Evolution

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Vash's girl [/i]
[B]Don't bring up religion? For me, evolution can't be brought up without evolution. Evolution is stupid and it does not exist. I don't wanna start fight or a debate. There is basically no proof of evolution. It's all circular reasoning. God created all things and that's the way it is! End of subject. [/B][/QUOTE]

You're an idiot. There's no proof God exists, therefor there is no God. Thats the way it is, end of subject.

How do you like it thrown back at you?

Have you ever thought, in your small pathetic mind, that maybe, just maybe, God created the ability to evolve in species? Of course not, you're feeble mind cannot comprehend what the bible doesn't tell you. Come on, you think God created EVERY species on this planet? There are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of species on this planet and even more sub-species, and you actually though he did all that in 7 days or whatever? Of course not. He created one basic species and gave it the ability to evolve or change, therefor creating other species to co-inhabit with it. Thats why there are different sharks... thats why there are different cats, different dogs.

As far as the origin of species is concerned... there are tons of theories... I like the bubble theory myself. Bateria formed in the darkest parts of the sea are captures by bubbles from shifting lands and growth in the eart and are brought to the surface where the heat and light cause them to grow, thus changing them, thus creating different forms of life... whether plant or animal. There's also a land-sea theory and several others... There's many theories, including the instant creation theory and the ape theory. There's no way to proove ANY of them. At least not yet. So I can't see why you would even think that any of them are the right one, when not a damn one is prooven, whether you think they are or not... just liket the fact you're here in the first place.

[AzureWolf]

Jumped between posts, and only read here and there, so I'm sorry for any repetition. I came across this thread late, so I don't have time to get up to speed on everything said. :o Anyway...

Evolution is certainly an interesting theory, and, until I got into college, I never understood why 45% of the United States did not believe in it. Yeah, as you've guessed, the largest concentration of that percent is in the south...

In any case, what you have to realize is that evolution contradicts the nature of what we know about the rest of the universe. That is, the theory of evolution defies the law of entropy. Additionally, you can take that theory to imply that life, and living things in general, defy entropy. It's really an amazing phenomenon, especially when you consider that [I]everything[/I], from interstellar debris to our organic building blocks, follows entropy, and the only known exception is the nature of life. *cough*God*cough* ;)

If you asked me, "Do you believe in evolution?" before I entered college, I would have said with no doubt or hesitation, "Of course, only an idiot would not believe in evolution! Haha, how could anyone think otherwise?!" However, after studying a little cell biology and organic chemistry, I refuse to make an ultimately ignorant stance without truly understanding everything. For now, I'm neutral, since I can't honestly say I know as much as I should on the topic.

[Baron Samedi]

May I repeat this thread is not about religion.

Presumably there would be convection currents in this morass of chemicals etc. right? So, IF your' cell found its way into an area that circulated certain mineral etc. around, it is forseeable that a colony could develop right? Say this is some little rock pool containing some tainted form of H2O and many other minerals, surrounded by reeking lava and sulphorous fumes. These cells eventually multpily, maybe several different strands become, depending entirely on where in this tiny pool they are located, as in different mineral patches. They maybe become multi-celled, amassing more and more cells until they are big enough to be seen. They sit on the bottom, or attatch themselves to the rock. However, they need some way of movement, because they can't get to all the good minerals. So they maybe have little feelers to help move themselves around. Maybe one of the strains finds that it is easier to absorb other 'creatures', or they just get larger naturally. Eventually, after millions of years there is plant life outside the 'pool' and they grow, before being able to breathe air, growing larger limbs, and exiting water.

This is all hypothesising, based on my little knowledge about this subject. This would take millions of years, but it is possible. PRobably mosses would form first, growing around the 'pool', spreading, developing another form of nourishment- photosynthesis- and spreading, evolving, forming reprodctive systems-seeds. Spreading of plant-life.

I don't know, no-one knows [i]for sure[/i] it is all hypothetical-ness. But terra's and Transtic's theories sound plausible as well.

A brief dash of religion to finish this post off- I may be a disbeliever in Supreme beings, or whatever, but God or [insert deity/supreme belief here] may have been of a scientific bent, starting Earth from a very raw material, and watching it grow, and the beings evolve. Who says they weren't?

But there is no proof for any belief, no solid, total proof, just faith and reasoning. But evolution sounds quite plausible to me.

And would everyone congratulate our new round of moderators? Cheers Drix and terra. And youse others as well. But I know those two. You go guys.

[DeathBug]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]You're an idiot. There's no proof God exists, therefor there is no God. Thats the way it is, end of subject.

How do you like it thrown back at you?

[/B][/QUOTE]

Way to welcome the newbies, Trastic. Really, was that called for? God forbid someone feel very strongly about something, and just happen to disagree with you. So, instead of trying to logically convince them through a well-presented argument, you call them names. Yes, that's a way to promote your veiwpoint righ there.

