Full Version: Evolution
Just remember that belief doesn't require any sort of proof or justification. Belief simply is. Science is another matter altogether. It has specific guidelines that must be met in order to have any credibility as a valid (not necessarily correct, but valid) scientific theory. It is because of this that a person can both believe in evolution, due to scientific support, and believe in the Bible, for whatever reason they choose to. The only real difference is that the support for evolution being objective in nature) will remain the same despite who studies it, whereas support for God (being subjective) will vary depending on who you speak to.
add to that subjectivity and objectivity are complementary not opposing.
except in the case of suggesting dinosaurs being lizard-angel hybrids that is!
except in the case of suggesting dinosaurs being lizard-angel hybrids that is!
QUOTE(pallidin @ Jun 13 2005, 02:52 PM)
QUOTE(Ashley-Star*Child @ Jun 13 2005, 08:06 AM)
There was also a skull and pelvis found of a 16 ft human being.
Really? I have not heard of that. Where did you get that info. Please share.
[right][snapback]674276[/snapback][/right]
Unless you are referring to some other 16 foot human, I believe that the giant was proven to be a hoax(a movie set if I recall correctly), although several creationist sites grabbed on to the photo and ran with it.
QUOTE(kaoeki @ Jun 13 2005, 05:22 PM)
We DO HAVE FOSSILS OF DINOSAURS and a copy of a book called the bible that was translated and written by a man who thought he could translate the Hebrew/Arabic language.
[right][snapback]674515[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]674515[/snapback][/right]
Where does it say in the bible that dinosaurs weren't created? Doesn't it say animals were created? Don't you think a dinosaur is an animal? I do.
amal, we all know your answer to this: no matter what is found, the bible can be re-interpreted to account for it even if it means it contradicts itself! a more magical book there has not been, more black magical book that is!
Why dear Amalgamut, the nearest and clearest would be the Egyptians. The 7plagues and all that turmoil supposedly caused were non existence in any Eygptian records, and please note that the Egyptians are great chroniclers, they would hardly fail to mention such a great disaster. The Chinese civilizations left clear records as well going back to 4000yrs. There is much evidence as well that the civilization was clear and continuos going back much furthur, ergo, no great flood. this is the same for India and other ancient civilisation as well. One minor point is also disimilarity of the creation myths of different cultural groups, what makes the Bible so special that it is taken as facts?
^^^maybe all their written documentations of a flood were destroyed in "the flood."
But I do recall of other civilizations recording "great floods."
But I do recall of other civilizations recording "great floods."
Definition of a species.
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~grange/glossary-01.html
Is a whale a dolphin, a horse a zebra, a wolf a fox or jackal? ALL these species have interbred, and our modern dog did NOT result from the wolf alone. Siberian Huskeys, Samoyeds, etc came from wolves. Many other breeds did not, and they ALL mix quite well today.
The skull is not a hoax. Oh wait, it supports Creationism, it *must* be a hoax. You even admit that Evolution draws on public opinion to eridcate Creationism. Like I said, opinions can and DO change. There was also a pelvic area/thigh bones found in a spearate area of a 16 ft human. A skull AND pelvic/thigh bones found separately? Explain that one. And it DOES challenge Evolution, that's why you don't hear about it. There were giant humans of their height description described in the Bible.
Now for the one who said she read through ALL 10 pages, I find that hard to believe as you wwent on to say 'dinosaurs aren't in the Bible'. I was talking about ENOCH, not the current, cut to bits Bible. Dinosaurs ARE in Enoch, and there IS evidence of them being in Egypt which I made a post about here before of a carving of an 'untameable' animal resembling an Apatosaurus caught by their extremely long necks. These animals had 'gods' status, and had a specific name.
There was also an Arab text found near the pyramids talking about someone descending from the sky to warn of a coming flood which would wipe out everything and was taught the mathematical and scientific knowledge to build the pyramids as a refuge from these floods.
Cror, you're still babbling. My post wasn't contradictory, I do not reside in the United States of America. Are you able to comprehend that?
QUOTE
Species
Classification of organism. The members of the species group can inter-breed. Sometimes cross-species breeding occurs, but an infertile, or hybrid organism is the result.
Classification of organism. The members of the species group can inter-breed. Sometimes cross-species breeding occurs, but an infertile, or hybrid organism is the result.
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~grange/glossary-01.html
Is a whale a dolphin, a horse a zebra, a wolf a fox or jackal? ALL these species have interbred, and our modern dog did NOT result from the wolf alone. Siberian Huskeys, Samoyeds, etc came from wolves. Many other breeds did not, and they ALL mix quite well today.
The skull is not a hoax. Oh wait, it supports Creationism, it *must* be a hoax. You even admit that Evolution draws on public opinion to eridcate Creationism. Like I said, opinions can and DO change. There was also a pelvic area/thigh bones found in a spearate area of a 16 ft human. A skull AND pelvic/thigh bones found separately? Explain that one. And it DOES challenge Evolution, that's why you don't hear about it. There were giant humans of their height description described in the Bible.
Now for the one who said she read through ALL 10 pages, I find that hard to believe as you wwent on to say 'dinosaurs aren't in the Bible'. I was talking about ENOCH, not the current, cut to bits Bible. Dinosaurs ARE in Enoch, and there IS evidence of them being in Egypt which I made a post about here before of a carving of an 'untameable' animal resembling an Apatosaurus caught by their extremely long necks. These animals had 'gods' status, and had a specific name.
There was also an Arab text found near the pyramids talking about someone descending from the sky to warn of a coming flood which would wipe out everything and was taught the mathematical and scientific knowledge to build the pyramids as a refuge from these floods.
Cror, you're still babbling. My post wasn't contradictory, I do not reside in the United States of America. Are you able to comprehend that?
QUOTE(Ashley-Star*Child @ Jun 13 2005, 07:30 PM)
Definition of a species.
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~grange/glossary-01.html
Is a whale a dolphin, a horse a zebra, a wolf a fox or jackal? ALL these species have interbred, and our modern dog did NOT result from the wolf alone. Siberian Huskeys, Samoyeds, etc came from wolves. Many other breeds did not, and they ALL mix quite well today.
Still, the point holds. Mutts are fertile, and cross-species hybrids cannot be fertile, so therefore all the different types of domestic dogs are the same species.
The skull is not a hoax. Oh wait, it supports Creationism, it *must* be a hoax.
We're still waiting for actual evidence of this skull.
You even admit that Evolution draws on public opinion to eridcate Creationism.
Methinks you misinterpreted the statement. At the moment, particularly in the USA, People are not trying to "eradicate" creationism, but merely keep it out of schools and scientific discourse, two places which it clearly doesn't belong.
Like I said, opinions can and DO change. There was also a pelvic area/thigh bones found in a spearate area of a 16 ft human. A skull AND pelvic/thigh bones found separately? Explain that one.
Simple. They were both part of the same hoax. It's not exactly hard to plant fairly realistic bones in two seperate locations. Also, ironically, the "Missing Link" fossils that you so disparage actually have MORE to show than these "Giant" bones which I have yet to see even the teeniest bit of proof for.
And it DOES challenge Evolution, that's why you don't hear about it. There were giant humans of their height description described in the Bible.
*Sigh* I feel like a broken record here, but... Proof please...
Now for the one who said she read through ALL 10 pages, I find that hard to believe as you wwent on to say 'dinosaurs aren't in the Bible'. I was talking about ENOCH, not the current, cut to bits Bible. Dinosaurs ARE in Enoch, and there IS evidence of them being in Egypt which I made a post about here before of a carving of an 'untameable' animal resembling an Apatosaurus caught by their extremely long necks. These animals had 'gods' status, and had a specific name.
Personally, I tend to be at least a little skeptical of anything that was written longer than one thousand years ago, especially if it hasn't been independently verified by another source.
There was also an Arab text found near the pyramids talking about someone descending from the sky to warn of a coming flood which would wipe out everything and was taught the mathematical and scientific knowledge to build the pyramids as a refuge from these floods.
Go look at Zecheria Sitchin's books, and then come back and talk. They're slightly more believable than these angel-lizards.
Cror, you're still babbling. My post wasn't contradictory, I do not reside in the United States of America. Are you able to comprehend that?
I think he was reffering to your calling the USA its own continent. It is, in fact, part of the North American continent.
[right][snapback]674901[/snapback][/right]
QUOTE
Species
Classification of organism. The members of the species group can inter-breed. Sometimes cross-species breeding occurs, but an infertile, or hybrid organism is the result.
Classification of organism. The members of the species group can inter-breed. Sometimes cross-species breeding occurs, but an infertile, or hybrid organism is the result.
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~grange/glossary-01.html
Is a whale a dolphin, a horse a zebra, a wolf a fox or jackal? ALL these species have interbred, and our modern dog did NOT result from the wolf alone. Siberian Huskeys, Samoyeds, etc came from wolves. Many other breeds did not, and they ALL mix quite well today.
