I was going to leave this out, but I just know someone's gonna say "oh yeah? What about dolphins, Mr. Smarty?"

I'm not sure that dolphins or other cetaceans are self aware, but in any case, I'm pretty sure that the Stone Age shepherd nomad people of the semi-arid Middle East were in a poor position to observe them, and so they probably failed to consider them in their creation myth-- much as they did with the orangs of Borneo and the chimps of equatorial Africa.

Dolphins are one of the most intelligent creatures in the world, if any type of animal besides humans has "self-awareness" they'd fall on one of the top five in the list.

Not even to mention that dolphins have their own religion.

Uhmmm.......not sure what your getting at

Does this remark serve any porpoise?

hehe nice pun... It does serve some purpose in saying that... Basically, it shows us that there are other animals (and that's what we are... animals) who have enough self-conciousness and intelligence to follow beleifs... and bearing in mind that we live in a world where dolphins are smarter than most people

I don't know where you heard that but I can assure you it's not true; at least it definetely hasn't been proven.



No- evolution is not a fact.

its much more plausible that creationism...

^I believe that evolution is correct, but I'm pointing out just because it's more believable than something else doesn't mean it's a fact.

What part of the above quote did some people not understand?

Keep this civilised and on topic otherwise the above will be applied.

Whether it's a fact or not, that I don't care about, I'm saying nothing occurs without the creation of a deity, it is nearly impossible for anything to happen with the consent of a deity, and if people are going to get all "technical" about (as I could spend hours to days to weeks to months reading on it and get nowhere except by obtaining the knowledge of how everything supposedly came together.) people should consider reading the bible more, why? I have found personally that when my questions can't be answered, I find a verse right smack in my face at that exact moment, the bible is a rich text, it shouldn't be looked into as ligthly, it will work if you give it a chance without being hasty to discard it.

I agree Stellar. BW is nothing more than a habitual troll. He just wants to draw everyone's angst and derail this very excellent thread. Too bad. It was entertaining.



Hit the nail on the head, BM! And for the open-minded, here's a terrific book to start with ...

The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design by Richard Dawkins
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/039331570...glance&n=283155

Sean

Does intelligence alone equal sentience? I don't know, just asking.

No probably not, but they are the top most competing for having a brain, that's gotta account for something right?

Not necessarily, but one would assume that the two go hand in hand with each other.



I don't fully understand what you're saying, are you referring to the creation of the universe?

Boorite and Bolt
Some heavy reading but sort of interesting: Is there a Paradox of Self-Consciousness?


With respect to all
Evolution is just a 'THEORY'

The definition of Theory:

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it often does in other contexts. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a general rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory.

SOURCE

No, evolution is fact. Look at anything from the fossil record to dog breeding to agriculture.

Evolution by natural selection, however, is a theory.

Please stop confusing the two.

Ivy I believe in evolution....but it is not a fact but based on FACTS

Evolution is a fact. The word refers to the development of different kinds of living organisms, which anyone can see for himself in the fossil record. How one explains this fact is the theory of it.

To avoid the fact that fewer kinds of living organisms developed (i.e., evolved) into many more kinds, one would have to simply not look at the fossil record. And indeed, we find that people who don't accept the fact of evolution, such as strict Biblical creationists who think all creatures were poof created just as they are today, are people who will not look at the record, no matter what. Therefore, they are in a poor position to say what is and isn't a fact.

It's much like looking at a crime scene. It may be a fact that several bodies are on the floor, and that one of them has a pistol in his hand. After noting such facts, you need a theory that parsimoniously puts it all together.

The theory of evolution by natural selection explains the facts of evolution by proposing that the environment determines which traits animals are able to pass on to succeeding generations. It is popular to say it's "just a theory," but that's much like saying quantum mechanics is "just a theory." It explains and predicts so many observations so parsimoniously that no working scientist can find a way to reject it. Controversies abound, of course, regarding how to interpret the theory or fit it to a particular case, but the theory itself has proven nearly indispensable.

This is why it's wrong to say "evolution is not a fact" and highly misleading to say Darwin's theory is "just a theory that hasn't been proven."

