Seriously, if you really want everyone to believe there is no God, higher power, etc.
THE FACEPALM REQUIRED FOR THIS POST IS FAR BEYOND ANYTHING A HUMAN IS CAPABLE OF
You keep doing it. You keep proving to us that you have abso-fucking-lutely no clue on what the theory of evolution is about. Are you doing this on purpose? It's just amazing how you can be so clueless.
The theory of evolution doesn't say shit about the existence of a god, nor the origin of life(because I know you're probably thinking that too.). The only thing it does is explain how life developed.
HURR DURR
I keep on hearing this from people. If you don't agree they tell you that you have no idea what you're talking about. I ask evolutionists. Why only comprehend one side of the coin? Maybe if you guys would comprehend both sides of the coin you can truely see which one is true and debunk the other. Obviously what creationists believe is truth, no theory behind their words. And obviously evolutionists beleive what they believe is truth. Maybe if they understand both sides of the coin they can take away that "theory" part at the end. And I am sure I am going to get flammed for saying this but its common sense.
Ok, I read the link about "how wings evolved". "1. Wings evolved from arms used to capture small prey. (This seems rational, so we can ask whether the ancestral forms were actually doing this.)
2. Wings evolved because bipedal animals were leaping into the air; large wings assisted leaping. (This is possible; any amount of wing could assist leaping. Remember that we first need phylogenetic evidence for a bipedal running or leaping origin.) 3. Wings were used as sexual display structures; bigger wings were preferred by potential mates. (This is a non-falsifiable evolutionary hypothesis — we cannot test it.) 4. Wings evolved from gliding ancestors who began to flap their gliding structures in order to produce thrust. (This is reasonable and possible, but only with phylogenetic evidence for an arboreal gliding origin.)"
1. "seems rational"? Sounds like he's saying it's a "good guess"? 2. Completely understandable. However, where are the fossiles/remains that connect creatures from 1 and 2? 3. He says "non-falsifiable" then says "we cannot test it"?! WTF? Uhh, if you cannot test it, since it is a GUESS, then what gives him the right to say it's "non-falsifiable"? Since it is a GUESS, then he has no clue if it's true or false. This is a perfect example of how evolutionists insist what they believe to be the absolute unfallable truth, but have no REAL backing. 4. Of course, this makes sense. But we have to get through parts 1-3 before getting to 4. From 4 to now is MICRO evolution.
Surprise: 'macro-evolution' is the direct result of 'micro-evolution' over a long period of time. You cannot have one without the other. The processes are one and the same.
Also, something that is 'non-falsifiable' is something that cannot be disproven. Edit: Something that is falsifiable has some quality about it that could be hypothetically observed that would prove it to be false. That is him doing what scientists do, being truthful. Wikipedia link on falsifiability. He is admitting a weakness in his analysis in that there's no way to disprove it. That's why he discards that hypothesis when he moves on to the testing phase. In short, since you seem to have failed to comprehend the article, he is proposing hypotheses to test using the scientific method there, he's not even to the proof part yet. Since #3 is not falsifiable, he discards it. Looking up stuff is cool. So right about now you should be feeling really foolish for criticizing him based on your misunderstanding of the phrases used, and then making a generalization.
You clearly don't even have a clue how the scientific process works, much less the ability to comprehend a scientific article.
You're not fooling anybody.
You sure are =D. I do have a request from you since your the grand master of evolution. Can you show me proof of evolution in motion? I am going to use the world view of some atheists.."I want physical evidence." If you can show me evolution in motion I will consider your belief.
I linked how evolution was observed in a lab earlier in this thread. Do some work yourself.
Evolution cannot happen because I do not have a tail, a tail is not useless, it is more useful than the pinky toe. A dogs tail is useless but they still have one.
Evolution for humans is not possible.
All mammals have a tail or some remnents of a tail. By your logic, humans are mammals, so pizza is made of cows.
Ok, I read the link about "how wings evolved". "1. Wings evolved from arms used to capture small prey. (This seems rational, so we can ask whether the ancestral forms were actually doing this.)
2. Wings evolved because bipedal animals were leaping into the air; large wings assisted leaping. (This is possible; any amount of wing could assist leaping. Remember that we first need phylogenetic evidence for a bipedal running or leaping origin.) 3. Wings were used as sexual display structures; bigger wings were preferred by potential mates. (This is a non-falsifiable evolutionary hypothesis — we cannot test it.) 4. Wings evolved from gliding ancestors who began to flap their gliding structures in order to produce thrust. (This is reasonable and possible, but only with phylogenetic evidence for an arboreal gliding origin.)"