Still, the point holds. Mutts are fertile, and cross-species hybrids cannot be fertile, so therefore all the different types of domestic dogs are the same species.
The skull is not a hoax. Oh wait, it supports Creationism, it *must* be a hoax.
We're still waiting for actual evidence of this skull.
You even admit that Evolution draws on public opinion to eridcate Creationism.
Methinks you misinterpreted the statement. At the moment, particularly in the USA, People are not trying to "eradicate" creationism, but merely keep it out of schools and scientific discourse, two places which it clearly doesn't belong.
Like I said, opinions can and DO change. There was also a pelvic area/thigh bones found in a spearate area of a 16 ft human. A skull AND pelvic/thigh bones found separately? Explain that one.
Simple. They were both part of the same hoax. It's not exactly hard to plant fairly realistic bones in two seperate locations. Also, ironically, the "Missing Link" fossils that you so disparage actually have MORE to show than these "Giant" bones which I have yet to see even the teeniest bit of proof for.
And it DOES challenge Evolution, that's why you don't hear about it. There were giant humans of their height description described in the Bible.
*Sigh* I feel like a broken record here, but... Proof please...
Now for the one who said she read through ALL 10 pages, I find that hard to believe as you wwent on to say 'dinosaurs aren't in the Bible'. I was talking about ENOCH, not the current, cut to bits Bible. Dinosaurs ARE in Enoch, and there IS evidence of them being in Egypt which I made a post about here before of a carving of an 'untameable' animal resembling an Apatosaurus caught by their extremely long necks. These animals had 'gods' status, and had a specific name.
Personally, I tend to be at least a little skeptical of anything that was written longer than one thousand years ago, especially if it hasn't been independently verified by another source.
There was also an Arab text found near the pyramids talking about someone descending from the sky to warn of a coming flood which would wipe out everything and was taught the mathematical and scientific knowledge to build the pyramids as a refuge from these floods.
Go look at Zecheria Sitchin's books, and then come back and talk. They're slightly more believable than these angel-lizards.
Cror, you're still babbling. My post wasn't contradictory, I do not reside in the United States of America. Are you able to comprehend that?
I think he was reffering to your calling the USA its own continent. It is, in fact, part of the North American continent.
[right][snapback]674901[/snapback][/right]
QUOTE
There was also a pelvic area/thigh bones found in a spearate area of a 16 ft human. A skull AND pelvic/thigh bones found separately? Explain that one.
Give me a link to that one first.
QUOTE
And it DOES challenge Evolution, that's why you don't hear about it.
How does it challenge evolution anymore than Homo Floresiensis does?
QUOTE
Personally, I tend to be at least a little skeptical of anything that was written longer than one thousand years ago, especially if it hasn't been independently verified by another source.
How the hell do you READ a carving? It was a PICTURE depiction which was also written about as an untamable animal.
And oh, of course, the 16ft'ers MUST be hoaxes. Right. I CAN tell you of a good evolutionist hoax though. ARCHEORAPTOR, that never was.
Ashley, would you finally give us the link instead of stalling?
The only thing I could find is this picture... is this part of what you're talking about?
The only thing I could find is this picture... is this part of what you're talking about?
I found another site (including the anomolous 'coneheads', none of these are fake) which shows giant human remains. I was actually looking for Enochian angel (Grigori) pictures and happened to come across this. So, since you're asking for a link.
Link: http://www.biblefacts.org/myth/giant.html
Edit:
Here is the femur bone site. It was only a single femur bone, my mistake, but neverless one bone is more than none.http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/pics/giant.femur.html
The skull I found on another site, Which I'm going to have to backtrack and find. Or someone else could look for it.
Link: http://www.biblefacts.org/myth/giant.html
Edit:
Here is the femur bone site. It was only a single femur bone, my mistake, but neverless one bone is more than none.http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/pics/giant.femur.html
The skull I found on another site, Which I'm going to have to backtrack and find. Or someone else could look for it.
lets use a pre- giraffe, with a small neck, about the size of a horse, for this example. let's say it had an offspring with a bigger neck from a mutation, since wild animals can not get obese for their kind, or be large, like humans or domesticated animals. this offspring would have to mate with another one with that same mutation for it to become a dominant trait. this would be very unlikely in the wild.
of course, the offspring of the offspring with the mutation could pass his genes and his offspring become carriers, which means they have the gene but dont show any signs of it. this couldve been how stuff was passed on by evolution. and as more and more mutations of this kind came around, the necks got a little longer each generation. but, there's a problem! their necks would be too long so they cant eat smaller plants, but too small to eat the plants higher up.
Alright the rest of your arguments seem to have been ripped to shreds so I'll take this one. When giraffe's are in heat the males fight each other for the right to mate. How do they fight you ask? Well they stand next to each other and swing their heads around to whack each other with those little horns on their heads (ever wondered what they where for?). With the longer neck you get a longer swing and more kinetic energy focused on those two little points which makes the one with the longer neck more likely to mate and pass on the long neck gene. Most of your evolutionary changes are just like that. As far as your eating bit goes Have you ever seen the environment they live in? There are plants of all sizes they would have eaten just fine even in the in between stages.
I also found this:
Link:
http://www.shadowhistories.com/front.asp?R..._DOCUMENT=front
I am not the ONLY one with this line of thought.
QUOTE
THE NEPHILIM
"How can we understand where the future will take us when we know so little about our past"
Ancient Biblical scripture tells of watchers, or angels, who fell from grace through their lust for mortal women, who gave birth to offspring called Nephilim. These ancient writings also suggest these watchers gave humanity advanced knowledge that gave birth to modern civilisation.
Were the Nephilim really the hybrid offspring of angels and humans, or were they in fact an advanced race of humans forgotten by the pages of history, maybe even the last of the Neanderthals who lived later than current opinion suggests?
Clearly it was the belief of the Jews in ancient times that these divine beings once walked with mankind, in what appears to be a shadow memory of a forgotten period in history. Modern day researchers have suggested the Nephilim were in fact an advanced race of humans, such as those hailing from the mythological land of Atlantis. Could it be that ancient religions across the globe, that all share common traits, were inspired by a higher knowledge passed on to humanity by the Nephilim?
Certainly the subject is a fascinating one, and here at Shadow Histories we intend to address it, and give you the chance to as well on our forums. If you would like to contribute an article, email it to webmaster@shadowhistories.com for evaluation.
DiPanna
19:46 01/01/05
"How can we understand where the future will take us when we know so little about our past"
Ancient Biblical scripture tells of watchers, or angels, who fell from grace through their lust for mortal women, who gave birth to offspring called Nephilim. These ancient writings also suggest these watchers gave humanity advanced knowledge that gave birth to modern civilisation.
Were the Nephilim really the hybrid offspring of angels and humans, or were they in fact an advanced race of humans forgotten by the pages of history, maybe even the last of the Neanderthals who lived later than current opinion suggests?
Clearly it was the belief of the Jews in ancient times that these divine beings once walked with mankind, in what appears to be a shadow memory of a forgotten period in history. Modern day researchers have suggested the Nephilim were in fact an advanced race of humans, such as those hailing from the mythological land of Atlantis. Could it be that ancient religions across the globe, that all share common traits, were inspired by a higher knowledge passed on to humanity by the Nephilim?
Certainly the subject is a fascinating one, and here at Shadow Histories we intend to address it, and give you the chance to as well on our forums. If you would like to contribute an article, email it to webmaster@shadowhistories.com for evaluation.
DiPanna
19:46 01/01/05
Link:
http://www.shadowhistories.com/front.asp?R..._DOCUMENT=front
I am not the ONLY one with this line of thought.
the biggest point overlooked in here is that the entire system evolves, not just a specific organism within it.
but i don't expect those that cling to the mechanistic views of the world to grasp the concept of both everything being alive and everything evolving.
but i don't expect those that cling to the mechanistic views of the world to grasp the concept of both everything being alive and everything evolving.
1. Wildbrain my arguements haven't been 'ripped to shreds'. I have an alternate view, and I'm entitled to it.
2. Your entire post of examples of evolution is MICRO EVOLUTION. I accept MICRO EVOLUTION. I can prove micro evolution with the same argument that dispells the idea that species can't inter-breed. The inter-species breeding that created the modern dog is micro in action.
