Ahhhhhhh..Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
Printable View
Ahhhhhhh..Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
It didn't have to be super-accurate tho. I was just interested in getting some additional information on that particular aspect since I sure as hell didn't want to comment on the rest of the post I quoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by khronosschoty
What holes? unfortunately with an argument for Evolution v Creationism or Intelligent Design, one side has to use available evidence while the other can throw around all sorts of nonsense. What can be presented without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Evolution is a Fact: We know species evolve over time with slight mutations between generations and driven by natural selection. We do not know every single step in that process but we have overwhelming evidence to support the theory of evolution to know that evolution itself happened and continues to happen.
What people struggle to comprehend is just how slow this process is. There is no big jump from one species to another. It takes hundreds of thousands or millions of years before you can consider something to be a different species. We do not go to bed as a young person and wake up the next old. It's a slow process.
and if you think you cannot be Christian,Muslim, Jewish and support evolution. Here is a video dedicated in saying otherwise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oDJksG3gKw
Organisms didn't just wake up one day and start having sex. It would have been a very different form to what we see today. https://www.thedodo.com/meet-the-anc...775002597.html.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Explain to me the theory of creation and/or intelligent design using scientific examples. I have yet to see a theory, all I see are attacks on so called "holes" in evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Seriously? whenever there is a contradiction someone will just say its a metaphor for something else, or it's not meant to be taken literally.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
I could list contradictions but will it really help? I think you are so sure of yourself that no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise.
I do not care if you believe in god or not. If you think you hear voices from god, fine. This is not the topic. I cannot disprove god like you cannot disprove there are no unicorns or tooth faeries. So until the day I find evidence that unicorns exist, I will continue assuming they do not.
I already provided the philosophical argument known as the First Cause Argument as the basis for Creationism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
Philosophical yes, scientific no. You have to assume the universe needs a cause, if God is an uncaused cause then why can't the universe be an uncaused cause? why complicate things by creating a god? The first cause will always lead us to the beginning of time 13.82 billion years ago, does anything exist before time? we just don't know. Either way it has nothing to do with Darwin's Theory of evolution. The cosmological argument is more of a pantheist argument than an argument for the belief in a personal or Abrahamic god as explained in the bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Evolution does not explain how life began. It is not trying to answer the first cause. It is a theory that explains how we went from single celled organisms to life as we see today.
With what? The odds of that one mutation is patatic small, the odds that the male is there is none exist..Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
unlikely things happen ALL THE TIME. There have been likely billions of different species on this Earth so the chances of one organism out of billions having a particular mutation are damn high. The chance of me winning the lottery with a single entry is about one in 45million but because of the amount of people who enter there as a winner almost every week.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Want to answer my other questions too or do you want to ignore those like you do the contradictions in your holy book?
Serius - you got to be ****ting me. Unicorns ->http://carm.org/bible-unicornQuote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
You should read the article I attached to my post :) It addresses a lot of what you're saying. Also, I only posted that to address the person I quoted who was saying there is absolutely no foundation for believing in God. Also, there is no observable evidence that anything evolved from one species to another. We can observe evolution WITHIN species today, but nobody has ever observed one species changing into another. So in a funny way, evolution is its own religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
FORUM CHALLENGE: Among all the believers of evolution in this thread, surely someone can provide a SCIENTIFICALLY OBSERVED piece of evidence that one species changed into another. I will read any and all links provided except wikipedia articles. And don't turn this around and ask me to provide the same about God. The point I'm making here is that believing in evolution takes as much if not more faith than believing in God. Evolution does not place its foundation on science any more than a religion does.
Darwinian evolution does not exist - so ofc not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Try to have an open mind. I am both a Christian and an institutional researcher, so I've had a lot of experience researching and even developing supporting arguments for things I don't agree with. It's fine if you disagree with Darwinian evolution, but try to look at it through the lens of people that agree with it. Believing something is about more than knowing WHAT you believe. You need to know WHY you believe it, and as Christians that answer is NOT "Because the Bible tells me so". People that say "I believe in evolution because of the facts", it is not a "fact" that species evolved from one another. It has never been directly observed; it has only ever been inferred, which is neither a fact or science. It's faith. I believe in Christianity because I have critically observed the alternatives and they all break down on either a scientific level, a theological level, or a philosophical level.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
O I used to be a hardcore evolutionist - so I have a quite open mind since now I am a fully blown christian. So I KNOW both side quite well. IF you take it real hardcore both is about faith - evolution or creation. I just find creation alot easyer to belive in, the odds are simply higher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
So basically you want to witness magic? If we witnessed one species magically turn into another in our short lifetime then the theory of evolution is wrong. Evolution takes many many many generations. We have seen the same species of lizard spread and evolve until they can no longer breed. Is that still considered the same species?
Do you accept plate tectonics? they have never been witnessed.