1. "seems rational"? Sounds like he's saying it's a "good guess"? 2. Completely understandable. However, where are the fossiles/remains that connect creatures from 1 and 2? 3. He says "non-falsifiable" then says "we cannot test it"?! WTF? Uhh, if you cannot test it, since it is a GUESS, then what gives him the right to say it's "non-falsifiable"? Since it is a GUESS, then he has no clue if it's true or false. This is a perfect example of how evolutionists insist what they believe to be the absolute unfallable truth, but have no REAL backing. 4. Of course, this makes sense. But we have to get through parts 1-3 before getting to 4. From 4 to now is MICRO evolution.
Surprise: 'macro-evolution' is the direct result of 'micro-evolution' over a long period of time. You cannot have one without the other. The processes are one and the same.
Also, something that is 'non-falsifiable' is something that cannot be disproven. Edit: Something that is falsifiable has some quality about it that could be hypothetically observed that would prove it to be false. That is him doing what scientists do, being truthful. Wikipedia link on falsifiability. He is admitting a weakness in his analysis in that there's no way to disprove it. That's why he discards that hypothesis when he moves on to the testing phase. In short, since you seem to have failed to comprehend the article, he is proposing hypotheses to test using the scientific method there, he's not even to the proof part yet. Since #3 is not falsifiable, he discards it. Looking up stuff is cool. So right about now you should be feeling really foolish for criticizing him based on your misunderstanding of the phrases used, and then making a generalization.
You clearly don't even have a clue how the scientific process works, much less the ability to comprehend a scientific article.
You're not fooling anybody.
You sure are =D. I do have a request from you since your the grand master of evolution. Can you show me proof of evolution in motion? I am going to use the world view of some atheists.."I want physical evidence." If you can show me evolution in motion I will consider your belief.
Honestly, why ask the question if it's not your real meaning? Proof has already been posted in this thread. Evolution has been observed and documented in real time in simpler organisms with faster lifecycles aleady (e-coli and flavobacterium if I recall correctly). Humans have directly influenced evolution in more complex life (various domesticated creatures and plants such as cows, dogs, bananas, cats, corn, etc.)
Asking to see evolution reproduced on the spot is idiotic. It's a long term process.
If you really want to see it, pray to your god for a longer natural life. I'm sure he'll be able to help you.
Look guys, it's simple. Micro evolution is a definate fact. MACRO evolution however is a ridiculous theory. Yes, using the science and discoveries that have been made thusfar do make it "somewhat" believable (yes I said - believable, because you have to believe/have faith, that it's true). But here's some easy questions for you since you're so much into this religion.... Explain to me how wings came to be. Seriously. Gradual changes in DNA through many years of development could perhaps create mutations that resemble wings. These mutations when they begin can't possibly be advantageous to the current species, and they'd be eaten up, which stops that evolution line dead in it's tracks. But let's say they ALL got super lucky and were able to survive long enough to gradually develop into something more resembling a wing. This process would take a LONG freaking time. And since they must've survived (because obviously they eventually developed into creatures with wings that can fly -- birds), then where are the remnants of these creatures? The same can be asked of pretty much any appendage on any creature. Because according to the "theory" of macro-evolution, it all began as a single-cell organism, and over a very long period of time, mutations took place.
Now, in closing, I have a request. Stop with the attacking of people who do not believe in evolution. We're not all attacking you. We don't call you stupid or uninformed, so don't do it to us. Just because we CHOOSE to believe a certain way doesn't mean we're completely ignorant to the other. Alot of us have been on your side in the past, but eventually simply changed our minds. Those mind changing stories are something you should perhaps pay attention to.
Fins.
They evolved in the sea, even a small fin is an advantage. Then the creature goes amphibian. A mutation gives larger fins that allow some individuals to flap them to move a few inches. Then one can flap more inches. In a milion years they can flap for few meters. You see the picture, if you want to.
Remnants.. I don't know about that.. but even if you saw them, you'd say that God put them there, so that wouldn't convince you.
What is ridiculous is believing in a God that allows innocent children and adults to suffer and die and lets the muderer/responsable live in peace. A God full of hate, that could be a possibility, even a God with a wicked and cruel sense of humor, but not a God full of love, no way.
Thank you for answering fins. I was reading through the thread knowing that someone had to know this answer. It always makes me sad when someone asks a question with such an easy answer and people answer it over and over without even getting to the easiest answer.
