Bob Baker Talks about his take on Creation and Evolution.
Full Version: Interesting Interview
| QUOTE |
| BB: Exactly! And that ain't right. I get a lot of unsolicited mail from Creationists . (Laughs) Sometimes I am identified as an Atheist and I had to call up this guy and yell at him because he listed me as an Atheist on his website. I said, "I'M NOT AN ATHEIST! GOL' DANG IT! I am a Pentecostal preacher and I still teach Old Testament." And he said, "Well, uh, you're a scientist." And I said, "SO? SO?" |
Evolution vs. Creation....
The fact that your kids inherit your looks is proof enough of evolution.
The fact that there is such a thing as "selective breeding" is proof enough that evolution exists.
Some people argued why aren't there transitional forms? Why can't we ever find a fish with legs? Well, by the time a fish has evolved legs, the rest of its body would have also evolved accordingly so the end result will be something different. We will never find a fish with legs.
When I hear Sean Hannity talking about how he looked upon the wonders of the universe and cannot grasp how there cannot be a creator. Like some sentient omnipotent being who created the entire universe is more logical. Where did THIS sentient being comes from? That is a question Creationist never ever answers. At least evolutionists admit that they do not know how the universe really came to be.
As for mankind, I heard somewhere that because we have such a huge population, it is very unlikely that we will physically change anytime soon, so forget all those images of us having enlarged craniums in the future. There are just too many of us for any beneficial genes to have a large enough impact to change us in any dramatic way.
The fact that your kids inherit your looks is proof enough of evolution.
The fact that there is such a thing as "selective breeding" is proof enough that evolution exists.
Some people argued why aren't there transitional forms? Why can't we ever find a fish with legs? Well, by the time a fish has evolved legs, the rest of its body would have also evolved accordingly so the end result will be something different. We will never find a fish with legs.
When I hear Sean Hannity talking about how he looked upon the wonders of the universe and cannot grasp how there cannot be a creator. Like some sentient omnipotent being who created the entire universe is more logical. Where did THIS sentient being comes from? That is a question Creationist never ever answers. At least evolutionists admit that they do not know how the universe really came to be.
As for mankind, I heard somewhere that because we have such a huge population, it is very unlikely that we will physically change anytime soon, so forget all those images of us having enlarged craniums in the future. There are just too many of us for any beneficial genes to have a large enough impact to change us in any dramatic way.
How about the Possibilty of Creation through Evolution.
Lets say that as We are Evolving externally, that our Body is Creating various new strands of more complex DNA, internally.
Thus Creation through Evolution?
Lets say that as We are Evolving externally, that our Body is Creating various new strands of more complex DNA, internally.
Thus Creation through Evolution?
Why can't you believe in God and evolution? I think there's pretty substantive proof that evolution is happening. But something had to have set the whole thing in motion, you just don't wake up one morning to life on Earth.
and what compells a being that has attained perfection to start the ball rolling?
| QUOTE (bathory @ Nov 25 2003, 05:24 AM) |
| and what compells a being that has attained perfection to start the ball rolling? |
Entertainment!
| QUOTE |
| As for mankind, I heard somewhere that because we have such a huge population, it is very unlikely that we will physically change anytime soon, so forget all those images of us having enlarged craniums in the future. There are just too many of us for any beneficial genes to have a large enough impact to change us in any dramatic way. |
We're the only species on the planet that actually alters our environment to make it more suitable to ourselves, rather than simply adapting to change...I don't think we ARE going to evolve any further than we are now to be honest...if natural selection is no longer functioning, then evolution is impossible.
| QUOTE (Seraphina @ Nov 25 2003, 12:25 PM) |
| ...I don't think we ARE going to evolve any further than we are now to be honest...if natural selection is no longer functioning, then evolution is impossible. |
Hmmmm ......
If as some "doom sayers" predict, we are returning to another Ice Age brought on by environmental problems. And the follow on effects to our modern day western lifestyle eg: no more power at the flick of a switch. Do you think it's possible that after the initial deaths of those unable to cope with a cold climate that the gene pool might be restricted to those whose physical makeup was more adaptable to a freezing climate? And their offspring would gradually evolve into a more efficient human for the environment in which they live? Same goes for the opposite, if we have a "global warming" with higher levels of carbon dioxide and less direct sunlight but higher UV levels?
