes energy, and other resources that would otherwise be used for other things.  If moths do not need to change colors it would doubtlessly be better for them to lack the ability.  If it is in the moths advantage to lack the ability then moths that don't have the ability will be selected over moths that do have the ability, and eventually color changing moths will die out



As I've already said, possessing every ability possible isn't necessary in a species best interest.  For creatures with stable environment specialization can be a big advantage. 

 I am curious who this great perfection you are talking about will be for.  If perfection for a moth is always being able to avoid being eaten by birds then what is perfection for moths is imperfection for birds.  If perfection for birds is always being able to find and eat moths then perfection for birds is imperfection for moths.  Based on that idea of perfection there doesn't seem to be any way for things to be perfect for everyone. 



Certain forms of animals appear again and again because animals are shaped by their environment.  Certain environments tend to shape animals in the same way.  This has nothing to do with perfection as you have described it.


No it is not 'more perfect period'.  Everything in life comes with advantages and disadvantages(As far as I know).  Every advantage a creature gains will come with a disadvantage for either that creature or for other creatures. 


The moon isn't going to fall.  It's probably going to escape from orbit. 

 

Evolution isn't a driving force.  Evolution is something that is driven by a specie's environment both living and nonliving. 

(For outside the debate:  Sorry I was so late getting back with this reply.  I accidently deleted my first reply which took me over an hour, and I was feeling kind of frustrated.)
 

edit: changed a few mistakes. 

[out of character: this post is not part of the argument]

RatDog, is everything alright?

I was looking forward to you finishing my crazy argument off with a death-blow so I can start another one

If you aren't available, would you mind if somebody else stepped in and finished this one off?

 

[out of character]

But you were in character!  I was the one pretending to be a theist in this debate :P  haha.

Anyway- no problem, Wednesday is fine; I just wanted to make sure.

Good luck on your midterms!

 

 

This is not relevant for god, since he can freely change matter into energy, and back.

 

 

Your not knowing if it's possible is very different from it being impossible.  It is certainly very complex and hard to understand- but that's the nature of god.  There are many things humans can't fully comprehend.

 

Yes, it is a super being.

 

 

If the species becomes very long lived, and has to tolerate all environments, it does.  And who is to say evolution doesn't have foresight?  When creatures become intelligent, they begin guiding their own evolutions.

 

 

It is unlikely in a short time-span, but possible in a long one.  With a long lived universe, it is inevitable, as all possibilities of evolution must come to pass.

 

Only for things so complex people guess them to be improbable- because they remain possible.  Proving something impossible or possible can be done without having to appeal to human understanding if done right.

 

God, and the few near-god creatures that occur prior to the emergence of the one true god, don't have to worry about this.

 

 

But without cost, they are always useful/never harmful.

 

 

But when environment changes quickly, that *is* a current need.  For creatures for whom environments change between all things at a great speed, this is an absolute necessity.

 

 

Only relative to the creature's lifespan.  When the creatures are nearly immortal- and then finally immortal, the pace is infinitely fast compared to lifespan.

 

 

God has all forms- every form needed- including the forms he needs to relate to us.  For example, the father, the son, the holy ghost.

 

 

God is perfect in more than just shape- he is the ultimate being.

 

 

As a conceptual example- an analogy.