Vash's Girl: If you have completely closed your mind off to the possibility of other theories, then your'e setting yourself up for disappointment. And let's not get this wrong, that's just what evolution is: a theory. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.


Now, unless I am mistaken, Christianity is the belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ, who was the Son of God. Did Jesus ever saw, maybe as an aside at the Last Supper, "Oh, by the way, evolution is wrong and Statanic...pass the bread."

On the other hand, did evolutionary theory ever say "Yeah, God, Jesus, they don't exist, you losers. Nya nya!"

Evolutionary theory coflicts a few Bible verses. But you know something? The Bible isnt' infallible. It was written by men, and men are fallible. The Bible contradicts itself, for one thing, so if you're holding it as your single source of information, you're in for a rude awakening.

Don't get me wrong, the Bible's great, but its' not perfect. It wasn't written by scientific men. For religius information regarding Christian beliefs, it's the best scource around, but it's not supposed to be a lesson in biological history.

It is possible to believe in both, because neither deal with the same subject. Until Jesus comes before me personally and tells me, in ten-foot tall flaming letters, that evolutionary theory conflicts with the Bible and is therefore wrong, I will believe what I currently believe.

However, I do agree with one point you brought up: It was unrealistic to expect that a discussion about evolution would not, at some point, mention religion.

[Adahn]

I'm sorry for not wanting religion to be brought into this much, but I swear I saw somewhere that threads pertaining to abortion or religion were likely to be deleted outright. We can get amino acids from gases apparently, and I'll take your word for it (I'm going to be a biochemist :) ). I was wondering when we would be able to create a cell from inorganic matter. There aren't many natural occurances on earth that we can't simulate or copy, and we know what makes up a cell, correct? Perhaps in a few decades, or centuries, we will have the nanotechnology that allows us to construct cells from scratch. If we want to actually test the way it must have happened naturally, all we have to do is put all the right chemicals in a controlled evironment and see how far they get to becoming a cell. Since it wouldn't take alot, this could be performed thousands upon thousands of times instantaneously. My guess, however, is that we will never be able to create a cell, even with our technology at its absolute peak. I believe it is simply out of man's league.

What truly eats at me is how people shun all religions because they think evolution, the big bang, the cosmic pool, are all fact. It's ignorance that gets to me, and I started this only so people could question the beliefs in life that they have merely accepted. It all comes down to a question of faith, because neither form of creation can be proven, ever. You either believe our live's have some sort of meaning, or we are a byproduct of evolution. The funniest thing is that if we are evolved, it was evolutions greatest mistake. We shape the world with our hands, and in doing so destroy it.

[Baron Samedi]

Both sides are based on fact, as I have previously stated. Anything lacking sufficient proof is based on faith, whether it is a hunch, an idea, a misconception or something which is just lacking hard proof.

Faith is the cornerstone of much of our beliefs. Well duh. I can't believe I said that. I'm an Oxymoron, not just a moron now.

Heh.

[terra]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AzureWolf [/i]
That is, the theory of evolution defies the law of entropy. Additionally, you can take that theory to imply that life, and living things in general, defy entropy. It's really an amazing phenomenon, especially when you consider that [I]everything[/I], from interstellar debris to our organic building blocks, follows entropy, and the only known exception is the nature of life.[/QUOTE]

Got to go to class. Just wanted to say that actually only yesterday in class my p.chem professor was talking about the idea that evolution defies the law of entropy. This is in fact not necessarily true. (Crap, I need the delta sign, and I don't know where to get it.) While the entropy of the system (the living organism who is evolving) may indeed decrease, the entropy of the surroundings apparently still increases, making net entropy increase overall. His explanation of why the entropy of the surroundings increases really sucked, but I think it has something to do with the amount of energy being given to the Earth by the sun every day.

[Jokopoko]

[COLOR=TEAL][SIZE=1][B]I am a firm believer in Evolution myself. Their is evidence of Evolution all over that planet, from micro-organisms to Dinosaurs and from the tiny (and cute :p) first mammals to us. I also believe that the next step in our course of Evolution will be realising the full potentional of our brains. We currently only use around 6% to 11% of our brain power and what is the point of having so much 'free space' in the brain without having something to come along and fill it? I have an un-proven theory on our 'possible' psychic abilites, if anyone wants to hear my long winded explanation about that they are welcome to PM me :D[/B][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Justin]

Chris, with all due respect, chill. You can see she is a child, most likely, why don't you lay off?

As for the Bible's infallibility: If you believe God can bring the Word to men, can you not also believe that He can protect it from those same, weak, men?

Secondly, evolution does not contradict the Bible, if properly presented. If it's presented as something God initiated for the purpose of creation, it is a viable theory. In fact, Genesis says that God [i]allowed[/i] the earth to grow up during creation. Therefore implying that he started it, and then allowed it to take it's designed course.

Now, this says nothing for what I personally think. As I said, I do not care. It takes a backseat to the Gospel.