Well I'm outnumbered here by far -- apparently not alot of christians are gamers, and I'm tired of wasting my time arguing with you guys. I'm stuck in my beliefs, and I don't ever intend to change them. I honestly don't care how to believe, but I worry about your later generations. Living lives without anything but the current set of government and state laws as the only means of limitation. Seriously, if you really want everyone to believe there is no God, higher power, etc. What do you think the world is really going to be like in 30-50 years if you succeed? While you probably won't go around killing people (because your'e limited by laws), where will the morals be? You know, the kind that constitues love and care of a child, being faithful to your wife, not stealing just because you can get away with it, etc. If you say you'd still love, be faithful, and not do something "wrong" eventhough you could get away with it, then what exactly would stop you? Where do you think those feelings come from? Were they "evolved" into us? Or is there something deeper? Take your "scientific analyses" and study what you think a world would truely be like if nobody believed in God, and only lived by the laws of the land. "...if consequences dictate our course of action and it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught...then I should just play God and shoot you myself...." -- Tool
Anyway, I'm out.
No, I am out, you are Vhayne. You are right, we are outnumbered.
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. They think they have proof because they see small orginizism change. But they never see those small orginisms change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."
I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. Have good life evolving into nothing.
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. (talk about "the pot calling the kettle black") They think they have proof because they see small orginizism (organism... fixed that for you) change. But they never see those small orginisms (wow... didn't even misspell it the same way twice) change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. (you're still clueless on assumptions (Creationism) vs. Scientific Facts/Theories (Evolution)) Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."(Yet... there are fossils that carbon date back then. Fossils > Bible) I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. (never seen it... heresay until you provide a link) Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. (Sorry... you're still clueless on the fact that Evolution is not trying to disprove "God"... it just disproves the Creationist idea that is thrown around by you and your ilk) Have good life evolving into nothing. (Don't let the door hit you on the way out)
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. (talk about "the pot calling the kettle black") They think they have proof because they see small orginizism (organism... fixed that for you) change. But they never see those small orginisms (wow... didn't even misspell it the same way twice) change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. (you're still clueless on assumptions (Creationism) vs. Scientific Facts/Theories (Evolution)) Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."(Yet... there are fossils that carbon date back then. Fossils > Bible) I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. (never seen it... heresay until you provide a link) Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. (Sorry... you're still clueless on the fact that Evolution is not trying to disprove "God"... it just disproves the Creationist idea that is thrown around by you and your ilk) Have good life evolving into nothing. (Don't let the door hit you on the way out)
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that), is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant, stupid, idiot, etc. from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth.
Tykero are you familiar with the mathmatics behind evolution? I've actually had some amazing discussions with a Korean Evolutionist which has been working to understand how evolution allowed species to develop from one to the next. The ironic part his job is to prove species which are believed to be connected arent. Thus trying to clear out misconcieved connections.
Ironically hes finding out some species such as polar bears, american grizzlies, kodiaks, russian grizzlies and there family can all be traced back to one species of bear in alaska which for all aparent purposes appears to be a grizzly but has all the genetic material for the ones coming after. Heres the weird part. The ones after have less complexity. They didnt evolve into new species at all. They just had more and more dna become dormant over time allowing singular features develop.
This puts a whole new spin on how features and species can develop!
In essence I helped him by digging up similar species. In birds, reptiles, fish and amphibians. Its turning out about the time after the last major ice age tons of species moved into new areas and quickly adapted to there new environments.
So quickly it didn't make sense. BUT if all that was happening was species were temporarily putting dna into dormancy... Well allows for much quicker development. But how? Why? How often does it happen?
All I know is theres a ton more to learn about species.
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. (talk about "the pot calling the kettle black") They think they have proof because they see small orginizism (organism... fixed that for you) change. But they never see those small orginisms (wow... didn't even misspell it the same way twice) change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. (you're still clueless on assumptions (Creationism) vs. Scientific Facts/Theories (Evolution)) Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."(Yet... there are fossils that carbon date back then. Fossils > Bible) I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. (never seen it... heresay until you provide a link) Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. (Sorry... you're still clueless on the fact that Evolution is not trying to disprove "God"... it just disproves the Creationist idea that is thrown around by you and your ilk) Have good life evolving into nothing. (Don't let the door hit you on the way out)
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that) (That's because Evolutionists actually have scientific proof to back up their theory. Yet, all you Creationists have is some morons who completely ignore actual scientific facts, commit quote mining, and are found to be criminal (Kent Hovind) to "back up" your ideals. Oh... and the Bible, which you, the Creationists, take it as being litteral.) , is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant (never said that), stupid (never said that), idiot (never said that), etc (never said that). from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth. (oooh... threats...)