2. Your entire post of examples of evolution is MICRO EVOLUTION. I accept MICRO EVOLUTION. I can prove micro evolution with the same argument that dispells the idea that species can't inter-breed. The inter-species breeding that created the modern dog is micro in action.
the only reason you are so against the idea of macro-evo is because macro allows for a continuous evolution where the god-bible allows for discontinuous evolution. fear of macro rejecting your mythology is all we see here.
too bad you can't see past the point that classical evo and the bibletype mythologies come from the same background.
in essence, while the preponderance of the evidence supports macro-evo (sorry to disappoint you), it only covers PART of the story and is still incomplete. you have to look at the entire system to get the entire picture. the very holes you want to poke in macro evo will also show the weaknesses in creationism because, follow with me here, the world (universe) is not mechanistic.
your entire mythology is a fallacy when it comes to describing the universe. it does fine in the fiction section though. creationism, as solid as a house built on swampland.
too bad you can't see past the point that classical evo and the bibletype mythologies come from the same background.
in essence, while the preponderance of the evidence supports macro-evo (sorry to disappoint you), it only covers PART of the story and is still incomplete. you have to look at the entire system to get the entire picture. the very holes you want to poke in macro evo will also show the weaknesses in creationism because, follow with me here, the world (universe) is not mechanistic.
your entire mythology is a fallacy when it comes to describing the universe. it does fine in the fiction section though. creationism, as solid as a house built on swampland.
QUOTE(Ashley-Star*Child @ Jun 13 2005, 11:54 PM)
1. Wildbrain my arguements haven't been 'ripped to shreds'. I have an alternate view, and I'm entitled to it.
Yes you are, and I apologise for the inappropriate term I used. I should have said "argued".
2. Your entire post of examples of evolution is MICRO EVOLUTION. I accept MICRO EVOLUTION. I can prove micro evolution with the same argument that dispells the idea that species can't inter-breed. The inter-species breeding that created the modern dog is micro in action.
[right][snapback]675044[/snapback][/right]
Yes you are, and I apologise for the inappropriate term I used. I should have said "argued".
2. Your entire post of examples of evolution is MICRO EVOLUTION. I accept MICRO EVOLUTION. I can prove micro evolution with the same argument that dispells the idea that species can't inter-breed. The inter-species breeding that created the modern dog is micro in action.
[right][snapback]675044[/snapback][/right]
And your right that is micro evolution in action but evolution as a whole is a series of micro evolutions through which a species can change entirely or, when a trait shows up that is equally beneficial as the predominant trait you get a fork in the evolution of a species and a new species.
oooops, I posted this somewhere else, meant to post it here
Source:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
IMO, humans evolve but have not evolved from primates, what are humans evolving into ? Here are some questions for evolutionists to ponder ...
1. Where has macroevolution ever been observed? What’s the mechanism for getting new complexity, such as new vital organs? If any of the thousands of vital organs evolved, how could the organism live before getting the vital organ? (Without a vital organ, the organism is dead—by definition.) If a reptile’s leg evolved into a bird’s wing, wouldn’t it become a bad leg long before it became a good wing? How could metamorphosis evolve?
2. Do you realize how complex living things are? How could organs as complex as the eye, ear, or brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve? How could such motors work until all components evolved completely and were precisely in place?
3. If macroevolution happened, where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don’t we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?
4. Textbooks show an evolutionary tree, but where is its trunk and where are its branches? For example, what are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?
5. How could the first living cell begin? That’s a greater miracle than for bacteria to evolve into man. How could that first cell reproduce? Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did it not have oxygen? Whichever choice you make creates a terrible problem for evolution. Both must come into existence at about the same time.
6. Please point to a strictly natural process that creates information. What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could ever assemble itself? What about the 4,000 books’ worth of coded information that are in a tiny part of each of your 100 trillion cells? If astronomers received an intelligent signal from some distant galaxy, most people would conclude that it came from an intelligent source. Why then doesn’t the vast information sequence in the DNA molecule of just a bacterium also imply an intelligent source?
7. Which came first, DNA or the proteins needed by DNA, which can only be produced by DNA?
8. How could sexual reproduction evolve? How could immune systems evolve?
9. If it takes intelligence to make an arrowhead, why doesn’t it take vastly more intelligence to create a human? Do you really believe that hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough?
10. If the solar system evolved, why do three planets spin backwards? Why do at least 30 moons revolve backwards?
11. Can you name one reasonable hypothesis on how the moon got there—any hypothesis that is consistent with all the data? Why aren’t students told the scientific reasons for rejecting all the evolutionary theories for the moon’s origin? What about the other 138+ moons in the solar system?
12. Where did matter, space, time, energy, or even the laws of physics come from? What about water?
13. How could stars evolve?
14. Are you aware of all the unreasonable assumptions and contradictory evidence used by those who say the earth is billions of years old?
15. Why are living bacteria found inside rocks that you say are hundreds of millions of years old and in meteorites that you say are billions of years old? Clean-room techniques and great care were used to rule out contamination.
16. Did you know that most scientific dating techniques indicate that the earth, solar system, and universe are young?
17. Why do so many ancient cultures have flood legends?
18. Have you heard about the mitochondrial Eve and the genetic Adam? Scientists know that the mitochondrial Eve was the common female ancestor of every living person, and she appears to have lived only about 6,000–7,000 years ago.
19. Careful researchers have found the following inside meteorites: living bacteria, salt crystals, limestone, water, sugars, terrestrial-like brines, and earthlike isotopic patterns. Doesn’t this implicate Earth as their source—and a powerful launcher, “the fountains of the great deep?”
20. Would you explain the origin of any of the following 25 features of the earth:
The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons
Mid-Oceanic Ridge
Continental Shelves and Slopes
Ocean Trenches
Seamounts and Tablemounts
Earthquakes
Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor
Submarine Canyons
Coal and Oil Formations
Methane Hydrates
Ice Age
Frozen Mammoths
Major Mountain Ranges
Overthrusts
Volcanoes and Lava
Geothermal Heat
Strata and Layered Fossils
Metamorphic Rock
Limestone
Plateaus
Salt Domes
Jigsaw Fit of the Continents
Changing Axis Tilt
Comets
Asteroids and Meteoroids
Its just Me_Again learning...thank you to anyone who attempts to answer any of these questions.
--------------------
Source:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
IMO, humans evolve but have not evolved from primates, what are humans evolving into ? Here are some questions for evolutionists to ponder ...
1. Where has macroevolution ever been observed? What’s the mechanism for getting new complexity, such as new vital organs? If any of the thousands of vital organs evolved, how could the organism live before getting the vital organ? (Without a vital organ, the organism is dead—by definition.) If a reptile’s leg evolved into a bird’s wing, wouldn’t it become a bad leg long before it became a good wing? How could metamorphosis evolve?
2. Do you realize how complex living things are? How could organs as complex as the eye, ear, or brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve? How could such motors work until all components evolved completely and were precisely in place?
3. If macroevolution happened, where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don’t we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?
4. Textbooks show an evolutionary tree, but where is its trunk and where are its branches? For example, what are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?
5. How could the first living cell begin? That’s a greater miracle than for bacteria to evolve into man. How could that first cell reproduce? Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did it not have oxygen? Whichever choice you make creates a terrible problem for evolution. Both must come into existence at about the same time.
6. Please point to a strictly natural process that creates information. What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could ever assemble itself? What about the 4,000 books’ worth of coded information that are in a tiny part of each of your 100 trillion cells? If astronomers received an intelligent signal from some distant galaxy, most people would conclude that it came from an intelligent source. Why then doesn’t the vast information sequence in the DNA molecule of just a bacterium also imply an intelligent source?
7. Which came first, DNA or the proteins needed by DNA, which can only be produced by DNA?
8. How could sexual reproduction evolve? How could immune systems evolve?
9. If it takes intelligence to make an arrowhead, why doesn’t it take vastly more intelligence to create a human? Do you really believe that hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough?
10. If the solar system evolved, why do three planets spin backwards? Why do at least 30 moons revolve backwards?
11. Can you name one reasonable hypothesis on how the moon got there—any hypothesis that is consistent with all the data? Why aren’t students told the scientific reasons for rejecting all the evolutionary theories for the moon’s origin? What about the other 138+ moons in the solar system?
12. Where did matter, space, time, energy, or even the laws of physics come from? What about water?
13. How could stars evolve?
14. Are you aware of all the unreasonable assumptions and contradictory evidence used by those who say the earth is billions of years old?
15. Why are living bacteria found inside rocks that you say are hundreds of millions of years old and in meteorites that you say are billions of years old? Clean-room techniques and great care were used to rule out contamination.
16. Did you know that most scientific dating techniques indicate that the earth, solar system, and universe are young?
17. Why do so many ancient cultures have flood legends?
18. Have you heard about the mitochondrial Eve and the genetic Adam? Scientists know that the mitochondrial Eve was the common female ancestor of every living person, and she appears to have lived only about 6,000–7,000 years ago.
19. Careful researchers have found the following inside meteorites: living bacteria, salt crystals, limestone, water, sugars, terrestrial-like brines, and earthlike isotopic patterns. Doesn’t this implicate Earth as their source—and a powerful launcher, “the fountains of the great deep?”