Wouldn't this be another step in our evolution to adapt to our environment?
So many factors govern changes to human development, environment, location, diet, disease, science. For example, diet can make a big difference even over a relatively short period of time. The average height in the U.S. during WWI for males was something like 5' 7" and now stands at 5' 10" a 4.5% increase.
Natural selection is one thing, what about "unnatural selection" ... new diseases we are having to cope with, AIDS, SARS etc etc..
I think we will continue to evolve until extinction.
Sera, you may be able to answer this question for me. Could a human evolve to be born with no appendix? Just curious as we do'nt use them and if they are removed there's no ill effects, barring pain and discomfort ofcourse.
I doubt it 
Evolution removies traits that make the organism less suitable to survival, as those that have that trait are supposed to die before being able to reproduce, as members of the species with a more suitable characteristic survive to pass on the genes for that instead.
Nax: I'm pretty sure that, if we were to near any such world altering event as that, that you would see scientific research accelerate to try and find ways for us to survive it...
As we treat diseases with medication today, natural immunity is no longer bred into the species...those who suffer from sickness do not simply die anymore, but are given treatment and helped back to health...and go on to have kids in later life, and their genes that were vulnerable to that disease are passed on.
The increase in average height is actually due to better health care and nutrition in the human diet; our genetic makeup hasn't changed over the last 90 years or so, we just have better health care, leading to less people suffering from malnutrition during their growth cycle.
Our answer to everything now is to find a way round it for the entire population...we simply don't allow those less suited to an environment to die and allow natural selection to occur. Every single facet of our society is influenced and altered by technology, and we use it as a shield against nature's whitling process.
Given our level of sentience, it's hardly surprising...we're not, after all, likely to simply let members of our society sicken and die. Humans, therefore, are limited to evolution on a cultural level, rather than a physical one.
Evolution removies traits that make the organism less suitable to survival, as those that have that trait are supposed to die before being able to reproduce, as members of the species with a more suitable characteristic survive to pass on the genes for that instead.Nax: I'm pretty sure that, if we were to near any such world altering event as that, that you would see scientific research accelerate to try and find ways for us to survive it...
As we treat diseases with medication today, natural immunity is no longer bred into the species...those who suffer from sickness do not simply die anymore, but are given treatment and helped back to health...and go on to have kids in later life, and their genes that were vulnerable to that disease are passed on.
The increase in average height is actually due to better health care and nutrition in the human diet; our genetic makeup hasn't changed over the last 90 years or so, we just have better health care, leading to less people suffering from malnutrition during their growth cycle.
Our answer to everything now is to find a way round it for the entire population...we simply don't allow those less suited to an environment to die and allow natural selection to occur. Every single facet of our society is influenced and altered by technology, and we use it as a shield against nature's whitling process.
Given our level of sentience, it's hardly surprising...we're not, after all, likely to simply let members of our society sicken and die. Humans, therefore, are limited to evolution on a cultural level, rather than a physical one.
cheers for answering back What was the last significant step in evolution?
What was the last significant step in evolution?
| QUOTE (Naveed @ Nov 25 2003, 08:35 AM) | ||
Entertainment! |
I was gonna say boredom.
Hard to say...with the invention of basic tools, weapons and so on to take over our day to day tasks, evolution has greatly slowed down...maybe when Randy Orton joi...oh, wait, wrong evolution...*coughs*...hmm...
Modern man has been around for a very long time in the same physical state, genetically, as it is now...so most likely the last true example of natural selection in the species would have been immunisation from a plague or suchlike. Our physical characteristics haven't changed that much on the genetic level for a very, very long time.
Modern man has been around for a very long time in the same physical state, genetically, as it is now...so most likely the last true example of natural selection in the species would have been immunisation from a plague or suchlike. Our physical characteristics haven't changed that much on the genetic level for a very, very long time.
So, the opposing fore finger and thumb on both my feet do'nt count. 
Sorry sera, i could'nt resist. Thanx again for replying.
Sorry sera, i could'nt resist. Thanx again for replying.
No, I don't think they do However, as evidenced by neds, it is not unknown for evolution to take a step backwards.
However, as evidenced by neds, it is not unknown for evolution to take a step backwards.
TOUCH'E! 
I think the last real physical evolutionary change happened as man spread all over the globe and developed into three distinctive "races" in response to the environment.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.