And you said a pig is still the pig. Ok, but now the pig has changed. The same as people live longer lives. They are still people, but they changed to people who live longer lives. And maybe in the future people will change so much that they never die? But no one knows the future.
Change made by man would not be real biological evolution, it would be change by design and action of men, it would be a created thing, not a mindless evolution of biological species through some random unplanned force.
I am imagining option777. If you told me it is a sin to imagine what could be possible, then people would never discover anything. But I told you I am not a scientist, but just wondering. So you need a debate with someone better than me.
What if the pig with an accident ate the green color. Then the pig had babies and they were green. Is that design or evolution?
Why would it be a sin to imagine something? All I am doing is asking what foundation of known reality would lead a person to believe in that imagination to come true. I am not opposed to personal faith at all, whether the personal faith and imaginations that follow are atheistic or theistic in nature. My point is that if there is mindless biological evolution, it begs the question, why have we never seen a biological species evolve into an eternal species, a perfect species. All species are born, they have an innate instinct to survive and experience pleasure over pain, and then they die. When you ask why do biological species have these characteristics, characteristics not shared non biological species...the atheistic evolutionists have the brilliant comeback of "well, because that is the way it is, it is natural." Of course, no explanation is given as to why biological species have this particular nature and not another nature, or why nature is the way nature, or where nature came from...because the atheistic evolutions have no clue as the the why...they only try to figure out the what that they can prove according to the what rules. What answers without why answers may complete some people, but it hardly completes the big picture story...the big picture story has seemed pretty important to most of the great thinkers over the course of human history. Why this is the case of avoidance of the why and limiting the examination to the what is a question avoided by the atheistic evolutionists. Atheistic evolutionists hate the why questions they cannot answer, but a thinking man then asks "why is that?"
Was the green color naturally occurring, or was the green color a chemical designed by man? The mutation was a consequence of man's mind, design...not random ignorant mindless process.
I think if you just say ok, it was a god that did something, then you never ask why. If you never ask why, you never discover anything.
If you really ask "Why God" and seek God for the answer, you find God. If you don't ask "Why God" and look only in the world, you find only the world. I would not force which path to take onto another person, but they are different paths toward different goals. Each person is free to seek perfection and something unlimited, or they can be content to erect all possible combinations of an erector set...without knowing why there is an erector set, where it came from, or why it is before them. One person spends their time with a limited set which only yields limited conclusions bound by the "nature" of the limited, another person directs themselves toward an unlimited possibility. Free will. Nothing man has ever done, or thought, or discovered, has ever changed the possibility of God existing. People go after what they believe in, and pursuing "why they believe" what they believe reveals the bottom line of a person. Bottom line is of course the exact same thing for every human being...human ignorance. Human ignorance that leads to humility is spiritual, human ignorance that leads to the exact opposite, which is hubris, is material. "Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet." ---Rudyard Kipling---