20. Would you explain the origin of any of the following 25 features of the earth:
The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons
Mid-Oceanic Ridge
Continental Shelves and Slopes
Ocean Trenches
Seamounts and Tablemounts
Earthquakes
Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor
Submarine Canyons
Coal and Oil Formations
Methane Hydrates
Ice Age
Frozen Mammoths
Major Mountain Ranges
Overthrusts
Volcanoes and Lava
Geothermal Heat
Strata and Layered Fossils
Metamorphic Rock
Limestone
Plateaus
Salt Domes
Jigsaw Fit of the Continents
Changing Axis Tilt
Comets
Asteroids and Meteoroids
Its just Me_Again learning...thank you to anyone who attempts to answer any of these questions.
--------------------
QUOTE
. If macroevolution happened, where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don’t we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?
evo is a continuous change.
there are no "missing links" because it is a continuous process.
Continuous process my ass. No fossils, no evidence. It either happened or it didn't. And when something like that happens, you have fossil evidence. I find no lack of dinosaur bones. They 'transitional state' however seems sadly lacking, except maybe in the hoax department.
And those horse fossils were debunked in the other thread.
And those horse fossils were debunked in the other thread.
QUOTE(Ashley-Star*Child @ Jun 13 2005, 09:06 PM)
Continuous process my ass. No fossils, no evidence. It either happened or it didn't. And when something like that happens, you have fossil evidence. I find no lack of dinosaur bones. They 'transitional state' however seems sadly lacking, except maybe in the hoax department.
And those horse fossils were debunked in the other thread.
[right][snapback]675098[/snapback][/right]
And those horse fossils were debunked in the other thread.
[right][snapback]675098[/snapback][/right]
your lack of understanding is truly astounding.
have you ever read anything besides your book of enoch?
QUOTE(hyperactive @ Jun 14 2005, 08:41 AM)
perhaps one thing evo related we have seen is how slowly "higher order" animals evolve. (well, at least half will get the truth in that, and the other half will take it as a wise-crack).
[right][snapback]674370[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]674370[/snapback][/right]
But which half will get it, and which half think it a wise-crack?
To: Amalgamut
I did say that it seems to be a continous progression of the Chinese civilization. They hardly became extinct and have another group picked up their cultural practices after they left! The Chinese did have stories of great floods but note that the context used was flooding of the Yellow river, where their civilization originated. The babylonians did have myths of a universal great flood.. actually, I think that since the babylonian myth predates the Hebrew ones, it is likely that the Biblical story originated from the Babylonian one.
I did say that it seems to be a continous progression of the Chinese civilization. They hardly became extinct and have another group picked up their cultural practices after they left! The Chinese did have stories of great floods but note that the context used was flooding of the Yellow river, where their civilization originated. The babylonians did have myths of a universal great flood.. actually, I think that since the babylonian myth predates the Hebrew ones, it is likely that the Biblical story originated from the Babylonian one.
QUOTE(Shai_Hulud @ Jun 14 2005, 08:05 PM)
The babylonians did have myths of a universal great flood.. actually, I think that since the babylonian myth predates the Hebrew ones, it is likely that the Biblical story originated from the Babylonian one.
[right][snapback]675234[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]675234[/snapback][/right]
I posted on this before. Many cultures have flood stories. Is it not possible (nay, even probable) that they all simply document the same event?
QUOTE
1. Where has macroevolution ever been observed? What’s the mechanism for getting new complexity, such as new vital organs? If any of the thousands of vital organs evolved, how could the organism live before getting the vital organ? (Without a vital organ, the organism is dead—by definition.) If a reptile’s leg evolved into a bird’s wing, wouldn’t it become a bad leg long before it became a good wing? How could metamorphosis evolve?
Several people have mentioned that macro evolution can be observed by fossil records and the logic inherent in micro evolution. Complex features such as wings or eyes hardly evolved full fledge in an organism at the start! They theory is that they started out simpler, perhaps as a patch of light sensitive cells, it is clearly an evolutionary advantage. As time passes evolution starts favouring organism containing more sensitive cells, the organism in question starts using them as a primary sensory tools. The organ in response becomes more complex and in time can be called eyes. Remember that it is 1.2 billion years of evolution.QUOTE
3. If macroevolution happened, where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don’t we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?
Mentioned, many fossils do not survive the process of fossilisation and besides transitionary fossils have been discovered.QUOTE
4. Textbooks show an evolutionary tree, but where is its trunk and where are its branches? For example, what are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?
Proto insects in assume, perhaps they become extinct. Same with proto mammals and dinosaurs. We only remember the dinosaurs because they were big.QUOTE
5. How could the first living cell begin? That’s a greater miracle than for bacteria to evolve into man. How could that first cell reproduce? Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did it not have oxygen? Whichever choice you make creates a terrible problem for evolution. Both must come into existence at about the same time.
The first organism might even be simpler than a single celled bacteria. An organic molecule that is able to replicate its likeness, the RNA, mutation exists as an external force and behold in time a protein sheathe grew around it and the first bacteria emerges. Its a hypothesis, but very possible.QUOTE
6. Please point to a strictly natural process that creates information. What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could ever assemble itself? What about the 4,000 books’ worth of coded information that are in a tiny part of each of your 100 trillion cells? If astronomers received an intelligent signal from some distant galaxy, most people would conclude that it came from an intelligent source. Why then doesn’t the vast information sequence in the DNA molecule of just a bacterium also imply an intelligent source?
Do you need to test everything to death? We know enough to know that organic molecules forms into complex form in conditions predicted for primeveal Earth. This are the basis of DNA or RNA.The rest of your post is redundant or I have answered, organic molecules form intricate patterns that replicates themselves.
I doubt that it could be the same event. All civilizations encounter flood, If they exist long enough. The stories also differs, the Bible story is a relgious myth, where a universal great flood takes place by the will of God. The babylonian one is in a totally different context, a heroic epic where the hero Gilgamesh seeks immortality.
Ahh that Gilgammesh again, like I posted the other day, Gilgamesh is the name of a Nephilim (child of an angel). And Babylon was built AFTER the flood by the remaining Nephillim. This was the tower made to 'pierce the sky'.
QUOTE(Ashley-Star*Child @ Jun 14 2005, 02:30 AM)
Definition of a species.
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~grange/glossary-01.html
QUOTE
Species
Classification of organism. The members of the species group can inter-breed. Sometimes cross-species breeding occurs, but an infertile, or hybrid organism is the result.
Classification of organism. The members of the species group can inter-breed. Sometimes cross-species breeding occurs, but an infertile, or hybrid organism is the result.
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~grange/glossary-01.html
Finally!
Okay, then, so, according to your definition species can be defined as two members of a groupd of creatures that cannot carry on reliable reproduction (personally, it feel it kind of pointless to talk about breeding, but limit it to infertile offspring. What's the point?) Since you were not talking about human and monkeys having sex for the heck, but rather for the purpose of having offspring, and since we have anthropological evidence of entire settlements of these creatures ("ape-men", as you so much like to call them), then it stands to reason that these creatures did not come about from a tribal orgy involving bestiality, but rather from their own evolutionary line. Unless, of course, you wish to posit that they were poofed into existance.
QUOTE
Is a whale a dolphin, a horse a zebra, a wolf a fox or jackal? ALL these species have interbred, and our modern dog did NOT result from the wolf alone. Siberian Huskeys, Samoyeds, etc came from wolves. Many other breeds did not, and they ALL mix quite well today.
So, now that the definition you have provided invalidates both your ape-man and your dog examples, how are you going to cover it up? Dog breeds are not seperate species, and therefore can mate, although, just to make it more fun, there are two species of wolves that can still breed with domesticated dogs, and there are dog breeds that cannot breed with each other, which by the definition you gave (which is correct, but which you do not understand) seperates them (quite appropriately so) into sepearte species.
QUOTE
The skull is not a hoax. Oh wait, it supports Creationism, it *must* be a hoax.
No, whether it is a hoax or not depends on all factors involved. Credibility is one of those factors, and creationist lack a great deal of credibility.
QUOTE
You even admit that Evolution draws on public opinion to eridcate Creationism. Like I said, opinions can and DO change.
Yes, I do, but since the question was whether science relies on public opinion to validate theories, which it does not, the point is moot.
Blatant attempt to convert one meaning into another, Ashely. This is why you lack credibility.
QUOTE
There was also a pelvic area/thigh bones found in a spearate area of a 16 ft human. A skull AND pelvic/thigh bones found separately? Explain that one. And it DOES challenge Evolution, that's why you don't hear about it. There were giant humans of their height description described in the Bible.
Like I said, so what? How does it challenge evolution? How is it not possible? Let's assume an entire viable population of these giants existed (and no, I do not believe this story is anything but a hoax, but let's assume it is real), how does a tribe of giants go against evolution in any way, shape or form?