And whoever said we only use 10% of our brains--I'm sorry, you've been decieved. That erroneous old wives tale has long been disproved. I feel sorry for the one who only uses such a small portion of his brain.

Evolution DOES exist. At the very least on a small scale. Micro-evolution cannot be disputed. As for macro-evolution, I have no real proof, beyond a viable theory, so I do not take a position.

For God, I have proof of His existance more than anything in this world. Soon enough, I'll be able to share it in the same way it's been shared with me.

-Justin

[Dagger]

Scientists believe that the most primitive cells began to develop around 3 million years ago. More advanced [i]cells[/i] didn't even appear until 1.5 million years later. Isn't that enough time for sophisticated organelles to evolve?

Animals, for the most part, cease evolving when they find an evolutionary "niche"-- that is, when they're developed to the degree that they can survive competition and predation without dying out. That's why some species seem to have stopped evolving.

~Dagger~

[Drix D'Zanth]

Firstly, I'd like to address TN's behavior. Seriously, lay off. You can't prove that God [I]doesn't[/I] exist, bud. Secondly, most of the evolutionary examples you are placing are between DIFFERENT species. People, we don?t really know if this small horse-like creature died off, extinct. We don?t know if it is a common ancestor to anything.

Secondly, according to most evolutionary ?facts?, humans had evolved from the chimpanzee. Yes, the chimpanzee. I know we share almost 98% of our DNA with a Chimp, however, we share 75% of our DNA in common with a blue-green algae. DNA is a horrible determinate in evolutionary progress, as it is impossible to determine exactly what has evolved, or what advantages arise from it. Secondly, all DNA in EVERY life from is Adenine, Thymine, Guanine, and Cortisol (I believe). Because every creature uses the same nucleotides, it?s [B]inevitable[/B] that we share similar DNA (how many combinations are there.. think about it).

In order to believe in natural selection, or other mechanisms of macro-evolution, you MUST believe it applies to all major examples of life, including the original conception. If you think evolution just ?kicked in? sometime after we had complex organisms, you might as well stop posting on this thread.

[quote] [B]Originally posted by Terra [/B]
Let's see *digs out what she learned in biochemistry last year*. There's been an experiment done in which the four gases postulated to be necessary for life (CH3, water vapor, ammonia, and hydrogen gas, if anyone cared) were put into a container and provided with energy (UV, or a spark, or whatever). It formed this black gunk, and within the gunk they discovered amino acids, which are the basic building blocks of proteins, and the things that probably made up the first cell. I guess what this means is that provided those things were on Earth and were given some form of energy (from the sun perhaps), it's very possible from that formed the first amino acids and from there, the first cell. [/quote]

Amino acids are just the START of organic cataclysms to form some discernable organism. Think about it, proteins and the amino acids coordinate most of cell structure. In order to arrange amino acids into applicable chains, you must have some sort of RNA or transcription protein. DNA cannot even be created without the help of protein. DNA cannot replicate without some sort of protein to replicate it.

This all goes back to the chicken and egg. Without a subsidiary base of proteins, DNA cannot sustain itself. Without DNA, proteins cannot be created, and are effectively useless. You could get a vat of MILLIONS of amino acids, wait millions of years, and they couldn?t possibly create even the most basic cell structures.

[QUOTE] [B]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/B]
There are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of species on this planet and even more sub-species, and you actually though he did all that in 7 days or whatever? [/QUOTE]

Why, yes I do! It?s not any more or any less unbelievable than believing a single celled organism suddenly came together in the PERFECT proportions to sustain itself, in a puddle of goo. While we are on the ?first? cell, let?s talk about your previous point. You said that mutation doesn?t necessarily provide the drive towards evolution?
[QUOTE] [B]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/B]
Evolution doesn't happen to everything. It doesn't go "ok, this species gets a possitive evolution, this one gets a negative".... The term evolution nearly means a possitive growth... It's a pick and choose sort of thing. It doesn't happen to everything.

Evolution (n.) A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form.

Mutation (n.) The act or process of being altered or changed.

While they are similar, mutation, I tend to think, is something that happens much faster. (Ie: If I pour toxic chemicals on you, it would mutate your cells, not evolve them.)

Evolution has happened.... Some elephants used to be the size of horses. Horses used to be the size of your left foot. Dragonflys used to be 20 times the size they are now. If you don't believe me, look it up. Human skull shave significantlt changed shape as we've grown over the last 2 million years. These are examples of evolution. They aren't quite as big as evolutioon from ape to man... which I guess is what you mean by macro-evolution.... evolving from one species to the next step (ie: another species)

Whether you believe in the evolution from ape to man, there's simply no doubt that apes and humans are very similar to each other and that we are probably related somewhere down the line, wherever that may be.

And being accustomed to heat or cold isn't micro-evolution... thats adaptation... something a little different from evolution. Usually has to do with your environment. (ie: wheatear)[/QUOTE]

According to the most basic principles of evolution, it can only be DRIVEN by mutation. No species can change its genetic chemistry purposely without destroying itself. Mutations during conception (which do occur, however rare) are the only way a species can change. Genetic mutation occurs without rhyme or reason. It is random, and MOST mutations are harmful to an individual, killing it.