Did you accept the existence of atoms before they were observed?
So basically if there is a crime scene where a murder has taken place, we have finger print evidence, DNA, murder weapon etc. Should we dismiss all the evidence because we didn't OBSERVE the murder taking place?
Evolution has DNA, Embryo, Fossil, Gene and MORE evidence to support the theory. Yet that is not enough for you, you want to witness a MIRACLE!
You obviously do not know evolution very well. Still waiting for those holes mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Of course creation is easier to believe. Our imaginations are far less complicated and interesting than the universe we live in. We are not wired to know quantum mechanics, because its hard to understand does that mean it doesn't exist because it is difficult?
Keep an open mind but not so open that your brain falls outQuote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
you can disagree with evolution after you understand what the evidence is. I agree with it because it is by far the most probable answer. Science doesn't deal with absolute truths like your religion does. Christianity pretends to have all the answers because they cannot admit when they do not know.
Absolutely it is the same species. And your crime analogy makes no sense in the context of this discussion. In your murder case, you've already collected all the evidence needed. In evolution, the most important piece of evidence is still missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
The fossil record contains an event known as the Cambrian Explosion. It's a sudden, unexplainable appearance of a great number of groups of animals. Darwin wrote about this phenomenon in The Origin of Species. "If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory to descent with slow modification though natural selection". So I cannot accept the fossil record as support for the theory of evolution.
Darwin says such an event would kill his theory, yet it happened. How do you reconcile that? If evolution happens over many many many generations, how can so many groups of animals come into existence in the same period? All I'm trying to do here is dispel the myth that evolution is founded on science and fact. You said it yourself. Providing the key piece of evidence that would prove Darwin's theory would be a miracle, so it takes just as much faith for you to believe in evolution as it does for me to believe in God.
A ridiculous response. I am giving you specific, indisputable instances where the theory of evolution breaks down and you are giving me a list of words and calling it evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
DNA: How exactly does DNA support the theory of evolution? How does the existence of DNA disprove the existence of God?
Fossil: I already debunked that one.
Embryo: What does this even mean?
I'll make the effort to understand the evidence when you do.
The Cambrian Explosion wasn't numerous species all starting into life at once. The evolutions did happen rapidly, but such rapid evolution has been seen at other times in history and usually after mass extinctions, which makes sense in terms of evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Do you have a link or something about other instances of rapid evolution after mass extinction? I can't find any good sources. But the Cambrian Explosion, and resulting rapid evolutions do make perfect sense if you consider that it was caused by the flooding of the Earth chronicled in Genesis. In such a rapidly changing global environment, rapid adaptations would be necessary for survival.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
But this argument can be settled instantly if someone here provides a single observed example of one species evolving into another. Without that piece of evidence, evolution should not be accepted as fact, nor should it be considered to be founded on science. The fact is, evolution has never been anything more than a theory, one that has not been sufficiently proven in the last 150 years. People claiming that evolution is fact do so purely out of faith, not science.
EDIT: Let me be clear. I absolutely subscribe to evolution in the sense that species adapt over time to survive in changing environments. But I cannot subscribe to the kind of evolution discussed in this thread, that humans (and all other animals) evolved from single-celled organisms. Nobody in this thread has provided sufficient evidence to that end, and scientific study has yet to provide this evidence in the last 150 years. So if you believe that life as we know it evolved from single-celled organisms, you do so out of faith that one day we'll discover that evidence. You do not do so in the name of facts and science.
Well Genders.. it makes no sence, and the BS you pulled backk there, if your gona pull a retard once more, save us all from replaying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
You know the cambrian explosion is over a minimum of a 10 million year period? you try to make it sound like it happened in a day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Genders do not make sense? please do not tell me you believe everything just popped into existence 6,000 years ago with Adam and Eve? if you are a young earth creationist then you are not worth talking to anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
The first organisms to reproduce sexually were bacteria like organisms. There are species today who can reproduce sexually and asexually. There are even animals who can alter their gender depending on what gives them the higher chance of reproducing.
So no, gender did not just "pop up" one day. It's a slow process but even today there are gender altering animals.
You gave me a BS example which proved nothing. I AM NOT trying to disprove god. God is IRRELEVANT in this conversation, Get it? you can believe in god and accept Evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Observable examples of evolution taking place right now. Some Lizards are evolving to have longer legs, some are losing them. A reptile in Australia has been found to sometimes lay eggs or sometimes incubate the egg inside itself like mammals. It is using calcium to provide a protective layer around it's egg for protection like a mammal. Here is the link for some examples. http://www.cracked.com/article_19213...-our-eyes.html.
We share DNA with all living things on Earth. We share ~ 98 - 99% DNA with chimpanzees and they are our closest cousin today. We did not directly come from current apes but we came from a common ancestor millions of years ago. We have now evolved our separate ways, We have developed muscle precision compared to their muscle strength so we can handle tools much better than any other animal. Our muscles around our jaw are much smaller to apes which has allowed our skulls to grow bigger and brain size to increase.