QUOTE
There was also an Arab text found near the pyramids talking about someone descending from the sky to warn of a coming flood which would wipe out everything and was taught the mathematical and scientific knowledge to build the pyramids as a refuge from these floods.[right][snapback]674901[/snapback][/right]
Yes, pretty much all coastal civiliation had a flood legend, and a messenger who came to warn them (my people had a sad llama telling them to go into the mountians). Considering that floods are pretty much the most common disaster event that can befal a coastal city, this isn't too surprising. What you need to do is present evidence of a flooded civilization that had nothing to fear from a flood. Show us a flood story from a tribe that didn't live next to a river or ocean.
QUOTE
You said giant modern man. That is not a jaw fom a giant modern man, nor was it 16 feet tall.
QUOTE
Here is the femur bone site. It was only a single femur bone, my mistake, but neverless one bone is more than none.http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/pics/giant.femur.html
Interesting... there doesnt seem have been any scientific study on it.
QUOTE
I accept MICRO EVOLUTION.
I dont have much time to respond to the rest but I want to touch this before I leave. Would you consider something like the shortening of toes to be micro-evolution?
QUOTE(hyperactive @ Jun 14 2005, 12:50 AM)
QUOTE(Snake_6024 @ Jun 13 2005, 02:45 PM)
as much as i support science, some of you really have as much of a utopian view of it as ashley does of the book of talking dinosaurs.
there is far too much politics in science. science is VERY much influenced by society. it is only humans involved in science, the same species involved in promoting dinos as angel-reptile hybrids. don't forget it.
it is no where near the ideal search for truth you want to make it sound to be.
What do you call yourself?Open-minded sceptic?
[right][snapback]674379[/snapback][/right]
there is far too much politics in science. science is VERY much influenced by society. it is only humans involved in science, the same species involved in promoting dinos as angel-reptile hybrids. don't forget it.
it is no where near the ideal search for truth you want to make it sound to be.
What do you call yourself?Open-minded sceptic?
[right][snapback]674379[/snapback][/right]
after seeing the examples of believers and sceptics of all colours around here I am now just refering to myself as
(if my post you quoted sounds cynical it is because it is! i know first hand how it is to have to publish, to have to do things that draw funding, etc. it is worse in private research because the companies funding research are interested in their bottom line.)
[right][snapback]674394[/snapback][/right]
.....Can I join the club?
QUOTE(Me_Again @ Jun 13 2005, 09:39 PM)
oooops, I posted this somewhere else, meant to post it here
Source:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
IMO, humans evolve but have not evolved from primates, what are humans evolving into ? Here are some questions for evolutionists to ponder ...
1. Where has macroevolution ever been observed? What’s the mechanism for getting new complexity, such as new vital organs? If any of the thousands of vital organs evolved, how could the organism live before getting the vital organ? (Without a vital organ, the organism is dead—by definition.) If a reptile’s leg evolved into a bird’s wing, wouldn’t it become a bad leg long before it became a good wing? How could metamorphosis evolve?
It's not observable, as its a process that takes far longer than any human has ever lived. We just have to make the best guesses we can from the scanty fossil record. Shai already answered the eye bit.
2. Do you realize how complex living things are? How could organs as complex as the eye, ear, or brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve? How could such motors work until all components evolved completely and were precisely in place?
This is where you'd have to talk to someone who's a professional in this field.
3. If macroevolution happened, where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don’t we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?
Like I said, less than 0.1% of all the creatures that have ever lived successfully become a fossil, and even then many are destroyed due to subduction or never found because of their being in somewhere like, say, Virginia.
4. Textbooks show an evolutionary tree, but where is its trunk and where are its branches? For example, what are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?
The trunk would be bacterial life, and a pair of slim side-branches would be visible animals and plants.
5. How could the first living cell begin? That’s a greater miracle than for bacteria to evolve into man. How could that first cell reproduce? Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did it not have oxygen? Whichever choice you make creates a terrible problem for evolution. Both must come into existence at about the same time.
The first living cells expelled oxygen as a waste product, paving the way for the more advanced creatures.
6. Please point to a strictly natural process that creates information. What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could ever assemble itself? What about the 4,000 books’ worth of coded information that are in a tiny part of each of your 100 trillion cells? If astronomers received an intelligent signal from some distant galaxy, most people would conclude that it came from an intelligent source. Why then doesn’t the vast information sequence in the DNA molecule of just a bacterium also imply an intelligent source?
We don't know how it does it, only that DNA appeared around the same time that most advanced proteins were "evolving".
7. Which came first, DNA or the proteins needed by DNA, which can only be produced by DNA?
Proteins, then DNA. Like I said, it's a wonder that it happened like that, but Science is evolving so that someday we'll be able to explain exactly what happened and how.
8. How could sexual reproduction evolve? How could immune systems evolve?
Single-celled organisms cooperating to form a larger entity, then certain ones evolve certain functions. For more detail, I'm afraid you'd have to ask a professional.
9. If it takes intelligence to make an arrowhead, why doesn’t it take vastly more intelligence to create a human? Do you really believe that hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough?
Of course not. Scientists have concluded, though, by how rapidly life arose once the earth became solid (it only took 50 million years), that it is inevitable, "chemically destined to be".
10. If the solar system evolved, why do three planets spin backwards? Why do at least 30 moons revolve backwards?
What? How is this relevant?
11. Can you name one reasonable hypothesis on how the moon got there—any hypothesis that is consistent with all the data? Why aren’t students told the scientific reasons for rejecting all the evolutionary theories for the moon’s origin? What about the other 138+ moons in the solar system?
Evolution doesn't dabble in cosmology.
12. Where did matter, space, time, energy, or even the laws of physics come from? What about water?
We still have scientists trying to discover the details, so be patient.
13. How could stars evolve?
Ok, I think I see the problem here. EVOLUTION ONLY APPLIES TO ORGANIC ENTITIES.
14. Are you aware of all the unreasonable assumptions and contradictory evidence used by those who say the earth is billions of years old?
Such as?
15. Why are living bacteria found inside rocks that you say are hundreds of millions of years old and in meteorites that you say are billions of years old? Clean-room techniques and great care were used to rule out contamination.
Because life exists almost anwhere that it's possible. And, apparently some bacteriums are able to go into a kind of "stasis".
16. Did you know that most scientific dating techniques indicate that the earth, solar system, and universe are young?
Actually, I believe the current age that science goes by for the universe is around 13.5 billion years old.
17. Why do so many ancient cultures have flood legends?
A giant flood in the earth's past? It doesn't prove Noah's Ark, though. Any particular such culture could be correct.
18. Have you heard about the mitochondrial Eve and the genetic Adam? Scientists know that the mitochondrial Eve was the common female ancestor of every living person, and she appears to have lived only about 6,000–7,000 years ago.
Bull. They've traced most people's lineage back to 7 individual females that lived several hundreds of thousands of years ago.
19. Careful researchers have found the following inside meteorites: living bacteria, salt crystals, limestone, water, sugars, terrestrial-like brines, and earthlike isotopic patterns. Doesn’t this implicate Earth as their source—and a powerful launcher, “the fountains of the great deep?”
Or it merely means that life is far more inevitable then most people think, if its basic components could spawn extraterrestrially.
20. Would you explain the origin of any of the following 25 features of the earth:
The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons
Erosion via rivers.
Mid-Oceanic Ridge
Plate Tectonics.
Continental Shelves and Slopes
Plate Tectonics.
Ocean Trenches
Subduction.
Seamounts and Tablemounts
Sorry, not familiar with these.
Earthquakes
Plate Tectonics.
Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor
What?
Submarine Canyons
Subduction.
Coal and Oil Formations
Various geological processes.
Methane Hydrates
?
Ice Age
Fluctuations in the Earth's temperature.
Frozen Mammoths
Mammoths that froze? Hardly rocket science...
Major Mountain Ranges
Plate Tectonics.
Overthrusts
?
Volcanoes and Lava
The earth has a molten core... are you seriously unaware of these things? -.-;
Geothermal Heat
Molten core.
Strata and Layered Fossils
Sediment depostion.
Metamorphic Rock
Rock from volcanoes.
Limestone
What's the question here?
Plateaus
Talk to a geologist...
Salt Domes
What're these?
Jigsaw Fit of the Continents
Plate Tectonics.
Changing Axis Tilt
?
Comets
Leftovers from the big bang.
Asteroids and Meteoroids
More leftovers.
Its just Me_Again learning...thank you to anyone who attempts to answer any of these questions.
--------------------
[right][snapback]675084[/snapback][/right]
Source:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
IMO, humans evolve but have not evolved from primates, what are humans evolving into ? Here are some questions for evolutionists to ponder ...