Did you see a horse-sized creature turn into an elephant? Sorry, you saw a picture of some extinct creature?s skeleton, and some scientist jabbering on about how it was an elephant descendant. So it looked like an elephant, or a horse? Maybe it died because it wasn?t as good as the elephant or horse. Human skulls have varied in the last two thousand years, Chris, even amongst other nations. This is microevolution, or variation in the species. Some people have wide set eyes, some people have larger noses. It?s all passing down traits. However, there is no proof that they were different species. Ever seen the Australopithecus? It?s a fairly vague collections of some bones, only three plate shaped bones are all that scientists have of it?s ?head? and it?s heralded as the ?missing link?, please.. excuse me while I go plug in ?reality?.

Also, according to the randomness of genetic mutation, the driving force behind any and ALL evolutionary ?adaptation?; it DOES happen to every creature. And, your little line about adaptation is microevolution. I think you are misinformed on the difference between micro, and macro.
Evolution is flawed at it?s most basic level. Unless some random mutation happened to somehow drive a single-celled organism to replicate, there wouldn?t be really any reason. It has no competition, no environment to adapt to, as being conceived from NOTHING for no reason is most definitely proof enough that the organism could survive. Secondly, there is no reason to believe that the single-celled organism should survive? the chances of one organism forming from nothing are STAGGERING (the average lifespan of such a simple organism is rarely enough to replicate it?s genetic material, if it [b]could[/b]), so there?s no reason OTHER micro-organisms should have formed.

Then take into consideration:
-The perfect positioning from our sun.
-the perfect amount of gasses
-Water

Did these fairly random occurrences, perfectly shaped into one evolutionary breakthrough? Sorry, something or SOMEONE had a hand in this. Thusly, I believe in Intelligent Design.

[QUOTE] [B]Originally posted by Mitch[/B]
Darwin's theory of Natural Selection is one of the most beautiful theories I have seen...and I wouldn't even call it much of a theory any longer. It's pretty much easy to see.

Survival of the fittest is seen all over. In economics, Darwinists are those that belive in the surviving of the fittest. And history shows most of this...showing Rockafeller and his Stand Oil Company either crushing his competitors or buying them out like little toys.

It's even happening today.

So that said, it's obviously factual, in some part, what evolution has showed. And sometimes things just happen. I myself don't boggle myself with probabilities and "how this could happens," but much rather, I see that it has happened. What's the point of knowing the probabilities when it's happened anyways? It doesn't help anything, really. More or less just shows that things...as unlikely as they can be...happen.[/QUOTE]

Darwin?s natural selection basically could never happen WITHOUT genetic mutations, in order to support MACROevolution. It does however support microevolution, and this is easily enough proven. If a cat species jumps higher than another cat species, it will probably survive! Will this eventually evolve the cat species into a totally new, efficient species? Nope.

Wow, I didn?t think [I]fact[/I] could be argued with.. Hmmmm shrug.

People, realize that evolution is just taking FACTUAL evidence, pieces of bone, or extinct creatures, and trying to link them together! Evolution and Intelligent Design use the same information, it?s just the application that differs. Scientists are just trying to explain the world, what they don?t realize is that all the evidence in the world cannot prove what cannot be tested.

[QUOTE] [B]Originally posted by Dagger IX1[/B]
Scientists believe that the most primitive cells began to develop around 3 million years ago. More advanced cells didn't even appear until 1.5 million years later. Isn't that enough time for sophisticated organelles to evolve?

Animals, for the most part, cease evolving when they find an evolutionary "niche"-- that is, when they're developed to the degree that they can survive competition and predation without dying out. That's why some species seem to have stopped evolving.[/QUOTE]

Ok, let?s get some actual substantial evidence for or against evolution please? Stuff like this? this is not good. The FIRST cell came around 3 million years ago, and dinosaurs died off about 65 million years ago. So what does that make dinosaurs? I think you should actually research this topic before stating your opinion, please. I don?t suggest you continue to post on the thread without knowing what you are talking about.

Now, I?m not saying God didn?t do something, shape SOMETHING. I think God have molded the earth to his will, shaping and destroying what he wanted, then leaving it to it?s beautiful mechanisms. It?s impossible to believe that species wont change a bit, and species don?t go extinct. However, I don?t condone the belief that this was all some RANDOM occurrence, especially in reference to humans. God may have had a sequence of order in the Seven days he worked his magic (what is a day to God.. is it 24 hours? Who?s to say). But I have as much faith in my principle belief as evolutionary theorists have in theirs. That?s what?s required: Faith.


I hate to bring up God, but it?s kind of required, as it?s the only model opposing evolution. I?ll write more later as I get the time.

