Evolutionist's.....care to discuss?

[.blank cd]

Just proved my point, you read what I write and only see what you want to see.

I read your whole post, I promise, I've just stopped responding to stuff you don't understand, like how you believe evolution is supposed to be some all encompassing concept, when it's not

Creationism explains where we came from, as a theory
Evolution doesn't answer where we came from it assumes we were already here.

Evolution doesnt have to, thats called abiogenesis.[/quote]

There's no evidence to suggest a primordial soup evolved into complex organisms, and frankly evolutions time frame is so far off with the AG of the earth that alone is hole enough.

Did you not see my post about the miller-Urey experiment?

You guys honestly ar so close minded it really is pointless to argue

You know, I used to be closed-minded. I thought that god was the only explanation for everything that exists. But the more I got my head in other books, I found out how less and less likely that was.

[Vteckidd]

the fact that you try to pass yourself off as some intellectual is truly just funny. You resort to this "you dont understand im so much smarter than you i wont bother explaining" that just makes me chuckle.

WHat is your degree in again? Highest level of education? Surely you make good money being as smart as you are.

Lastly, i never said i ONLY believed in GOD and that creationism was the ONLY ANSWER. For you to suggest that shows absolutely how FUCKING DUMB you are. Ive never once said that. Ive only said that there is just as much evidence (as lack of evidence) to support creationism and evolution.

Furthermore your double talk tactics are retarded. On one hand you argue that evolution explains why god doesnt exist, then when i ask simple questions you say "oh no evolution doesnt deal with that".

Evolution deals with species evolving, but it doesnt explain where the species come from in the FIRST PLACE. Nothing does. Evolution DOES try to say that man came from apes, which COULD be true, but that means apes came from somewhere right?

Evolution attempts to explain the origins or species and how we came to be today, the problem is it largely ignores any other factor that has to do with complex organisms changing over millions of years.

Creationism explains where we came from, and all the other animals, and regions, countries, matter etc. Its far fetched and not able to be proven, but you cannot say without a shadow of a doubt it never happened.

Just like i cant say that we DIDNT come from apes, even though most likely we did NOT. Because i DONT KNOW. there is no proof.

NOW 7 PAGES LATER YOU ARE STILL TOO INCOMPETENT TO EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE ARGUING.

Im seriously done with this thread, and probably any other further discussions with you because i have wasted far too much time arguing with people that refuse to accept all possibilites in the name for them condemning everyone else so they feel they are right.

Now you can double talk , argue with yourself, and proclaim how right you are to the empty void of IA, because i have better things to do with my time.

Never argue with idiots, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[bodhi]

ok, then good bye? no one really cares about your threats to leave. Participate or leave, none of us cares.

Lastly, there is NO EVIDENCE that suggests we simply appeared by the grace of god, likewise, there is ZERO evidence that we are here because lightning zapped a pool of matter than turned into complex organisms that then evolved into species that gave us man, billions upon billions upon billions of years later. For that to happen , the earth would hae to be FAR OLDER than what evolution THINKS we are. And the fossil records have GIGANTIC holes in them.

Its a very simple concept, there is no concrete infallible evidence we evolved from the big bang or something else, or that god created us in 7 days. they are both BELIEFS, not proven.

Ill ask a simple question then, where did MATTER COME FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE. Matter cannot be created or destroyed. So where did it come from in the first place?
These things you, evolution, and creationism cannot answer.

all you 2 jackasses want to do is berate people into agreeing with you, you want everyone to respect your opinions and beliefs while shitting on everyone elses.

I just choose to have an open mind and say "i dont know"

... i dont know what to say really, only...