Yeah... it's probably a good thing you are leaving this thread. I mean, you're blatantly stating that I've said things that I've never said (hint: see all the "(never said that)"). So, time to remove yourself from this thread and go back into hiding in your belief structure while completely ignoring actual scientific facts of Evolution.
Tykero are you familiar with the mathmatics behind evolution? I've actually had some amazing discussions with a Korean Evolutionist which has been working to understand how evolution allowed species to develop from one to the next. The ironic part his job is to prove species which are believed to be connected arent. Thus trying to clear out misconcieved connections. Ironically hes finding out some species such as polar bears, american grizzlies, kodiaks, russian grizzlies and there family can all be traced back to one species of bear in alaska which for all aparent purposes appears to be a grizzly but has all the genetic material for the ones coming after. Heres the weird part. The ones after have less complexity. They didnt evolve into new species at all. They just had more and more dna become dormant over time allowing singular features develop. This puts a whole new spin on how features and species can develop! In essence I helped him by digging up similar species. In birds, reptiles, fish and amphibians. Its turning out about the time after the last major ice age tons of species moved into new areas and quickly adapted to there new environments. So quickly it didn't make sense. BUT if all that was happening was species were temporarily putting dna into dormancy... Well allows for much quicker development. But how? Why? How often does it happen? All I know is theres a ton more to learn about species.
Yeah, scientists are learning more about how specific features of a creature's genetics can be turned on or off, or be reused in a different manner, and how those switches will alter the creature in impressive ways.
I am reminded of one of the more interesting finds on this -- of how some species of caterpillar will use the same sequence that determine leg location to generate spots on the wings.
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. (talk about "the pot calling the kettle black") They think they have proof because they see small orginizism (organism... fixed that for you) change. But they never see those small orginisms (wow... didn't even misspell it the same way twice) change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. (you're still clueless on assumptions (Creationism) vs. Scientific Facts/Theories (Evolution)) Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."(Yet... there are fossils that carbon date back then. Fossils > Bible) I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. (never seen it... heresay until you provide a link) Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. (Sorry... you're still clueless on the fact that Evolution is not trying to disprove "God"... it just disproves the Creationist idea that is thrown around by you and your ilk) Have good life evolving into nothing. (Don't let the door hit you on the way out)
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that) (That's because Evolutionists actually have scientific proof to back up their theory. Yet, all you Creationists have is some morons who completely ignore actual scientific facts, commit quote mining, and are found to be criminal (Kent Hovind) to "back up" your ideals. Oh... and the Bible, which you, the Creationists, take it as being litteral.) , is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant (never said that), stupid (never said that), idiot (never said that), etc (never said that). from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth. (oooh... threats...)
Yeah... it's probably a good thing you are leaving this thread. I mean, you're blatantly stating that I've said things that I've never said (hint: see all the "(never said that)"). So, time to remove yourself from this thread and go back into hiding in your belief structure while completely ignoring actual scientific facts of Evolution.
Well you yourself have not but others have.
Hold on Snow Leopard, imma let you finish, but Windows had one of the best operating systems of all time.
If the Powerball lottery was like Lotro, nobody would win for 2 years, and then everyone in Nebraska would win on the same day. And then Nebraska would get nerfed.-pinkwood lotro fourms
AMD 4800 2.4ghz-3GB RAM 533mhz-EVGA 9500GT 512mb-320gb HD
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. (talk about "the pot calling the kettle black") They think they have proof because they see small orginizism (organism... fixed that for you) change. But they never see those small orginisms (wow... didn't even misspell it the same way twice) change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. (you're still clueless on assumptions (Creationism) vs. Scientific Facts/Theories (Evolution)) Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."(Yet... there are fossils that carbon date back then. Fossils > Bible) I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. (never seen it... heresay until you provide a link) Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. (Sorry... you're still clueless on the fact that Evolution is not trying to disprove "God"... it just disproves the Creationist idea that is thrown around by you and your ilk) Have good life evolving into nothing. (Don't let the door hit you on the way out)
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that) (That's because Evolutionists actually have scientific proof to back up their theory. Yet, all you Creationists have is some morons who completely ignore actual scientific facts, commit quote mining, and are found to be criminal (Kent Hovind) to "back up" your ideals. Oh... and the Bible, which you, the Creationists, take it as being litteral.) , is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant (never said that), stupid (never said that), idiot (never said that), etc (never said that). from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth. (oooh... threats...)