Comparative Embryology, our embryo's show similarities with fish, birds and all sorts of animals. You can almost not tell the difference,our embryos have gills!
All living things bio chemistry are incredibly similar. For example: The sequence of amino acids in the haemoglobin of the chimpanzee and humans is identical, indicating a very close genetic relationship.
Anatomy of animals have a lot of comparisons. For example whales have hip bones and the genome which produces limbs, Limbs are also very similar in all living animals.
Fossils and foot prints have shown the slow changes which have taken place over millions of years. NOT ONE fossil has been found in the wrong era. This means a single creation event of all living things we see today is impossible.
We have a tail bone. Why would humans need a tail bone if we never previously have tails?
Was this all worth the effort? probably not.
please don't insult other usersQuote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Firstly, what do you consider a different species? I would like to think a different species is one who cannot reproduce with another. If that is in fact the case I have an observed example for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantetsuken
Speciation in action among Larus seagulls.
Gulls of the genus Larus form an evolutionary ring around the North Pole, which acts as a geographic barrier for their population. Although some have argued that this is technically not an example of a ring species(Liebers et al., 2004), it is certainly an example of speciation in action.
In the image above, one can see the "ring" the sub-species of gulls make around the pole. The herring gull can interbreed with its neighbor, the American herring gull, which can interbreed with its neighbor, the Vega gull, which can interbreed with its neighbor, Birula's gull, which can interbreed with its neighbor, Heruglin's gull, which can interbreed with its neighbor, the Siberian black-backed gull, which can finally interbreed with its neighbor, the lesser black-backed gull. (Image Source 4)
However, the populations of the herring gulls and the lesser black-backed gulls are genetically different enough so that, even though they now live in relatively the same area, they cannot reproduce together. Thus, they can not truly be the same species. As you move west around the pole, the genetic difference in each population becomes slightly greater and greater until the two ends meet, at which we have two separate species.
Examples such as the Larus gulls essentially show all the steps of speciation laid out in a ring. Each population is slightly different from the last, until the two ends meet and these populations are completely different species that will now continue to grow more and more genetically different. To the left you can see the two distinct species of gulls, the herring gull and the lesser black-backed gull. (Image Source 5)
Full Link = http://phylointelligence.com/observed.html
A mouse adaps to new spot to live, and become A mouse.. THIS is not what he is asking for - its adaption, not Darwinian evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
A real had been a dog turned into a fish
Mouse? you did not even read it! I posted about gulls!Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
You have no bloody clue about evolution if you think proof is to witness a dog turning into a fish. You clearly have no idea and you should stay out of this conversation and take your ignorance elsewhere until you actually read what I have to say or answer any of my questions.
OR you shall go and have a look on your own linkQuote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
So you ignored what I copy and pasted to make it easy for you and instead went to the link and read a different section which I didn't refer to just so you could say "it's still a mouse"?Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsdk
Things people do in desperation when they cannot just simply admit they do not know.
You have to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DmYLrxR0Y8 - second time I posted this today...feel the love!
lol -- agreed!Quote:
Originally Posted by Attero
Damn biology is so ruined by the proliferation of total horse**** in the media.
If people need to know why there is a divide between Christianity and Evolution - there really isn't any theological argument, most Christianity acknowledges the story of creation as a parable and most have no problem accepting the theory of evolution.
The problem arises when a different religion (eugenics) was promulgated, which directly and intentionally runs contrary to Christianity - and eugenics the religion is nothing more than a regurgitation of old horse**** that has been kicking around for centuries, that somehow finds suckers to believe in its articles of faith. Eugenics the religion uses pseudo-scientific dogma to justify itself and latched onto Darwin's theory as soon as it was published, thanks to his ****tard cousin and those who followed him. Eugenism is the absolute worst thing humans have ever done, and of course any person with an ounce of decency would and should denounce it. Unfortunately, eugenists have hid behind institutional science (which itself is a dubious invention), and more often than not it is the eugenists that insist on a divide between religion and science - a divide which in actuality doesn't exist. There are certainly a few wingnuts on the right who want to profit from the divide and propose Intelligent Design bull****... to be honest I wonder if those people are just part of the plan to undermine traditional religion, or just desperate fools looking to profit from other desperate fools.
Get rid of the eugenics religion and there is an actually worthwhile discussion. There is no point in trying to reason or negotiate with believers in eugenics, because eugenics is evil incarnate and its adherents are stupid, vile thugs.
For what it's worth, I've always been an atheist and find Christian dogma absurd, but I can give them a lot more credit than the strawman argument Eugenists make millions of times a day. For the eugenists in the world, if they want to cull the human population, best they start with themselves - after all, most of them are nothing but retarded thugs.