1. Where has macroevolution ever been observed? What’s the mechanism for getting new complexity, such as new vital organs? If any of the thousands of vital organs evolved, how could the organism live before getting the vital organ? (Without a vital organ, the organism is dead—by definition.) If a reptile’s leg evolved into a bird’s wing, wouldn’t it become a bad leg long before it became a good wing? How could metamorphosis evolve?
It's not observable, as its a process that takes far longer than any human has ever lived. We just have to make the best guesses we can from the scanty fossil record. Shai already answered the eye bit.
2. Do you realize how complex living things are? How could organs as complex as the eye, ear, or brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve? How could such motors work until all components evolved completely and were precisely in place?
This is where you'd have to talk to someone who's a professional in this field.
3. If macroevolution happened, where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don’t we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?
Like I said, less than 0.1% of all the creatures that have ever lived successfully become a fossil, and even then many are destroyed due to subduction or never found because of their being in somewhere like, say, Virginia.
4. Textbooks show an evolutionary tree, but where is its trunk and where are its branches? For example, what are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?
The trunk would be bacterial life, and a pair of slim side-branches would be visible animals and plants.
5. How could the first living cell begin? That’s a greater miracle than for bacteria to evolve into man. How could that first cell reproduce? Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did it not have oxygen? Whichever choice you make creates a terrible problem for evolution. Both must come into existence at about the same time.
The first living cells expelled oxygen as a waste product, paving the way for the more advanced creatures.
6. Please point to a strictly natural process that creates information. What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could ever assemble itself? What about the 4,000 books’ worth of coded information that are in a tiny part of each of your 100 trillion cells? If astronomers received an intelligent signal from some distant galaxy, most people would conclude that it came from an intelligent source. Why then doesn’t the vast information sequence in the DNA molecule of just a bacterium also imply an intelligent source?
We don't know how it does it, only that DNA appeared around the same time that most advanced proteins were "evolving".
7. Which came first, DNA or the proteins needed by DNA, which can only be produced by DNA?
Proteins, then DNA. Like I said, it's a wonder that it happened like that, but Science is evolving so that someday we'll be able to explain exactly what happened and how.
8. How could sexual reproduction evolve? How could immune systems evolve?
Single-celled organisms cooperating to form a larger entity, then certain ones evolve certain functions. For more detail, I'm afraid you'd have to ask a professional.
9. If it takes intelligence to make an arrowhead, why doesn’t it take vastly more intelligence to create a human? Do you really believe that hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough?
Of course not. Scientists have concluded, though, by how rapidly life arose once the earth became solid (it only took 50 million years), that it is inevitable, "chemically destined to be".
10. If the solar system evolved, why do three planets spin backwards? Why do at least 30 moons revolve backwards?
What? How is this relevant?
11. Can you name one reasonable hypothesis on how the moon got there—any hypothesis that is consistent with all the data? Why aren’t students told the scientific reasons for rejecting all the evolutionary theories for the moon’s origin? What about the other 138+ moons in the solar system?
Evolution doesn't dabble in cosmology.
12. Where did matter, space, time, energy, or even the laws of physics come from? What about water?
We still have scientists trying to discover the details, so be patient.
13. How could stars evolve?
Ok, I think I see the problem here. EVOLUTION ONLY APPLIES TO ORGANIC ENTITIES.
14. Are you aware of all the unreasonable assumptions and contradictory evidence used by those who say the earth is billions of years old?
Such as?
15. Why are living bacteria found inside rocks that you say are hundreds of millions of years old and in meteorites that you say are billions of years old? Clean-room techniques and great care were used to rule out contamination.
Because life exists almost anwhere that it's possible. And, apparently some bacteriums are able to go into a kind of "stasis".
16. Did you know that most scientific dating techniques indicate that the earth, solar system, and universe are young?
Actually, I believe the current age that science goes by for the universe is around 13.5 billion years old.
17. Why do so many ancient cultures have flood legends?
A giant flood in the earth's past? It doesn't prove Noah's Ark, though. Any particular such culture could be correct.
18. Have you heard about the mitochondrial Eve and the genetic Adam? Scientists know that the mitochondrial Eve was the common female ancestor of every living person, and she appears to have lived only about 6,000–7,000 years ago.
Bull. They've traced most people's lineage back to 7 individual females that lived several hundreds of thousands of years ago.
19. Careful researchers have found the following inside meteorites: living bacteria, salt crystals, limestone, water, sugars, terrestrial-like brines, and earthlike isotopic patterns. Doesn’t this implicate Earth as their source—and a powerful launcher, “the fountains of the great deep?”
Or it merely means that life is far more inevitable then most people think, if its basic components could spawn extraterrestrially.
20. Would you explain the origin of any of the following 25 features of the earth:
The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons
Erosion via rivers.
Mid-Oceanic Ridge
Plate Tectonics.
Continental Shelves and Slopes
Plate Tectonics.
Ocean Trenches
Subduction.
Seamounts and Tablemounts
Sorry, not familiar with these.
Earthquakes
Plate Tectonics.
Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor
What?
Submarine Canyons
Subduction.
Coal and Oil Formations
Various geological processes.
Methane Hydrates
?
Ice Age
Fluctuations in the Earth's temperature.
Frozen Mammoths
Mammoths that froze? Hardly rocket science...
Major Mountain Ranges
Plate Tectonics.
Overthrusts
?
Volcanoes and Lava
The earth has a molten core... are you seriously unaware of these things? -.-;
Geothermal Heat
Molten core.
Strata and Layered Fossils
Sediment depostion.
Metamorphic Rock
Rock from volcanoes.
Limestone
What's the question here?
Plateaus
Talk to a geologist...
Salt Domes
What're these?
Jigsaw Fit of the Continents
Plate Tectonics.
Changing Axis Tilt
?
Comets
Leftovers from the big bang.
Asteroids and Meteoroids
More leftovers.
Its just Me_Again learning...thank you to anyone who attempts to answer any of these questions.
--------------------
[right][snapback]675084[/snapback][/right]
Highlighted red for irrelevance.
I personally believe that evolution would more likely be the right answer over the creation, if you were to choose just one. I think, though, that evolution and creation are the same thing, just the creation story is an easy way of explaining evolution. Think about the people the story of the creation was told to, the people had no clue what the different molecules, DNA, or even cells were. So, if evolution was explained to them, then they would have been extremely confused and would have had no idea what to make of the information.
Actually, evolution does say something almost like that, depending on what theory you are looking at. One theory says that that lightning struck (not necessarily the ocean) and simple molecules were formed, but were destroyed when they hit the earth due to the immense heat. Another theory, the Bubble Theory, states that oceanic vents formed these molecules which then floated to the surface of the water in bubbles, and then were released into the air. Lightning would then strike, and combine different molecules, with these compounds at first being destroyed when they hit the ground due to the heat.
QUOTE
QUOTE
and, according to evolution, lighting struck the ocean's waters, and amino acids, the basis of DNA, was created.
Evolution does not say that at all. Not even abiogenesis says this!
and, according to evolution, lighting struck the ocean's waters, and amino acids, the basis of DNA, was created.
Evolution does not say that at all. Not even abiogenesis says this!
Actually, evolution does say something almost like that, depending on what theory you are looking at. One theory says that that lightning struck (not necessarily the ocean) and simple molecules were formed, but were destroyed when they hit the earth due to the immense heat. Another theory, the Bubble Theory, states that oceanic vents formed these molecules which then floated to the surface of the water in bubbles, and then were released into the air. Lightning would then strike, and combine different molecules, with these compounds at first being destroyed when they hit the ground due to the heat.
QUOTE
I think, though, that evolution and creation are the same thing, just the creation story is an easy way of explaining evolution.
the primary difference is one claims there is a continuous evolution, where the other claims a discontinuous evolution. (comparing classical evo to creationism).
i am waiting for ashley to explain away evo-devo. i can't wait for her explanation of why human embryos have gill slits.
If people do not wish to see reason and logically concluded hypothesis, let them go on deluding themselves.
It is not for us to "convert" such people, let their flawed reasoning and inability to rationally debate through a process of unbiased understanding lead them to a life of exploitation.
I for one consider the above as justice, and i wait with intense excitement when they get their first letter from nigeria!
All who are clearly "switched on" please remember that if these people wish to delude themselves, and falsify evidence to warp their mind into believing a principle, we who are rational and level headed (even including some belivers), can always exploit the physical enviroment to our advantage (science/engineering), and i take great relief in knowing that the worlds power in general is manipulated by those of us who are rational.
It is not for us to "convert" such people, let their flawed reasoning and inability to rationally debate through a process of unbiased understanding lead them to a life of exploitation.
I for one consider the above as justice, and i wait with intense excitement when they get their first letter from nigeria!