Yeah... it's probably a good thing you are leaving this thread. I mean, you're blatantly stating that I've said things that I've never said (hint: see all the "(never said that)"). So, time to remove yourself from this thread and go back into hiding in your belief structure while completely ignoring actual scientific facts of Evolution.
Well you yourself have not but others have.
Nobody in this thread has ever called anyone stupid an idiot. The only times when those terms have been mentioned is when creationists in this thread felt they were being called or referred to that way, whereas they never have. To restate, never has a person in this thread been insulted. It seems some of you have a preset idea that we think of you as ignorant, idiots or stupid. This is simply not true. It seems as though you believe we think of you like that so much that these words are actually prompted in your brain to the degree that you think these words are actually coming from us. We're 'attacking' your beliefs, yes (same as you're 'attacking' ours, that's pretty much the spirit of debate). But you've never been attacked as a person. And I'm actually going as far as to say that you're welcome to have the beliefs you have, as long as you don't hurt anyone with them. We all have some irrational beliefs, even the most logical of scientists and engineers.
Oh, when I said nobody had been personally insulted, I was of course not talking about the guy that called us 'arrogant assholes'. Then again, he's on your side. Very Christian of him. Luckily, by far most of you aren't like that.
Hmm when ..well lets just say "some" KNOW the truth (read the 7 pages) and the rest are lol just learning from that (poster) .. just agree and move on. Also the word "christian" anyone can say or use it ..just know that its a word no more no less does not mean they are.
What got me was "watch this video first".. huh? Lol well I dont have to watch that video to debate Evolution .. you should have said "watch this dumbed down version" .. or read this book get back to me when you done lol and I will then let you know where you got it wrong... relax just playing..
In other words ..listen to others .. learn from them.. you know have all the facts .. takes years to even start to understand .. yes I know what you are trying to say about the word "evolution"
I am not hijacking this thread, just inserting a little humor in it
A renowned anthropologist spent the majority of his life searching for proof that Adam and Eve truly existed. While exploring deep within the inner reaches of some caves in Europe, he finds two bodies - one male, one female - encased in ice.
He runs from the cave shouting that he has indeed definitely found the bodies of Adam and Eve!
What is his 'proof positive' that the bodies he's found are none other than Adam and Eve?
So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.
My reason for evolution not being possible is if things did evolve then wouldn't everything living now be able to fly, breath under water, have tails, feet with opposable thumbs and have poisonous venom? Because if things we able to evolve then why wouldn't they take the best of everything and adapt themselves to that so they be super badasses.
Evolution cannot happen because I do not have a tail, a tail is not useless, it is more useful than the pinky toe. A dogs tail is useless but they still have one.
Evolution for humans is not possible.
A dogs tail is not useless O.o when my dog is happy / excited she swings it around. =]
My reason for evolution not being possible is if things did evolve then wouldn't everything living now be able to fly, breath under water, have tails, feet with opposable thumbs and have poisonous venom? Because if things we able to evolve then why wouldn't they take the best of everything and adapt themselves to that so they be super badasses.
Because they don't need to. That's not how evolution works.
Take, for example, snakes. Now, over the last few million years, wouldn't it make sense for snakes to grow legs?
The answer, however, is no. Snakes never evolved to grow legs because THEY DON'T NEED THEM. THEY DO JUST FINE AS SNAKES.
Nothing in our ancestor's environment dictated that being able to breathe underwater was necessary for the advancement of the species. Hence, pre-homo sapien ancestors never developed that trait and/or passed it on to the earliest homo sapiens. Just because a trait would be advantageous does not mean that a species is automatically going to develop it.
I would really advise reading up on the theory of evolution before panning it because you can't fly.
So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.
Some people research science and watch videos over and over again util they convince themselves evolution is how we are created. Others read books over and over again untilthey convince themselves that their religion is how we were created. This is all very, very silly. ANYONE with ANY intelligence knows we were created by mice. Get it right!
--------------------------------- Mean People Suck
Some people research science and watch videos over and over again util they convince themselves evolution is how we are created. Others read books over and over again untilthey convince themselves that their religion is how we were created. This is all very, very silly. ANYONE with ANY intelligence knows we were created by mice. Get it right!
Actually a deeper question would be....if you never learned anything, I mean, absolutely nothing of either subject, what would you believe later in life?
Yo ucan debate all you want but I would rather believe that mankind was created by a higher being than mankind evolved from a monkey over millions of years.......IMO evolution is totally ridiculous and offers its beleivers no hope.......