[Adahn]

Let me just say, Drix, that I'm glad I don't have to debate against you. I was going to respond to some of the posts, but, now I don't have to. I like the points you have taken, and am in eager anticipation of intelligent rebuttal, though it will probably prove futile. As for Dagger, I hope you meant "billion" when you said million, otherwise Drix's response should prove most appropriate. I think Poisontongue needs to get in on this action. I love the absolute mutilation of each other's posts, it's the best way for observers to see both sides.

[DeathBug]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Justin [/i]
[B]

As for the Bible's infallibility: If you believe God can bring the Word to men, can you not also believe that He can protect it from those same, weak, men?

[/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, I know He can, but I doubt He would. It would be the same as a parent giving their child the answers on their homework. If they want they child to learn, the child must figure out the concepts themselves, with the parental unit providing occasional guidence.

Anyway, I think that's all I'm going to say on this, because I've gotten off-topic, unless someone can explain the bat thing.

[Transtic Nerve]

Me lay off? lol You should have told her before she started blurting out all that BS. She completely disregarded any scientific basis and just threw out her blinded by faith opinion. So you know what? I threw it right back at her. If you don't like it, deal with me personally. I don't appreciate being told how to respond to someone who completely offended me. When you are in my position, you can tell me what to do.

As for your responce to my post, I am not saying all this happened without the help of God. I just say that I don't think God did it all. I think he gave certain characteristics to certain things, giving them the ability to do what he fully intended on them to do. Therefor my reason for saying that God gave the ability of evolution to some species.

And no, I'm not misinformed between micro and macro... I think I understand prefixes... adaptation is not microevolution or it would be called MICROEVOLUTION, and it's not, therefor, it's not. I don't think adaptation is a form of evolution because evolving tends to be permanent while adaptations change.

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]
And no, I'm not misinformed between micro and macro... I think I understand prefixes... adaptation is not microevolution or it would be called MICROEVOLUTION, and it's not, therefor, it's not. I don't think adaptation is a form of evolution because evolving tends to be permanent while adaptations change. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'll be addressing the issue with the "faith blinded" person via PM, Chris, so we don't drag it onto the boards.

Using evolving and permanent in the same sentence is oxymoronic. In lamens, you're saying that "changing" is "permanent". Then you say "adpations" "change". So adaptions are permanent? No, microevolution is VARIATION within a species, whether you call that genetic fluke, or adaptation, I don't care. Microevolution is any change within a species that does NOT change the species of an individual (i.e. it can still reproduce with members of it's species). Therefore adaption IS microevolution, just a form of it, a form of the genetic change.

I'll reiterate once more. Species don't just CHANGE to their environments. A bear doesn't suddenly GROW more hair because it's cold, no, it's genetics may change a bit through a mutation. This mutation gives the bear more fur. The extra fur helps the bear survive, the bear passes it onto its young. This is microevolution, considered "adaption", even though it is indirect adaption. Get it now? I'm going by scientific definition here, Chris, the lamen's dictionary definition refers to the typical term ("to evovle" is a verb, perfectly acceptable when not even pertaining to biology, just means "to change"). I'm talking about the Evolutionary Model here (this is more in reference to your FIRST post, because it seems like you're riding the momentum of it).


Oh, to explain the bat thing...
The point that person was trying to get across was that sonar requires EXTREMELY complex workings, precise organs. There's no trial and error in the formation of a Bat's sonar. Which means, by the evolutionary model, either the sonar just mutated within a VERY short period of time (in order to be effective) just appearing, and the bat passes it to it's offspring (this is exremely unprobable, but it seems perfectly acceptable to evolutionary theorists). OR, the bat slowly evolved sonar, which is unlikely, unprobable, and usless until all the correct organs fall into place. So, he's just saying, either the bat is a one in a trillion fluke of evolution, or evolution has a big gaping hole in its "theory".

[Justin]

Lol, Chris...how can we tell her what and what not to say before she even posts?

In response to DeathBug: I doubt that would be the case very seriously, lol. Firstly, because I've seen the Bible fulfilled [i]first hand[/i]. Secondly, to let the human race walk around with the wrong information would be practically damning them right then and there. And God is not in the business of damnation.

What was that? That's right. God doesn't damn people, people damn themselves. Let me explain: [b]No one can live a sin-fee life.[/b] Not me, not you, not my pastor, not your pastor, not even if you were the most anointed human on the face of this earth.

No one is a Christian because they pursue a life of purity. Instead, people pursue a life of purity [i]because they are Christian[/i]. Christianity is about God's grace, mercy, and love in sending Jesus to live, die, and live again for our sake. And only though accepting Him, and His divine sacrifice and [i]pursuing[/i] a pure life can one be a true Christian. [b][i]That[/i][/b] is the Gospel!

-Justin

[Mitch]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]
Darwin?s natural selection basically could never happen WITHOUT genetic mutations, in order to support MACROevolution. It does however support microevolution, and this is easily enough proven. If a cat species jumps higher than another cat species, it will probably survive! Will this eventually evolve the cat species into a totally new, efficient species? Nope.