DUH FUCK?!!


bro, i always knew you were kinda slow side and i know rational thinking might be too difficult for you

your question can be simply answered:

matter has existed since before...why do you think it needs a beginning and an end?




a cycle

earth's age has been calculated around 4.5billion...i guess you think that's nothing when it comes to the amount of progression the earth has gone through since then
your style of thinking is rather lame and gay, really. more of agnostic "im on the fence" type of belief. ugh its all too common for me and ive been in so many debates about this thats its boring to me now. i dont even bother with exposing links, books, experiments, differences in terminology, detailed explanations...
my atheist point of view doesnt make me close-minded, son...you do know what that word means rite? you think im close-minded because of what ive posted, but you know so little

i wont bother though

[bodhi]

i like how mike acts like he's so important and has ZERO time to chit-chat with others about a topic as complex as this

he thinks apes had to evolve from SOMETHING incredibly complex first..."but where did that species come from... oh and what about that one? oh and what about that one?" dude, stuff changes overtime...it happens, its been proven and if you dont believe me go do some research. no, im not talking about researching through yewtoob- there are tons of sites and articles out there that can answer your questions

gezz u guys are assholes, thinking youre so smart when in reality you be dumb cause joo close-minded. think about it creationism, evolution to different things that cannot be fully explained or disproven...bahbahabahlhalah. - vteckidd

[bodhi]

but hey dewds, ill be back later ok
mike please dont leave i enjoy reading agnostic point of views and think its rather lovely how you fight so hard for your belief


heh see i dont really care

god, religion, karma, luck... its all the same shit to me. pointless, boring and i dont believe in any of it. yeah i dont giva fuck

[Benefit]

If evolution were real, wouldnt a human be a transformer by now?

Doesnt the species with the less traits , DIE OUT?

You dont understand both sides, and once again...you have BLATANT proof of god, you are just ignorant as fuck

I guess if i just responded with "hahahahaha" to your posts, IT WOULD MAKE ME RIGHT. its sad that you dont have a real explanation to that

[Benefit]

humans ARE apes, like ducks are birds... you don't outgrow your ancestry

AHAHhhahAhahahahhahAhAHAHaHAHhahahAhaHa

arent apes fish?

wouldnt a ape die out?

wouldnt a ape develop more language than "AHH AHH AHH", compared to humans?

what the fuck are you talking about 0.00000009% plausible, you are a fucking idiot


go watch rise of the planet of the apes you damn monkey, i swear that movie got you too riled up

[bu villain]

Its a very simple concept, there is no concrete infallible evidence we evolved from the big bang or something else, or that god created us in 7 days. they are both BELIEFS, not proven.

Just to be clear, the big bang is not a 'fact' and it has nothing to do with evolutionary theory but...
Evidence for big bang: cosmic background radiation, red shifting, elemental distribution just to name a few
Evidence for Creationism: None (what would evidence of creationism even look like)

I believe the theory with the strongest evidence but I know it can change as the evidence changes.

Ill ask a simple question then, where did MATTER COME FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE. Matter cannot be created or destroyed. So where did it come from in the first place?
These things you, evolution, and creationism cannot answer.

I just choose to have an open mind and say "i dont know"

Exactly, "I don't know" is a much more logical answer than "God did it" which is the answer many people in this thread are proposing. My personal goal is for people to be honest with themselves and admit when they don't know. I wish people didn't feel the need to have all the answers to all the questions of life.

[bu villain]

I'm not sure if you are serious with the kind of comments you have been posting.

arent apes fish?

No, apes are apes and fish are fish. No animal alive today comes from any other animal alive today. The apes that humans evolved from are not the same apes that exist today.

wouldnt a ape die out?

Why would apes die out? They don't have any natural predators, the have sufficient food supplies.

wouldnt a ape develop more language than "AHH AHH AHH", compared to humans?

Why would they? Not all animals develop all characteristics.

[Vteckidd]

If evolution were real, wouldnt a human be a transformer by now?

Doesnt the species with the less traits , DIE OUT?

No because evolution refuses to look forward or backward in time. it only deals with what it can rationally pass off to the next person it wants to teach, and continues to ignore everything else.

Isnt the oldest record Hominid fossil something like 4 million years old? Surely in 4 million years we have seen humans "evolve", if what evolution teaches is true, then that means apes turned into humans over BILLIONS OF YEARS, and that simply isnt mathmatically possible considering what we know of the age of the earth.

It would have taken somewhere around an infinite amount of years for primordial soup to become and organism, then become complex organisms, then 1 strand of DNA then blah blah blah then an ape, then blah blal blah HUMANS! Yet that doesnt explain the vast number of species, while apes still exist (BILLIONS OF YEARS LATER DESPITE NATURAL SELECTION)

I mean by their theory, Apes naturally evolved into humans, but the lesser species has lived on, FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS.