I believe that Evolution is a far better explanation to the creation of Humans, Animals and our universe than Creationism ever was or will be

at least with Evolution you have Data that you can go over and scrutinize whereas with Creationism you only have faith and a 2,000 year old book that states these

That much is obvious. Still, you have seen fit to condemn all thought about evolution as "bunk." Boltwave, you are not entitled to an opinion on something you know or care nothing about. The thing you think you are condemning does not even exist, as far as I can tell.

Learn something, anything, about evolution before you go ranting about it, please!

Right, as we've said over and over again, there is nothing in evolution that says there can't be a deity involved. As I've said, over and over, God could have come up with a design and planted life to follow that design. That does not mean that evolution is therefore invalid.

The thing with evolution is we don't know how life started so God creating the first little bit of life from his blueprints is just as plausible as the theory of panspermia.

I don't know why the many other times this has been mentioned has gone ignored. It's getting frustrating. Answers to your idea about evolution somehow being Godless have been provided, saying "it's perfectly reasonable that God had a hand in the creation of life" but you chose to ignore it and just repeat the same thing over and over.

Let me say again, just so it's clear:

Evolution does not forbid the existence of God. Evolution is merely the way organisms have changed through time. Evolution says nothing about how life arose on the planet.




Yes, but you'd be informed about evolution to be able to argue about it. And we wouldn't have to keep repeating the same basic principles over and over.

I've learnt enough to know evolution is possible - nay, probable - and I do believe evolution may have been the vehicle that God used to create our Earth as we know it today. But I also think that evolution is far from a proveable fact. There is suggestive evidence, but imo, not enough to be absolutely conclusive.

Regards, PA

How is it not a fact that many, more specialized organisms developed from fewer, less-specialized ones?

As to the theory, what part of "heritable traits are selected by the environment" needs more conclusive evidence? What do you propose would be a plausible alternative explanation for the diversity of life?

That fact is easy to understand you need to evolve to fit the environment its not probable i think it's possible

What?

o.k don't worry i just got myself confused lol my bad

I've said it before that I was talking mainly to an atheist's perspective, if evolution was how things got here, than I can't deny that, even Genesis says God will curse the serpent and it will "crawl on it's belly", that right there already says something, really I could care less, depending on the context.

See I believe that God did create evolution...he planted the seeds if you will for every living thing to evolve...that to me makes more sense that what the bible has said (no offense)

You have never read Genesis beginning to end have you?

Yea and to me its a load of cobblers WHY?? ohh YES I forgot...for those of us that have our own beliefs you dont like it..silly me bolt...

So my personal belief is...God created evolution

let me counter that question...

Have you ever read the Book of Lies by Aleister Crowley? I doubt it, since it isn't what you beleive in... BM doesn't beleive in what the Bible says and teaches, so she doesn't read it...

Rhy

Allot of people in our day in age take the bible for something completely different, yes even Christians themselves do it, they either take it in too literally or they considered it was written by a bunch of fanatical loons....

But if you do read the book of Genesis, and I'm telling you in all seriousness, that it does bring up some relevance to the evolution theory.

I have in the past read some interesting testimony against the church and Christian faiths, and along with it, I have also read the bible, and all I can say is: read it, and try to understand it.

Such as...?

He KNOWs I dont believe in the bible ...but to be arrogant towards my beliefs he will continue to push LOL sad but thats how he works I guess

Two examples:

According to SaRuMaN's thread: http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...showtopic=70783 apes are more closely related to the female sex than males (don't ask me how this makes sense, but apparently it does ) this would imply that the human race (which evolved from ape like relatives) became human, and the male sex of humans evolved faster from that of the female sex, in the bible, it says this:

Genesis 2:18-25

18 The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh.

22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman, '
for she was taken out of man."

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

25 The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

Another example of animals evolving:

Genesis 3:14

14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this,
"Cursed are you above all the livestock
and all the wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.

There are probably more, but it would be a reasonable assumption that these refer to the process of evolution, or at least, the facts that evolution is based on.

Is this in regards to the creation STORY and if so which version of it?


**Grabs popcorn**

Yes bolt in what way is creation relevent to evolution?

Uhhhh......zandore, look above your post

Boorite...with some people the very concept of evolution is beyond their capacity to comprehend.

Thats a simple question but you aint going to get a simple answer LOL *grabs more popcorn*

What about it? I asked a question that was directed at you with a question from Raptor to you......

EDIT: What part of it did you not understand?