Wow, I didn?t think [I]fact[/I] could be argued with.. Hmmmm shrug.

People, realize that evolution is just taking FACTUAL evidence, pieces of bone, or extinct creatures, and trying to link them together! Evolution and Intelligent Design use the same information, it?s just the application that differs. Scientists are just trying to explain the world, what they don?t realize is that all the evidence in the world cannot prove what cannot be tested.



Ok, let?s get some actual substantial evidence for or against evolution please? Stuff like this? this is not good. The FIRST cell came around 3 million years ago, and dinosaurs died off about 65 million years ago. So what does that make dinosaurs? I think you should actually research this topic before stating your opinion, please. I don?t suggest you continue to post on the thread without knowing what you are talking about.

Now, I?m not saying God didn?t do something, shape SOMETHING. I think God have molded the earth to his will, shaping and destroying what he wanted, then leaving it to it?s beautiful mechanisms. It?s impossible to believe that species wont change a bit, and species don?t go extinct. However, I don?t condone the belief that this was all some RANDOM occurrence, especially in reference to humans. God may have had a sequence of order in the Seven days he worked his magic (what is a day to God.. is it 24 hours? Who?s to say). But I have as much faith in my principle belief as evolutionary theorists have in theirs. That?s what?s required: Faith.


I hate to bring up God, but it?s kind of required, as it?s the only model opposing evolution. I?ll write more later as I get the time. [/B][/QUOTE]

[size=1] Obviously it should be noted that I didn't say anything about mutations not having to happen in order for Natural Selection to work...it should be obvious. If by random chance a species is able to conceptualize a mutated oragnism which has some special traits, bad or not, then tha same species of that organism is either going to surpass and live on while that one dies due to its hinderances..or it will live on, and pass on its genes, making little tweaks here and there as more mutations occur. This is why if someone only gets a few more chromosomes during replication...then they are totally messed up: that's a negative, and that is why the die most often from it, and are fail-safed to not be able to replicate. How this fail-safe came to be, I do not know...but it's obvious to see that it does what it does.

So this is what Natural Selection is...those that are given some special mutation, and somehow, in even smaller occurances, are able to survive, further on their genes, and then it keeps going on and on and on. Survival of the fittest is a simple way to see it.

As for having faith in evolution and God. God himself, as far as I am concerned, isn't based on purely [i]FACTUAL[/i] evidence, whereas evolution IS. That said, the only true evidence I see, and still I see it as a facade, is the bible.

That being the factual understanding...believing in evolution and believing in God aren't comparable upon this level which you seem to place them. I do understand that it's easy to see there could be a God...but there isn't purely factual evidence. Therefore believing in subjects of science, such as evolution, is not faith.[/size]

[Baron Samedi]

Drix- In relation to your post Re: Positioning of sun etc., think of all the planets that [i]aren't[/i] positioned correctly for (what we know to be the conditions for survival). Now, we know very few planets and systems, but we know that their are many [i]millions[/i] more [i]at least[/i], so, does that not suggest, that despite the awesome odds of it happening, there is another planet out their with similar conditions? That there is enough planets to make the odds, not so bad as they seem?

Of [i]course[/i] this is all theoretical, but then again, so is yours isn't it? We will never be able to know these things, and this discussion, whilst preparing me for future studies, is vastly ineffective, as no-one is going to change their opinion, and all opinions have been stated.

[Heaven's Cloud]

[color=#993333] There is no need for me to debate evolution because everything I know about the subject has already been discussed in this thread. For the last several years I have come to terms with the idea that there probably is a greater presence, regardless of whether or not evolution fits into the puzzle. I came to this conclusion after being presented just one scenario, hopefully I can present it in a satisfactory way here?

If you look back at what humanity has accomplished in the last four thousand years, it is astounding to see what we have created, and the technology that we can manipulate. Imagine a species similar to ours that was given a billion years to evolve. What could they become? The possibilities are impossible to fathom. Could they create life? Could they build a Universe? Could they create the human soul? The answer is: who knows? To entirely discount evolution because of the flaws in its principal is close minded, at the same time, it is equally foolish to disregard theories of a supreme being because of evidence discovered to support evolution.

I know that is a pretty moderate position to take, not unlike most of the opinions that have been presented here, but it surprises me how vehemently people argue a point that they cannot prove or even hope to validate. I also think that it is funny that most people don?t understand how their electrical systems and plumbing work in their own homes but they don?t stress over it nearly as much as they fret over the origin of our existence?and the funniest thing is that I am as guilty of doing it as anyone else.[/color]

[Mitch]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]Drix- In relation to your post Re: Positioning of sun etc., think of all the planets that [i]aren't[/i] positioned correctly for (what we know to be the conditions for survival). Now, we know very few planets and systems, but we know that their are many [i]millions[/i] more [i]at least[/i], so, does that not suggest, that despite the awesome odds of it happening, there is another planet out their with similar conditions? That there is enough planets to make the odds, not so bad as they seem?