[Benefit]

LOL bu, wow...im done

not all animals develop characteristics...wowwtf

i already told you, you have PROOF of god, you are just ignorant

evolution is only right to NATURAL SELECTION.

no animal alive comes from another animal...Lol

you dont even know what you are talking about do you?

[Vteckidd]

Exactly, "I don't know" is a much more logical answer than "God did it" which is the answer many people in this thread are proposing. My personal goal is for people to be honest with themselves and admit when they don't know. I wish people didn't feel the need to have all the answers to all the questions of life.

ive never advocated either stance, ive argued that your buddy needs to acknowledge that despite his best efforts and fact distortion, the ultimate answer is WE DONT KNOW.

You CAN ARGUE creationism with Evolution because evolution is a sideway of saying this is where we came from. Evolution was brought up because Darwin didnt believe in creationism. To act like they dont both try to reference each other is just stupid.

Evolution happens in species, IMO, but not at the scale the Darwinians want us to think.

[Benefit]

what the hell was so wrong with "apes" that they needed to double the size of their brain, walk upright, and be 80% less stronger

i thought species "evolved" to ADAPT better?

the most evolution a ape would see is...hmmm...NONE because it is perfect for the environment

not turn into a different species because we both have tailbones

[geoff]

Man Oh man this has gotten way out of hand. I believe Blank_cd and I agreed we would keep this rational and not mock each others personal views. Then Bohdi comes in here like a 5 year old that just discovered his " peepee" for the first time and expects us all to be impressed. Grow up bro, your links to wikipedia show no more intelligence then the irrational comments you make about my faith. That being said, blank_cd, you have still not given me a response to the videos or article...i'm waiting, simply because you seem to be rational and I expect a reasonable answer from you.

Now, I have spent the last week doing vast amounts of research on this subject. I am no scientist or expert, so doing experiments myself was out of the question. How then did I look deeper into this debate? I reasearched papers, exerpts from books, articles, and ancient human and natural history. I was shocked to come to the conclusion i have now. I will list several points numerically...

1. The theory of evolution, or, Dawrinism does lay out some very interesting evidence.

Darwin’s theory has legs. It has vast explanatory power. In many cases it even predicts what later will be discovered. Although there are big mysteries still out there, “black boxes” where Darwin’s theory is seriously strained, Darwin’s theory is one of the hardest working theories in science and continues to be more successful than not.
Darwin’s two-stage mechanism cannot be proven true in the strictest sense because it depends on unprovable assumptions of randomness and naturalness. What we have are lots of observations in laboratory settings and fossil remains that point to the near absolute certainty that variation and selection are happening in regularly all around us. But being unprovable is not a deal breaker for a hard-working theory like Darwin’s. Variation and selection not only is observably at work; the assumptions of randomness and naturalness make sense.

Rick Kennedy

Richard Dawkins, in Climbing Mount Improbable (1996), creates a parable of a mountain climb to answer the mathematical problem that troubles Darwinian natural history. The mathematical problem of Darwinian natural history is portrayed in Dawkins’ book as a steep cliff that blocks climbers from getting to the top. Dawkins recognizes that genetics may have found DNA and people can watch in laboratories the process of variation and sexual selection, but he also acknowledges a problem with the mathematics. There does not seem to be enough time in earth’s history to allow enough random variation through sexual selection to create complicated things like the human brain. The math in natural history is a daunting problem that he depicts as a steep cliff.

There are various ways to handle this mathematical problem. “Chaos theory” posits the possibility of fast spurts of variation and selection. Theories of multiple universes allow us to spread the mathematics broader so that the calculations of random variation work. The idea that Dawkins likes best emphasizes algorithms. In Dawkins’s parable, an easy trail, the algorithm, winds up the back of the mountain, avoiding the mathematical cliff. The randomness in random variation is not really random, because variation is affected by algorithmic “pressure.”

Daniel Dennett, in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (1995), describes Darwinian evolution as “algorithmic sorting processes which take the probabilities or biases that are due to fundamental laws of physics and produce structures that would otherwise be wildly improbable.”