Which is why they will dismiss it

This is great, I'm glad we can sit around here all day and snicker and point and laugh at how incredibly stupid I am but I really can't argue with people who are going to misunderstand everything I've said, and then call me the idiot.

Zandore, the fact that you still payed no attention to what I posted makes me think you are only looking for confrontations.

Man you are in a world of your own..you have managed to take not just my own beliefs but other peoples beliefs and attacked them left right and centre...mods have tried to stop this..and you ignored them...you wont settle untill you have slammed other beliefs like mine for example many times over and over again you slammed my belief..you KNOW for a fact I dont believe in the bible..and because I said ...MY BELIFS IS THAT GOD CREATED EVOLUTION you attacked me for it and in badness regardless of my belief you threw bible text at me LOL the mods are going to get sick of coming on here after you have bickered your way through a thread that you want closed cuz you dont agree with other views on the subject of evolution...and you STILL wont allow anyone to say what they feel..and here you are raning again
NOT ONE person has called you stupis or an idiot...you have put these words up yourself not anyone slese..you are so paranoid its so not funny

What the mods are trying to do here is keep this discussion open and friendly...3 of them have tried..you have ignored them...you show them disprespect and continue your bickering..as for WHY you do it.its beyond me....why cant you just accept that we ALL have different ideas??? you can disagree with out your arrogant comments...dont take this the wrong way...but if you did not post on this thread ..I would dare say it would be running smoothly no offense but I think it would...you should just move on and let others post their views without being under your attack

AH I was making my post when you posted this
If you would have read that news item you would have seen this:

Another revelation was the notion that the chimpanzee genome project has shown that women are closer to chimps then men. Prof Jones explained that is because the X chromosome has changed less than the Y chromosome since we split from a common ancestor with chimps. Women have two X chromosomes compared with XY in men.

Do you want to look up the definition of notion or do you want me to?


I think I see some 'contradictions' here!

Two creation accounts....

Genesis 1

On the third day
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Fifth day
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

Then on the SIXTH day
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Male and female at the same time....

A side note
Gen 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Was there others here before Adam and Eve......

well, I read the verses that you quoted... which is rare for me, so at least I try to understand where you are coming from...

But i honestly don't get how these verses are in any way related to evolution... are you saying that woman evolved from man?
And as for the verse on the snake, all that I see is that God condemned the snake to a life of hardship... not that he changed the snake in any way...

or are you reading it differently to me?

I guess the skeletons of snakes , that appear to have what were recessed nubs of former appendages, is all a lie perpetrated by the scientific community. Or most particularly the bony evidence contained in Homo erectus, Homo floresiensis , Homo-Habilus, Cro-Magnon, can not be taken into consideration as evidence of the change that preceded what we know as homo-sapiens are today!?
Fascinating how the world, "Evolution", which simply boils down to "change", can get so many ardent fundamentalists on the defensive as they argue there is no way the creator of all things in their world, would have ever been able to create within that creation, so as to insure it's survival, the capacity to adapt or change in conjunction with the environmental atmosphere of this home planet! It's funny how the opposition to evolution never take into consideration the geological aspects or evidence, when they assume the religious defensive posture to the concept of human evolution. As if such a thing isn't germaine to terrestrial matters, just those wherein the creator of people, not planets dang it, myth matters.

Yes, the planet evolves, but not people damn it!
Well, I can say I've met a few of those wherein that argument might just be valid after all. Not that it's not entertaining , mind you.



*edit for size*
Z.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good one IF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boorite already pointed out a couple times that Genesis is a good parable for evolution. In evolution, where we gained larger forebrains as we became more self-aware and knowledgeable and then women had to deal with greater pain in childbirth because of the enlarged brains. In Genesis, we received knowlege from the tree, became self-aware and because of it, women now experienced pain in childbirth.

Mitochondrial DNA, which is theorized to be inheirited through females and the X chromosomes weren't in Genesis, last time I looked. Unless humans had microscopes back then and just forgot to tell us.

The part where females are closer to chimps than males, doesn't mean females are less evolved, btw. While mitochondrial DNA is theorized to have evolved separately and it's passed down through the matriarchal line since the male's mitochondrial DNA is destroyed at fertilization, that in no way means women are "less evolved."

Just in case someone wanted to start something.

Also, IF, that's the funniest thing I've seen all week!