All who are clearly "switched on" please remember that if these people wish to delude themselves, and falsify evidence to warp their mind into believing a principle, we who are rational and level headed (even including some belivers), can always exploit the physical enviroment to our advantage (science/engineering), and i take great relief in knowing that the worlds power in general is manipulated by those of us who are rational.
QUOTE(Ashley-Star*Child @ Jun 13 2005, 02:06 PM)
Of course I know what a species is. And there is no way in hell that 'all the evidence points to macro-evolution'. Where is it now? Micro happens every day, macro does not. [right][snapback]673088[/snapback][/right]
Did you miss earlier on in this thread. Just incase you did I'll re-post some of it.
QUOTE
Researchers Trace Evolution To Relatively Simple Genetic Changes
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/...50528141615.htm
In a stunning example of evolution at work, scientists have now found that changes in a single gene can produce major changes in the skeletal armor of fish living in the wild.
surprising results, announced in the March 25, 2005, issue of journal Science, bring new data to long-standing debates about how evolution occurs in natural habitats.
The answer, based on new research, is that evolution can occur quickly, with just a few genes changing slightly, allowing newcomers to adapt and populate new and different environments.
"There are really dramatic morphological and physiological adaptations" to the new environments, Kingsley said.
Using genetic crosses between armored and unarmored fish from wild populations, the research team found that one gene is what makes the difference.
"Now, for the first time, we've been able to identify the actual gene that is controlling this trait," the armor-plating on the stickleback, Kingsley said
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/...50528141615.htm
In a stunning example of evolution at work, scientists have now found that changes in a single gene can produce major changes in the skeletal armor of fish living in the wild.
surprising results, announced in the March 25, 2005, issue of journal Science, bring new data to long-standing debates about how evolution occurs in natural habitats.
The answer, based on new research, is that evolution can occur quickly, with just a few genes changing slightly, allowing newcomers to adapt and populate new and different environments.
"There are really dramatic morphological and physiological adaptations" to the new environments, Kingsley said.
Using genetic crosses between armored and unarmored fish from wild populations, the research team found that one gene is what makes the difference.
"Now, for the first time, we've been able to identify the actual gene that is controlling this trait," the armor-plating on the stickleback, Kingsley said
That is done by 1 simple genetic mutation. Can you see how simple changes will lead to something much different looking? We are not talking about something as small as different colour skin... It shows a significant difference in bone structure and more..
QUOTE
2. Do you realize how complex living things are? How could organs as complex as the eye, ear, or brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve? How could such motors work until all components evolved completely and were precisely in place?
Why !
Things were not simple then all of a sudden complex !
When you start writing a code in C++, VB you start of with something quite basic and simple, over a period of time when you add more code it because more complex...
is it so hard to understand? * cries *
QUOTE
Do you realize how complex living things are? How could organs as complex as the eye, ear, or brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve? How could such motors work until all components evolved completely and were precisely in place?
Fallacy of Ignorance: The logical fallacy where one assumes a claim is incorrect due to a lack of knowledge of how the system works.
Fallacy of Incredulity: The logical fallacy where one assumes a claim is incorrect due to the subjective disbelieve that it could come about in that manner.
Overall, is the argument here that, since you cannot understand how it could have happened, you are of the opinion that it just poofed into existance?
Isn't that a little...primitive? "I don't understand how fire works, so I will assume the great thunder god created it."
QUOTE
Overall, is the argument here that, since you cannot understand how it could have happened, you are of the opinion that it just poofed into existance?
the creationist view that "things do not just poof into existance" (as one faulty attack on the big bang), followed with "god made everything out of nothing" (thus giving us everything out of nothing) demonstrates the level of logical thought we are dealing with here.
the real difference between science and religion is that we in science can't just make it up as we go along to meet a desired outcome.
QUOTE
Actually, evolution does say something almost like that, depending on what theory you are looking at.
Evolution doesnt deal with the origines of life.
QUOTE
One theory says that that lightning struck (not necessarily the ocean) and simple molecules were formed, but were destroyed when they hit the earth due to the immense heat.
"not necessarily the ocean"
QUOTE
Another theory, the Bubble Theory, states that oceanic vents formed these molecules which then floated to the surface of the water in bubbles, and then were released into the air. Lightning would then strike, and combine different molecules, with these compounds at first being destroyed when they hit the ground due to the heat.
Which molecules?
Thought I'd post this now, as I'm too impatient for Ash or someone else to post and give me an oppurtunity to counter. These are some facts that should give you an idea of how miraculous it is that we've uncovered the few transitional fossils that we have.
~ Only 1 bone in every 1,000,000,000 (that's a billion) ever becomes fossilized. To put that in perspective, of the 270 million americans alive today, each with 206 bones (some have less, but we'll go with the high number), The total fossil trace of our civilization would be 50 BONES. That's less than 0.25 of the total of a human skeleton.
~ Less than 1 species in 120,000 ever makes it onto the fossil record, and that's no guarantee that anyone will ever find it.
~ The fossil record is hopelessly skewed in favor of marine organisms. Most land animals don't keel over in sediments, and so around 95% of all the fossils we have are those of marine creatures.
And, here's a link to a site that talks about transitional fossils, for those of you still in doubt.
Click
~ Only 1 bone in every 1,000,000,000 (that's a billion) ever becomes fossilized. To put that in perspective, of the 270 million americans alive today, each with 206 bones (some have less, but we'll go with the high number), The total fossil trace of our civilization would be 50 BONES. That's less than 0.25 of the total of a human skeleton.
~ Less than 1 species in 120,000 ever makes it onto the fossil record, and that's no guarantee that anyone will ever find it.
~ The fossil record is hopelessly skewed in favor of marine organisms. Most land animals don't keel over in sediments, and so around 95% of all the fossils we have are those of marine creatures.
And, here's a link to a site that talks about transitional fossils, for those of you still in doubt.
Click
QUOTE(Kabutarian @ Jun 15 2005, 07:53 AM)
Thought I'd post this now, as I'm too impatient for Ash or someone else to post and give me an oppurtunity to counter. These are some facts that should give you an idea of how miraculous it is that we've uncovered the few transitional fossils that we have.
~ Only 1 bone in every 1,000,000,000 (that's a billion) ever becomes fossilized. To put that in perspective, of the 270 million americans alive today, each with 206 bones (some have less, but we'll go with the high number), The total fossil trace of our civilization would be 50 BONES. That's less than 0.25 of the total of a human skeleton.
~ Less than 1 species in 120,000 ever makes it onto the fossil record, and that's no guarantee that anyone will ever find it.
~ The fossil record is hopelessly skewed in favor of marine organisms. Most land animals don't keel over in sediments, and so around 95% of all the fossils we have are those of marine creatures.
And, here's a link to a site that talks about transitional fossils, for those of you still in doubt.
Click
[right][snapback]676502[/snapback][/right]
~ Only 1 bone in every 1,000,000,000 (that's a billion) ever becomes fossilized. To put that in perspective, of the 270 million americans alive today, each with 206 bones (some have less, but we'll go with the high number), The total fossil trace of our civilization would be 50 BONES. That's less than 0.25 of the total of a human skeleton.
~ Less than 1 species in 120,000 ever makes it onto the fossil record, and that's no guarantee that anyone will ever find it.
~ The fossil record is hopelessly skewed in favor of marine organisms. Most land animals don't keel over in sediments, and so around 95% of all the fossils we have are those of marine creatures.
And, here's a link to a site that talks about transitional fossils, for those of you still in doubt.
Click
[right][snapback]676502[/snapback][/right]
And people expect to propose a reasonable and accurate hypothesis on this very basis.
QUOTE
And people expect to propose a reasonable and accurate hypothesis on this very basis.
...and yet people propose a much more unreasonable and inaccurate hypothesis on much much less - religious writtings/rantings
At least, if I wanted to, I could find out for myself how credible studies of fossils are - carbon dating, location, biological structure, etc - and by this I don't mean READING SOMEONE'S ACCOUNT - I could do it myself (with enough funding of course) 
I cannot say the same for religions though - apart from reading some convoluted 'supposed' accounts that quite frankly seem like nothing more than mythological fiction scaresely sprinkled with some normal observations of the world at that time I ask any creationist this, If I told you I can cure cancer, make blind people see, deaf people hear, cripples walk and I talk to god - would you believe me? I think not - you'd want or seek out proof. If I then gave you a written account of these from my friends (whom BTW would do anything to see just how gullible you are) - would you then believe? I think not. If I waited to disclose these claims until no one could even verify my friends' claims - would you believe then? even less I think
The bible (& other religious writtings) & hence creationism are no different - except that they demand blind faith, ignorrance and a LOT of imagination
I rest my case...
It is true that a lot of believers are too ignorant to realize evolution could quite possibly be true. A lot of it has to do with not wanting to be wrong. It takes a lot to admit to being wrong, and a lot of people can't do it even when having hard evidence against their case. People have to realize this, and if they do, a lot of useless arguments could be prevented.