An algorithm is a closed information system in which infinite possibilities are honed into a finite form by the action of a recurring set of rules. Algorithms domesticate wildness. Modern computers, the World Wide Web, and hopes for continuing development of artificial intelligence are rooted in the wonders of algorithms. Probably nothing in mathematics is so inspirational to futurists as the idea that algorithms seem to make simple the complex. David Berlinski, in his breathless The Advent of the Algorithm: The Idea that Rules the World (2000), writes that after Newton’s calculus, the algorithm “is the second great scientific idea of the West. There is no third.”

Limited time is a problem for natural history. Louis Agassiz, whose mountain namesake is appropriately not in the Evolution Range, could not accept Darwinian evolution because he thought the islands of the Galapagos were geologically too young for the mathematics of chance variations being sexually selected. Dawkins points out that “if Darwinism were really a theory of chance, it couldn’t work.” Dawkins believes “Darwinism is not a theory of random chance. It is a theory of random mutation plus non-random cumulative natural selection.”

The possibility that algorithmic pressures affect natural history solves some problems but raises others. Not the least of these problems is: how did the algorithm get started? If algorithms work from rules, where do the rules come from?

These would be some problems found with in the theory of evolution.

[Benefit]

if there was nothing on earth, and 100's of monkeys just materialized out of nowhere...




they would not be humans in 239478209357920347092402937490237094 years

[Benefit]

Darwin stated the obvious...then added his imagination to it

ie. this here caterpillar will transform into a butterfly....then turn into a seagull in 6 billion years

yeah , its a big comparison , but that is how monkeys and humans is...

anyways, everyone who has anything to say about evolution, has a DIFFERENT THEORY , EVERYTIME

religion remains the same

even darwin was unsure about his theory

[geoff]

Also this in point one.

Natural selection is the Achilles heel of Darwinism. Darwin saw Malthus’ population theory as the basis NS. This has never been established scientifically and I would submit is dead WRONG. Nonetheless Dawkins still supports Malthusism and many scientists are trying to demonstrate how conflict might lead to cooperation.

There is a long history of dualistic thinking where change is generated by conflict, Being vs Non-Being, (which does not rally work either,) so maybe we should not be too hard on Darwinism. However Darwinism is supposed to be science, which means that it is supposed to be based on scientific evidence, that is experimentation and/or observation. Darwinian NS has none of this.

The result of the failure of Darwinian NS as a system leads multiple concepts of how it works, so evolution as it now stands is not a Theory, but a family of concepts, none of which are acceptable. My own theory for why evolution is so messy is based on a nondualistic, nonlinear understanding of Reality which goes against monististic, linear scientism. See my book, DARWIN’S MYTH.

Roger A. Sawtelle

The point of this is to show that evolution shows itself to be valid, yet is in fact based on flaws and assumptions, it is not a definite answer but rather leads to more questions. As more questions arise, more assumptions are made and the theory is "tweaked". ADAPTATION is FACT, it can be seen, we as people do it all the time...i.e. the example blank_cd gave about winter and jackets....but because i put on a jacket to escape the cold...does not mean i changed at a cellular or genetic level.

[.blank cd]

the fact that you try to pass yourself off as some intellectual is truly just funny. You resort to this "you dont understand im so much smarter than you i wont bother explaining" that just makes me chuckle.

You didn't understand the 17 other times I've tried explaining it to you, why continue?

WHat is your degree in again? Highest level of education? Surely you make good money being as smart as you are.

Income level never has or never will correlate to one's intellectual level. There are just as many stupid people making insane amounts of money as there are brilliant people making a pittance.

Furthermore your double talk tactics are retarded. On one hand you argue that evolution explains why god doesnt exist, then when i ask simple questions you say "oh no evolution doesnt deal with that".

Never have I once tried to explain that god doesnt exist. I've tried to explain why it's illogical to believe that god did it

Evolution deals with species evolving, but it doesnt explain where the species come from in the FIRST PLACE.

A breakthrough!!! Congrats!!!

Evolution DOES try to say that man came from apes

No, evolutionary synthesis says we have the same ancestor, which due to genetic evidence, is true.