Of [i]course[/i] this is all theoretical, but then again, so is yours isn't it? We will never be able to know these things, and this discussion, whilst preparing me for future studies, is vastly ineffective, as no-one is going to change their opinion, and all opinions have been stated. [/B][/QUOTE]

[size=1] Well, according to John Quincy Adams, "Whoever tells the best story wins."

And it's obvious someone has told the best story, with most Americans being Christians these days. So there's your answer as to how things stand to most people's opinions.

As for Heavens Cloud's ideas...it makes logical sense. It's obvious there has to be some other life out there...if you look at the chances of our existence, then you realize that if the universe really is as universal as it seems to point its hand at, then there must be some civilization which has been around for quite some time.[/size]

[Adahn]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]Drix- In relation to your post Re: Positioning of sun etc., think of all the planets that [i]aren't[/i] positioned correctly for (what we know to be the conditions for survival). Now, we know very few planets and systems, but we know that their are many [i]millions[/i] more [i]at least[/i], so, does that not suggest, that despite the awesome odds of it happening, there is another planet out their with similar conditions? That there is enough planets to make the odds, not so bad as they seem?

Of [i]course[/i] this is all theoretical, but then again, so is yours isn't it? We will never be able to know these things, and this discussion, whilst preparing me for future studies, is vastly ineffective, as no-one is going to change their opinion, and all opinions have been stated. [/B][/QUOTE]

Do you think before your fingers move? This discussion is anything [i]but[/i] innefective. If pondering that which we cannot currently understand is innefective, then all of technology is the result of innefectiveness. The greatest thing about being human is the ability to perceive beyond our immediate reality.

As for opinions not being able to be changed, I cannot even begin to describe how ludicrous that sounds. If there is ONE thing everyone has, it's an opinion, [i]and the power to change it[/i]. I suggest you put a little thought into your own opinions. If you think nobody else can change theirs, then do you believe you don't have the power to change [i]yours[/i]? I remember a quote from 7th or 8th grade, though I don't remember who said it. [i]"Simple minds discuss people, average minds discuss events, and great minds discuss ideas."[/i] If you don't question your own opinions, how strong can they truly be?

[Vash's girl]

Transic, buddy, didn't mean to offend ya. My apologies. I believe what I want to and you can believe what you want to. That's cool, I didn't come to get all you people to become christians. I'm not trying to shove my opinons down your throat. OK, so chill out, love ya ;)

[John]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1]
And it's obvious someone has told the best story, with most Americans being Christians these days. So there's your answer as to how things stand to most people's opinions.
[/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Whoooooooaaa, just one second. Most Americans are Chirstians? Now, being as new as I am in this forum, I don't know whether you're an American or not, but most Americans are certainly [i]not[/i] Christians. True, we have more Christians than any other place in the world, but we're far, far from being the majority. Far, far, far. Farfarfarfar.


[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve[/i]
[B]There are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of species on this planet and even more sub-species, and you actually though he did all that in 7 days or whatever? Of course not.
[/B][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth[/i]
[B]Why, yes I do! It?s not any more or any less unbelievable than believing a single celled organism suddenly came together in the PERFECT proportions to sustain itself, in a puddle of goo. While we are on the ?first? cell, let?s talk about your previous point. You said that mutation doesn?t necessarily provide the drive towards evolution?
[/B][/QUOTE]

We don't really know whether it was 7 days at all. At least not 7 days to us, for 1,000 years passes in the blink of an eye in God's time; so the 7 days could've been 7 actual rotations of the Earth or any amount of time. That [i]would[/i] give time enough for evolution. Also, the order that things were created in was fish, birds, beasts, then humans (or to the best of my recollection.) I guess that could easily hint toward evolution. But I, personally, don't quite believe in evolution because that's the way I was brought up. If it [i]is[/i] true, then it really wouldn't matter to or surprise me anyway. But I guess the idea that the God of the Universe, in all his infinite power and wisdom, could create a universe [i]is[/i] pretty distant, now isn't it? [i]Especially[/i] in only seven days, even though he himself created time. :rolleyes: I guess I forgot that God isn't any more powerful than a human. We [i]are[/i] the most magnificent beings in the universe, now aren't we? [B]Nothing's[/B] better than us, right? Riiiiiiiight.