Comments
THE FACEPALM REQUIRED FOR THIS POST IS FAR BEYOND ANYTHING A HUMAN IS CAPABLE OF
You keep doing it. You keep proving to us that you have abso-fucking-lutely no clue on what the theory of evolution is about. Are you doing this on purpose? It's just amazing how you can be so clueless.
The theory of evolution doesn't say shit about the existence of a god, nor the origin of life(because I know you're probably thinking that too.). The only thing it does is explain how life developed.
HURR DURR
I keep on hearing this from people. If you don't agree they tell you that you have no idea what you're talking about. I ask evolutionists. Why only comprehend one side of the coin? Maybe if you guys would comprehend both sides of the coin you can truely see which one is true and debunk the other. Obviously what creationists believe is truth, no theory behind their words. And obviously evolutionists beleive what they believe is truth. Maybe if they understand both sides of the coin they can take away that "theory" part at the end. And I am sure I am going to get flammed for saying this but its common sense.
Surprise: 'macro-evolution' is the direct result of 'micro-evolution' over a long period of time. You cannot have one without the other. The processes are one and the same.
Also, something that is 'non-falsifiable' is something that cannot be disproven. Edit: Something that is falsifiable has some quality about it that could be hypothetically observed that would prove it to be false. That is him doing what scientists do, being truthful. Wikipedia link on falsifiability. He is admitting a weakness in his analysis in that there's no way to disprove it. That's why he discards that hypothesis when he moves on to the testing phase. In short, since you seem to have failed to comprehend the article, he is proposing hypotheses to test using the scientific method there, he's not even to the proof part yet. Since #3 is not falsifiable, he discards it. Looking up stuff is cool. So right about now you should be feeling really foolish for criticizing him based on your misunderstanding of the phrases used, and then making a generalization.
You clearly don't even have a clue how the scientific process works, much less the ability to comprehend a scientific article.
You're not fooling anybody.
You sure are =D. I do have a request from you since your the grand master of evolution. Can you show me proof of evolution in motion? I am going to use the world view of some atheists.."I want physical evidence." If you can show me evolution in motion I will consider your belief.
I linked how evolution was observed in a lab earlier in this thread. Do some work yourself.
All mammals have a tail or some remnents of a tail. By your logic, humans are mammals, so pizza is made of cows.
Surprise: 'macro-evolution' is the direct result of 'micro-evolution' over a long period of time. You cannot have one without the other. The processes are one and the same.
Also, something that is 'non-falsifiable' is something that cannot be disproven. Edit: Something that is falsifiable has some quality about it that could be hypothetically observed that would prove it to be false. That is him doing what scientists do, being truthful. Wikipedia link on falsifiability. He is admitting a weakness in his analysis in that there's no way to disprove it. That's why he discards that hypothesis when he moves on to the testing phase. In short, since you seem to have failed to comprehend the article, he is proposing hypotheses to test using the scientific method there, he's not even to the proof part yet. Since #3 is not falsifiable, he discards it. Looking up stuff is cool. So right about now you should be feeling really foolish for criticizing him based on your misunderstanding of the phrases used, and then making a generalization.
You clearly don't even have a clue how the scientific process works, much less the ability to comprehend a scientific article.
You're not fooling anybody.
You sure are =D. I do have a request from you since your the grand master of evolution. Can you show me proof of evolution in motion? I am going to use the world view of some atheists.."I want physical evidence." If you can show me evolution in motion I will consider your belief.
Honestly, why ask the question if it's not your real meaning? Proof has already been posted in this thread. Evolution has been observed and documented in real time in simpler organisms with faster lifecycles aleady (e-coli and flavobacterium if I recall correctly). Humans have directly influenced evolution in more complex life (various domesticated creatures and plants such as cows, dogs, bananas, cats, corn, etc.)
Asking to see evolution reproduced on the spot is idiotic. It's a long term process.
If you really want to see it, pray to your god for a longer natural life. I'm sure he'll be able to help you.
-
Fins.
They evolved in the sea, even a small fin is an advantage. Then the creature goes amphibian. A mutation gives larger fins that allow some individuals to flap them to move a few inches. Then one can flap more inches. In a milion years they can flap for few meters. You see the picture, if you want to.
Remnants.. I don't know about that.. but even if you saw them, you'd say that God put them there, so that wouldn't convince you.
What is ridiculous is believing in a God that allows innocent children and adults to suffer and die and lets the muderer/responsable live in peace. A God full of hate, that could be a possibility, even a God with a wicked and cruel sense of humor, but not a God full of love, no way.