Evolution attempts to explain the origins or species and how we came to be today,

no, it doesnt once again, evolutionary sysnthesis is not an all encompassing theory. What was that word again that deals with the origin of life? Starts with an A and ends with BIOGENESIS? I cant think of it, i know i mentioned it at least once before in this thread...

Creationism explains where we came from, and all the other animals, and regions, countries, matter etc. Its far fetched and not able to be proven, but you cannot say without a shadow of a doubt it never happened.

At this point in science, we can rule out that a god simply spoke everything into existence, and biblical creation/great flood/Noah's ark type stuff. We know that didn't happen. What we can't rule out scientifically is if a creator was instrumental in the beginning of life

Never argue with idiots, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

This is for sure.

[.blank cd]

ADAPTATION is FACT, it can be seen, we as people do it all the time...i.e. the example blank_cd gave about winter and jackets....but because i put on a jacket to escape the cold...does not mean i changed at a cellular or genetic level.

So what do you call it when this adaptation happens at a genetic level?

[geoff]

2. I have come to realize, that one can not be Christian and also believe in evolution. The two do not go hand in hand. I also realized that I do not really buy into the Creationist or Intelligent Design schools of thought either. Why? because they change christianity and the Biblical God to fit into the accepted modern sciences of today. There are occurances in nature that would seem to show purpose and design. That is very evident. Darwinism shows this to be illusion and a product of natural selection. But, how does nature know which qualities are best? Both the schools of Creation and I.D. try and "fit" God into our modern logic. They give a little of God away so they can gain more reputation with logic. God is absolute, God is unchanging, and cannot fit into our logic. Simple. One can not say well maybe the Bible didn't really mean that. Maybe it was a metaphor and this is what it really meant....No, Gods' Word is final, not to be changed by wishy washy christians that want to reconcile with science and the academic community. They should be ashamed of themselves.

3. That being said, belief in God requires faith. There are evidences in nature that people can use to say " ah ha!!! See, only God could do that", but the sad fact is that it will never be enough. Atheists and evolutionists practice double standards and whats good for the goose is never good for the gander. God is Absolute. The Creationist and I.D. proponents can be described as Gnostics. I found an interesting quote that said exactly what i want to say now but for the life of me cant find it....

4.How can nature be purely physical if it is governed by laws which are not physical or material? I would like to know, When did the physical laws that govern our universe come into existence? Why? and what was the cause or reason behind it?

5. You say belief in God is completely ridiculous as there is no evidence or "proof". Here is an example. I jump off a roof that is 40ft high. The law of gravity states im going to hit the ground, it is impossible for me to continue suspended yes? Tell me then, at which precise moment is law observed? Can you tell me when it begins or when it stops? Can you measure the gravity that is involved in this scenario? What is the measurement for gravity? You can not physically touch it nor see it nor hear/smell...yet you believe. It is an invisible force....as is my God.

6. You easily dismiss the belief in God as pure fiction due to the appearance that it doesn't fit into any modern scientific model. But what about Human history? What about Jesus? What about the miracles He performed and His ressurection and ascension into heaven? These all break known physical laws, yet they are documented not only by believers but others and were passed down as "truth" from one to another, from one generation to the next. Do you so simply deny written history?

[geoff]

matter has existed since before...why do you think it needs a beginning and an end?

You sir are ignorant. The universe is finite, there is evidence for this.

ie. this here caterpillar will transform into a butterfly....then turn into a seagull in 6 billion years

Evolution cannot explain metamorphasis and is stumped by it.

So what do you call it when this adaptation happens at a genetic level?

Have we cracked the genetic code of every species? Give me an example of this occuring...

[geoff]

No, evolutionary synthesis says we have the same ancestor, which due to genetic evidence, is true.

Show me this.

At this point in science, we can rule out that a god simply spoke everything into existence, and biblical creation/great flood/Noah's ark type stuff. We know that didn't happen. What we can't rule out scientifically is if a creator was instrumental in the beginning of life

I would also like for you to show me this FACT......if such one exists.

[Benefit]

Evolution cannot explain metamorphasis and is stumped by it.

.

so if you cant explain the origin of it, why try to explain that it will turn into a moth or monarch, or mosquito or something "over time"

[Benefit]

when did grass evolve into a venus fly trap?