[Drix D'Zanth]

Ok, I'm going to pick this one apart a bit. *cracks knuckes*
Before I start, remember, I respect your opinion, even if I don't agree with it :D


[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1] Obviously it should be noted that I didn't say anything about mutations not having to happen in order for Natural Selection to work...it should be obvious.
[/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

That?s why I said, "when pertaining to MACROevolution". I didn?t say Natural Selection wouldn?t exist. Of course it would, but it wouldn?t be proving ANYTHING without variation within a species.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1]
If by random chance a species is able to conceptualize a mutated oragnism which has some special traits, bad or not, then tha same species of that organism is either going to surpass and live on while that one dies due to its hinderances..or it will live on, and pass on its genes, making little tweaks here and there as more mutations occur. This is why if someone only gets a few more chromosomes during replication...then they are totally messed up: that's a negative, and that is why the die most often from it, and are fail-safed to not be able to replicate. How this fail-safe came to be, I do not know...but it's obvious to see that it does what it does. [/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Firstly, the number of chromosomes never changes through mutation, the chromosome itself changes through mutation (during DNA replication usually). Secondly, you happened to inadvertently point out an inherent flaw in Natural Selection. Evolution tends to occur over small bits and pieces, as per definition, however with such a large margin of error in genetic mutation, combined with the fact that even the helpful mutations may not ensure the survival of an individual (because they tend to be so minor or subtle); Natural Selection pertaining to macroevolution is flawed. There is no guarantee, it?s all random. I don?t believe creatures like this came into being through random events.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1]
So this is what Natural Selection is...those that are given some special mutation, and somehow, in even smaller occurances, are able to survive, further on their genes, and then it keeps going on and on and on. Survival of the fittest is a simple way to see it. [/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Your right, but this still doesn?t explain why Bats have sonar :toothy:

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1]
As for having faith in evolution and God. God himself, as far as I am concerned, isn't based on purely [i]FACTUAL[/i] evidence, whereas evolution IS. That said, the only true evidence I see, and still I see it as a facade, is the bible. [/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Oh, no they take the same facts. Take a tree, for instance. Evolution says the tree evolved into that specific species through random occurrences. Intelligent design states that some higher power created this species of tree for a reason. The fact remains: there?s a tree.

size=1]
That being the factual understanding...believing in evolution and believing in God aren't comparable upon this level which you seem to place them. I do understand that it's easy to see there could be a God...but there isn't purely factual evidence. Therefore believing in subjects of science, such as evolution, is not faith.[/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Evolution isn?t purely factual either. In fact, it?s taking the SAME facts, and wielding a system to them . Believing microorganisms were created by some higher power, believing that god shaped some sort of evolution, or believing that the microorganism evolved through random genetic mutation (and nearly impossible odds in it?s very conception) all require faith. Sorry :-\ , believing in evolution is as faith-based as believing in any religion, the fact remains: You can?t prove it.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B] Drix- In relation to your post Re: Positioning of sun etc., think of all the planets that aren't positioned correctly for (what we know to be the conditions for survival). Now, we know very few planets and systems, but we know that their are many millions more at least, so, does that not suggest, that despite the awesome odds of it happening, there is another planet out their with similar conditions? That there is enough planets to make the odds, not so bad as they seem? [/B] [/QUOTE]

Hehe, think about the odds. If this planet were tipped off it?s axis maybe a few relative degrees closer to the sun, we?d fry. Vice versa, and we?d freeze. Not only that, but somehow we have the perfect mix of oxygen, hydrogen, and carbon to support life (if it evolved , or if created, this applies to both). No, I don?t believe another planet has the same conditions as this? even in our vast expanse. I don?t think God had only needed to create us, but I?m not going to say I know for sure! You don?t , neither do I, but we both know that at the present moment the only habitable planet is earth (according to life system standards (i.e. it?s got more than a fossilized microbe on it, maybe god stuck one on mars for kicks ;) ).

And, well, if you want to believe in Aliens.. Go right ahead. I?m content believing we are the only living planet in the universe. I don?t consider us alone, we have more companionship than we ever need (through each other and religion). The odds that we even exist under the mechanics are staggering enough for me to not believe in aliens

Edit: Circuit/J before critisizing my post, read it please. I stated that 7 days in the eyes of god may be unknown to human measures of time. ( "God may have had a sequence of order in the Seven days he worked his magic what is a day to God.. is it 24 hours? Who?s to say")

Then you say 7 rotations of the earth? Yes, I know the current model of evolution definately has PLENTY of time to create our planet as it is in seven years! "That would give time enough for evolution" ~ Circuit/J :rolleyes:

Lastly, as it seems you for some reason decided against thinking before you posted, I'll pose a question for you. This one will make you think, ready? Why would the human ear, a structurally complex body part, have any reason to evolve whatsoever without it being some evolutionary fluke?

[Dagger]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]Ok, let?s get some actual substantial evidence for or against evolution please? Stuff like this? this is not good. The FIRST cell came around 3 million years ago, and dinosaurs died off about 65 million years ago. So what does that make dinosaurs? I think you should actually research this topic before stating your opinion, please. I don?t suggest you continue to post on the thread without knowing what you are talking about. [/B][/QUOTE]

Oy. I need to get more sleep.

Sorry about that.... I definitely meant to type 3 billion years. I was going to dig out my old biology book, but I took the lazy route and looked it up on a website with ridiculously small print. So you have my deepest apologies. That was a stupid error.

~Dagger~