Thank you for answering fins. I was reading through the thread knowing that someone had to know this answer. It always makes me sad when someone asks a question with such an easy answer and people answer it over and over without even getting to the easiest answer.
GJ
No, I am out, you are Vhayne. You are right, we are outnumbered.
I am with you both,^^ I am done here as well. I am sick of being slandered and called an idiot when they don't even understand both sides of the coin. They think they have proof because they see small orginizism change. But they never see those small orginisms change into something else. All of their facts are based on assumptions. Saying dinosaurs lived millions of years ago...fairy tales start with a "long time ago."
I watched some video a while ago that these group of scientists said the only way we can evolve is if we co-exist with machines in us. Are you serious? That is absured. So to evolutionists, make the world religion free and see what you get. Have good life evolving into nothing.
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
The amount of cognitive dissonance in this thread is astounding.
I kinda find all this amusing tbh.
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that), is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant, stupid, idiot, etc. from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth.
Tykero are you familiar with the mathmatics behind evolution? I've actually had some amazing discussions with a Korean Evolutionist which has been working to understand how evolution allowed species to develop from one to the next. The ironic part his job is to prove species which are believed to be connected arent. Thus trying to clear out misconcieved connections.
Ironically hes finding out some species such as polar bears, american grizzlies, kodiaks, russian grizzlies and there family can all be traced back to one species of bear in alaska which for all aparent purposes appears to be a grizzly but has all the genetic material for the ones coming after. Heres the weird part. The ones after have less complexity. They didnt evolve into new species at all. They just had more and more dna become dormant over time allowing singular features develop.
This puts a whole new spin on how features and species can develop!
In essence I helped him by digging up similar species. In birds, reptiles, fish and amphibians. Its turning out about the time after the last major ice age tons of species moved into new areas and quickly adapted to there new environments.
So quickly it didn't make sense. BUT if all that was happening was species were temporarily putting dna into dormancy... Well allows for much quicker development. But how? Why? How often does it happen?
All I know is theres a ton more to learn about species.
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that) (That's because Evolutionists actually have scientific proof to back up their theory. Yet, all you Creationists have is some morons who completely ignore actual scientific facts, commit quote mining, and are found to be criminal (Kent Hovind) to "back up" your ideals. Oh... and the Bible, which you, the Creationists, take it as being litteral.) , is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant (never said that), stupid (never said that), idiot (never said that), etc (never said that). from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth. (oooh... threats...)
Yeah... it's probably a good thing you are leaving this thread. I mean, you're blatantly stating that I've said things that I've never said (hint: see all the "(never said that)"). So, time to remove yourself from this thread and go back into hiding in your belief structure while completely ignoring actual scientific facts of Evolution.
Yeah, scientists are learning more about how specific features of a creature's genetics can be turned on or off, or be reused in a different manner, and how those switches will alter the creature in impressive ways.
I am reminded of one of the more interesting finds on this -- of how some species of caterpillar will use the same sequence that determine leg location to generate spots on the wings.
-
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that) (That's because Evolutionists actually have scientific proof to back up their theory. Yet, all you Creationists have is some morons who completely ignore actual scientific facts, commit quote mining, and are found to be criminal (Kent Hovind) to "back up" your ideals. Oh... and the Bible, which you, the Creationists, take it as being litteral.) , is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant (never said that), stupid (never said that), idiot (never said that), etc (never said that). from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth. (oooh... threats...)
Yeah... it's probably a good thing you are leaving this thread. I mean, you're blatantly stating that I've said things that I've never said (hint: see all the "(never said that)"). So, time to remove yourself from this thread and go back into hiding in your belief structure while completely ignoring actual scientific facts of Evolution.
Well you yourself have not but others have.
Hold on Snow Leopard, imma let you finish, but Windows had one of the best operating systems of all time.
If the Powerball lottery was like Lotro, nobody would win for 2 years, and then everyone in Nebraska would win on the same day.