[geoff]

Benefit: you are just ranting and raving now. Metamorphasis cannot be explained by evolution. It is a process that happens very rapidly and does not need millions or billions of years to take place. I give you props for supporting the God side of the debate but come on man, slow your roll a bit.

I saw somewhere, not sure if it was one of you that said it, but it was stated that humanity has come to make his environment fit him and has adapted his surroundings to himself. i.e. a/c, medicine, technology, ect....evolution is supposed to be a natural occurring event that takes place when a species adapts to new surroundings. My question then is this, if humanity is able to manipulate his environment to be more suitable and to adapt to his needs, will technology then stop humans from continuing to evolve? After all, what would be the need if one can simply "change" something in our environment to adapt to our liking or needs?

[Benefit]

i wasnt saying it takes millions of years to take place, i was saying it has been happening for millions of years, but then humans came and said the butterfly evolved into a mosquito

[Benefit]

Oh well "never cry wolf", religion has , and something has really happened now,

[geoff]

Oh well "never cry wolf", religion has , and something has really happened now,

[Benefit]

idk , jesus gunna save u dont worry

[Echonova]

In other news today, scientists just discovered why Zebra's have stripes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/16965266


God has known all along.

~instigate~

[RL...]

You do all know that evolution takes MILLIONS of years right, it doesn't happen overnight. And for the record, humans have evolved through various stages. It's fucking common sense. Here, read a little about our evolution, it's not the most credible source but I don't have away of showing my biology textbook on here which btw makes a hell of a lot more sense as to how things came to be than the bible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

[geoff]

Echonova-almost seems like you believe in God...yes?

Rl: can you answer any questions that i have asked? What about metamophasis? What about human emotion?

[Benefit]

lollllllllllllllll @ the pictures

and its a certain type of monkey we evolved from?lol

i must of been the monkey with horns

rattlesnakes and cobras both evolved from lizards fyi

[Benefit]

. Charles Darwin struggled with the problem of evil and poor design in nature, and though his natural selection explained adaptation without the need for a designer, he was still inclined to think that everything resulted from designed laws.

[Echonova]

Echonova-almost seems like you believe in God...yes?

I absolutely, unequivocally believe in God.

However, I read in a book once, not to cast your pearls before swine. Therefore I don't. Waste of time.


You cannot teach the deaf to hear. But certain people here like to play like they are smart, by using Google or sites like http://asktheatheist.com and regurgitating what other people say.

Here's the thing, most people look to Christ (religious or not) and at the first hint of imperfection they shout hypocrite. Thing is, Christ isn't for the people that are already saved. It's for the unredeemed. The Bible is chock full of people that on the surface should have no business representing God. But they died for it, before it became a "corporation", before man got in the way... They died for it. Why?


But anyway... Yes, I believe. I dare say I'm the smartest guy posting in this thread. If blank cd/maniac/bandwagoneers could even beat me at a simple game of trivia (http://www.funtrivia.com/private/main.cfm?tid=93558 BTW: Baseball Friday doesn't count) I would have more respect for them. But they dare not show their true stupidity in a public forum.

Last little bit... I actually respect blank and maniac, because I do believe they honestly say what they believe. I don't have to agree, just as they don't agree with me... But you will never "prove" or "force" someone else to believe. It's something they have to experience for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

[Echonova]

If Churches were to vanish... Who would feed/care for the poor?


Evolution doesn't make room for the weak. Survival of the fittest.

[Echonova]

[.blank cd]

Eco, you don't wanna play trivia against me

[geoff]

Echonova- does it bother you to see many church folk and those that claim to believe in God alter their beliefs to fit in with modern science? I see creationists and I.D.proponents stating that the Bible is irrelevant for modern times, or they say it is not meant to be interpreted literally, or they try and fit God/Jesus into a form of "logic" that the modern philosopher can digest. My point in this thread was simply this; the beauty and diversity in nature, the complexity of life, and the mystery surrounding the universe can equally be seen as evidence of an All Mighty Gods' signature.

However, I read in a book once, not to cast your pearls before swine. Therefore I don't. Waste of time.

You and I among others were such swine not long ago. "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" romans 10:14

[Echonova]

Eco, you don't wanna play trivia against me

Yes... I do.