And stellar, although I'm being hypocritical in this statement, I gave you those theories so you could find out about them yourself. If you really want me to go into deep detail, I will. But if you're too lazy and egotistical as to not look it up for yourself, just tell me.
Also, ai guardian, what you say is true, which is why I believe the story of Jesus could be made up. I also think that Jesus could quite possibly have been real, but not a demi-god, just the perfect example of how people should be. I guess everything comes down to how open minded you're willing to be and your thought process.
And stellar, although I'm being hypocritical in this statement, I gave you those theories so you could find out about them yourself. If you really want me to go into deep detail, I will. But if you're too lazy and egotistical as to not look it up for yourself, just tell me.
Also, ai guardian, what you say is true, which is why I believe the story of Jesus could be made up. I also think that Jesus could quite possibly have been real, but not a demi-god, just the perfect example of how people should be. I guess everything comes down to how open minded you're willing to be and your thought process.
QUOTE
Also, ai guardian, what you say is true, which is why I believe the story of Jesus could be made up. I also think that Jesus could quite possibly have been real, but not a demi-god, just the perfect example of how people should be. I guess everything comes down to how open minded you're willing to be and your thought process.
...I too think that there may be some (very limited) truth in this Jesus person, but I can't help thinking that in this day and age (and without christianity preceeding) he would be sitting in a psychiatric ward with all the others who 'hear' voices in their heads
With christianity preceeding & an ounce of charisma, he'd be an evangelist. With higher education he'd be here voicing his opinions against creationism (and getting psychiatric treatment for his 'voices').
Thanks for the invitation aquastus1 . However, I have come to a conclusion on this topic...see here...my response Edit: - after many attempts, I figured it out (how to post the thread )...I've learned something new today - have you? 
*watches the stage as the fool Until I'm ready to blitzkrieg again 
Note :This is my opinion and I like it
. However, I have come to a conclusion on this topic...see here...my response Edit: - after many attempts, I figured it out (how to post the thread )...I've learned something new today - have you? *watches the stage as the fool
Until I'm ready to blitzkrieg again QUOTE
blitzkrieg
v : fight a quick and surprising war
v : fight a quick and surprising war
Note :This is my opinion and I like it
QUOTE(ai_guardian @ Jun 15 2005, 01:53 PM)
...and yet people propose a much more unreasonable and inaccurate hypothesis on much much less - religious writtings/rantings At least, if I wanted to, I could find out for myself how credible studies of fossils are - carbon dating, location, biological structure, etc - and by this I don't mean READING SOMEONE'S ACCOUNT - I could do it myself (with enough funding of course) I cannot say the same for religions though - apart from reading some convoluted 'supposed' accounts that quite frankly seem like nothing more than mythological fiction scaresely sprinkled with some normal observations of the world at that time
At least, if I wanted to, I could find out for myself how credible studies of fossils are - carbon dating, location, biological structure, etc - and by this I don't mean READING SOMEONE'S ACCOUNT - I could do it myself (with enough funding of course) I cannot say the same for religions though - apart from reading some convoluted 'supposed' accounts that quite frankly seem like nothing more than mythological fiction scaresely sprinkled with some normal observations of the world at that timeYou misunderstand - that was exactly my point. I am not against evolution, indeed I believe it could very well have taken place. It's spouting it as fact which I am against.
But Christianity, unlike science, does not claim to be scientifically verifiable. The Bible puts itself forward as all the proof you need for Christianity (which some argue, is not enough on its own). None-the-less, this thing called evolution which a lot of people consider fact, has almost as little verifiable evidence to back it up. That's what I was getting at in my post.
QUOTE(ai_guardian @ Jun 15 2005, 01:53 PM)
I ask any creationist this, If I told you I can cure cancer, make blind people see, deaf people hear, cripples walk and I talk to god - would you believe me? I think not - you'd want or seek out proof. If I then gave you a written account of these from my friends (whom BTW would do anything to see just how gullible you are) - would you then believe? I think not. If I waited to disclose these claims until no one could even verify my friends' claims - would you believe then? even less I think
The bible (& other religious writtings) & hence creationism are no different - except that they demand blind faith, ignorrance and a LOT of imagination
The bible (& other religious writtings) & hence creationism are no different - except that they demand blind faith, ignorrance and a LOT of imagination
The first thing I'd ask is.... "Are you a Doctor?" If the answer is yes, you could very well do all these things. If it's more of a supernatural/spiritual healing you refer to, I would say that you are a human and not God.
QUOTE(ai_guardian @ Jun 15 2005, 01:53 PM)
I rest my case...
Not a very convincing case, i think you'll agree.
QUOTE
You misunderstand - that was exactly my point. I am not against evolution, indeed I believe it could very well have taken place. It's spouting it as fact which I am against.
...point taken and I'm against religious writtings being put forward as fact when there is so much less to base them on
QUOTE
None-the-less, this thing called evolution which a lot of people consider fact, has almost as little verifiable evidence to back it up.
...I would tend to disagree...I have 2 fossils on my mantle piece (a trilobite ~350myo + ammonite ~250myo) & there are millions of others who hold such evidence - and they're only collectors! There are so many more in the hands of the scientific community. Classified & scrutinized by many in the scientific community these fossils are evidence of evolution & there are transitional species.
My little example (& untrue of course) of my healing powers (& talking with god - that should've been obvious) was to simply shock some into realizing how silly they look clutching the bible - because if we wanted to we could make up ANY story and THOU BELIEVERS SHOULD NOT QUESTION ITS CREDIBILITY BUT FOLLOW BLINDLY - regardless of how ridiculous. I guess some adults still believe that Alice really made it to Wonderland even though most kids don't.
QUOTE
Not a very convincing case, i think you'll agree.
well I didn't expect everyone to understand what I meant....
BTW, the question was 'would you believe my accounts?' (if I wasn't a doctor) & my friends can add parts to the story even claiming I'm a demi-god/god, does not matter.
I'm sure that if we were arguing over something other than religion (i.e a court case or how a device works) that in general the (good coherent) evolutionists line of reasoning and analysis would be universally agreed upon (otherwise you really would be in trouble).
the instant a self interest is added into the equation (e.g the joy of salvation) you abandon your method of decision.
would you apply the same method of reaching your conclusions of belief (i.e blind faith or not interpretting things literally etc) to any other real world situation such as evaluating car insurance, or accessing a product suitability to a task.....no you dont, so why on the subject most important to us all (religion is the most important question to all of us i think) do you change your methods?
the instant a self interest is added into the equation (e.g the joy of salvation) you abandon your method of decision.
would you apply the same method of reaching your conclusions of belief (i.e blind faith or not interpretting things literally etc) to any other real world situation such as evaluating car insurance, or accessing a product suitability to a task.....no you dont, so why on the subject most important to us all (religion is the most important question to all of us i think) do you change your methods?
QUOTE(ai_guardian @ Jun 15 2005, 06:23 PM)
...point taken and I'm against religious writtings being put forward as fact when there is so much less to base them on
It's been my observation that creationists do not put the Bible forward as "fact", hence the continuous expression for the need of faith.
QUOTE(ai_guardian @ Jun 15 2005, 06:23 PM)
...I would tend to disagree...I have 2 fossils on my mantle piece (a trilobite ~350myo + ammonite ~250myo) & there are millions of others who hold such evidence - and they're only collectors! There are so many more in the hands of the scientific community. Classified & scrutinized by many in the scientific community these fossils are evidence of evolution & there are transitional species.
As you pointed out yourself, the fossil records are so small. Thus any findings, while still valid, must have a question mark over them
Let's put it another way. Imagine three thousand years in the future (if we're still here). I have what remains of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which consists of about 3 lines on various parchments. Any comment I made regarding it would be (deservedly) laughed out the door.
QUOTE(ai_guardian @ Jun 15 2005, 06:23 PM)
My little example (& untrue of course) of my healing powers (& talking with god - that should've been obvious) was to simply shock some into realizing how silly they look clutching the bible - because if we wanted to we could make up ANY story and THOU BELIEVERS SHOULD NOT QUESTION ITS CREDIBILITY BUT FOLLOW BLINDLY - regardless of how ridiculous. I guess some adults still believe that Alice really made it to Wonderland even though most kids don't.
well I didn't expect everyone to understand what I meant....
BTW, the question was 'would you believe my accounts?' (if I wasn't a doctor) & my friends can add parts to the story even claiming I'm a demi-god/god, does not matter.
well I didn't expect everyone to understand what I meant....
BTW, the question was 'would you believe my accounts?' (if I wasn't a doctor) & my friends can add parts to the story even claiming I'm a demi-god/god, does not matter.
As I said, you are not God. Only God is God.
Edit - removed absolutes
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.