And then Nebraska would get nerfed.-pinkwood lotro fourms
AMD 4800 2.4ghz-3GB RAM 533mhz-EVGA 9500GT 512mb-320gb HD
This seems to be a reoccuring theme. The Creationists run away from the fight instead of actually sticking up for their ideals, no matter how misguided and wrong they are. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
Ok, had to temporarily come back for this one. Sticking to our ideals is one thing, but arguing with arrogant a$$holes (yeah I've taken enough personal abuse on this thread to warrant that) (That's because Evolutionists actually have scientific proof to back up their theory. Yet, all you Creationists have is some morons who completely ignore actual scientific facts, commit quote mining, and are found to be criminal (Kent Hovind) to "back up" your ideals. Oh... and the Bible, which you, the Creationists, take it as being litteral.) , is completely different issue. I see no point in continuing to argue. You are set in your ways, I'm set in mine. As for "cowardly"? I'm not the one calling people ignorant (never said that), stupid (never said that), idiot (never said that), etc (never said that). from behind a computer. If you were to try that too much in the real world, you might be coughing up your own teeth. (oooh... threats...)
Yeah... it's probably a good thing you are leaving this thread. I mean, you're blatantly stating that I've said things that I've never said (hint: see all the "(never said that)"). So, time to remove yourself from this thread and go back into hiding in your belief structure while completely ignoring actual scientific facts of Evolution.
Well you yourself have not but others have.
Nobody in this thread has ever called anyone stupid an idiot. The only times when those terms have been mentioned is when creationists in this thread felt they were being called or referred to that way, whereas they never have. To restate, never has a person in this thread been insulted. It seems some of you have a preset idea that we think of you as ignorant, idiots or stupid. This is simply not true. It seems as though you believe we think of you like that so much that these words are actually prompted in your brain to the degree that you think these words are actually coming from us. We're 'attacking' your beliefs, yes (same as you're 'attacking' ours, that's pretty much the spirit of debate). But you've never been attacked as a person. And I'm actually going as far as to say that you're welcome to have the beliefs you have, as long as you don't hurt anyone with them. We all have some irrational beliefs, even the most logical of scientists and engineers.
Oh, when I said nobody had been personally insulted, I was of course not talking about the guy that called us 'arrogant assholes'. Then again, he's on your side. Very Christian of him. Luckily, by far most of you aren't like that.
Hmm when ..well lets just say "some" KNOW the truth (read the 7 pages) and the rest are lol just learning from that (poster) .. just agree and move on. Also the word "christian" anyone can say or use it ..just know that its a word no more no less does not mean they are.
What got me was "watch this video first".. huh? Lol well I dont have to watch that video to debate Evolution .. you should have said "watch this dumbed down version" .. or read this book get back to me when you done lol and I will then let you know where you got it wrong... relax just playing..
In other words ..listen to others .. learn from them.. you know have all the facts .. takes years to even start to understand .. yes I know what you are trying to say about the word "evolution"
I am not hijacking this thread, just inserting a little humor in it
A renowned anthropologist spent the majority of his life searching for proof that Adam and Eve truly existed. While exploring deep within the inner reaches of some caves in Europe, he finds two bodies - one male, one female - encased in ice.
He runs from the cave shouting that he has indeed definitely found the bodies of Adam and Eve!
What is his 'proof positive' that the bodies he's found are none other than Adam and Eve?
bah, nvm
So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.
My reason for evolution not being possible is if things did evolve then wouldn't everything living now be able to fly, breath under water, have tails, feet with opposable thumbs and have poisonous venom? Because if things we able to evolve then why wouldn't they take the best of everything and adapt themselves to that so they be super badasses.
A dogs tail is not useless O.o when my dog is happy / excited she swings it around. =]
(Sorry if I'm wrong?)
Because they don't need to. That's not how evolution works.
Take, for example, snakes. Now, over the last few million years, wouldn't it make sense for snakes to grow legs?
The answer, however, is no. Snakes never evolved to grow legs because THEY DON'T NEED THEM. THEY DO JUST FINE AS SNAKES.
Nothing in our ancestor's environment dictated that being able to breathe underwater was necessary for the advancement of the species. Hence, pre-homo sapien ancestors never developed that trait and/or passed it on to the earliest homo sapiens. Just because a trait would be advantageous does not mean that a species is automatically going to develop it.
I would really advise reading up on the theory of evolution before panning it because you can't fly.
So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.
Some people research science and watch videos over and over again util they convince themselves evolution is how we are created. Others read books over and over again untilthey convince themselves that their religion is how we were created. This is all very, very silly. ANYONE with ANY intelligence knows we were created by mice. Get it right!
---------------------------------
Mean People Suck
Actually a deeper question would be....if you never learned anything, I mean, absolutely nothing of either subject, what would you believe later in life?
Yo ucan debate all you want but I would rather believe that mankind was created by a higher being than mankind evolved from a monkey over millions of years.......IMO evolution is totally ridiculous and offers its beleivers no hope.......