• 0
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Question

Posted · Report post

In discussions related to religion, the topic of evolution often arises, and theists sometimes state that they do not "believe in" evolution. It is curious how often the topic arises considering it does nothing to support a religious position (even if evolution were a load of made up nonsense it would not imply the existence of God or gods). But so much disinformation is spread by religions to discredit evolution that a worrying number of people seem content to be ignorant of it. I despair every time someone claims not to have been "descended from monkeys". Humans are not descended from monkeys, though we have a common ancestor. Comments like that betray a deep level of ignorance, and a desire to view humans as being essentially different to other animals, motivated by pride and flying in the face of all evidence.

There is no excuse for ignorance. Education is only a threat to your beliefs if your beliefs are wrong, in which case you'd be better off without them. So I'd like to offer a starting point to get people thinking about evolution. I doubt that I can do justice to the topic, but anything's better than nothing.

Is evolution mere hypothesis, or is it proven? The answer to that depends on how much evidence you want to consider something proven. Consider the force of gravity. Do we have complete proof that it exists? Every time I drop an object it falls to the floor, but what does that prove?

It could be, for example, that objects are moved by random forces, which have given the impression of the existence of gravity by an incredibly unlikely chance. Being random, they may not necessarily continue to do so, so don't be surprised if things start flying around the room. However, the huge improbability of this makes it a poor explanation.

Or it could be that whenever I drop an object, God pulls it to the floor because He wants to. In which case, similarly, there is no reason to assume that he should continue to do so. He may change his mind at any moment. Likewise, this is a highly unlikely explanation because if God was merely exercising free will to move objects around it is unlikely that this would manifest itself in a behaviour so consistent as to appear to be a universal force with clear mathematically defined magnitude and direction. The other problem with that hypothesis is that it requires the existence of a god, which makes it a very complicated hypothesis indeed, and raises all sorts of awkward questions about how such a god could come to exist, why such a god would be doing what he is doing, the mechanisms by which he operates and so on.

So, the existence of gravity is not the only explanation for what we observe, but it is astronomically more likely than either of the above ones.

Evolution is supported in the same way, in that our observations are completely consistent with the theory. It's a tall order to give reasons why evolution is consistent with observation. The problem is knowing where to begin (and the other problem is knowing when to stop as this could be a very long post). We could start with the fact that our DNA structure is incredibly similar to that of all animals on this planet, as are larger structures like cells. Our skeletal formation, bodily functions and internal organs are incredibly similar to that of all mammals, allowing for deformation. Either that's one heck of a coincidence, or there's a suggestion of a common origin there. Based on this much alone, to suggest that human beings are not animals (since we have more developed brains) makes no more sense than a claim that a peacock cannot be a bird because it has such elaborate tail feathers.

And then there is the grouping of species at various levels which have differing degrees of commonality. All birds, for example, share common traits that differ from all mammals. But both share sets of common traits with, for example, all vertebrates. This is a clear indication of lineage, but we can look a lot deeper. We can trace lineage at the level of individual genes, and throughout the entire spectrum of living species the family tree is consistent.

Like the force of gravity, we can infer the process of evolution from the consistency of its results. But, unlike gravity, we can also observe and even interact with the underlying mechanisms that cause the process.

The process of mutation and genetic inheritance is undeniable. Humans have manipulated it successfully over millennia with selective breeding of plants and animals (including human beings). Nowadays we understand the mechanisms that cause this, in minute detail. We have also studied natural selection in the wild and how species adapt to change, and even branch off into new species. Evolution is happening, right now, all around us. That much is fact, proven to the greatest extent that anything can be. Unless our whole experience of life is some kind of fake illusion, or the whole thing is a big conspiracy, evolution happens.

Ah, but how do we know that evolution happened in the past as well? Nobody has yet envisaged a reasonable explanation of how we could have come to this point otherwise. Then there is the aforementioned commonality of physical traits and genes that caused them, the huge, well-established genetic map of species, which corresponds both geographically and chronologically with an extensive fossil record, which in itself gives us an amazingly complete picture, enabling us to trace our ancestry back millions of years. It all ties in together. There is a huge amount of data and it all fits.

Darwin understood evolution from observing the process and its effects on a medium scale. In Darwin's time, the theory was accepted by the scientific community despite flying in the face of religious belief (no small feat in those days). It was elegant, simple, and self-evident. Almost a hundred and fifty years later nobody has been able to pick a hole in it, and not for lack of trying. In that time we have come to understand so much more, far more information has been unearthed about present species, fossils, and the mechanisms of genetics (which are now understood on a molecular level). A vast amount of new information has come to light. And it all still fits.

But does that prove that we came to be this way by means of evolution? Of course not! God could have planted all the fossil evidence, arranged every living thing so as to look like it evolved, and even put all the processes in place so that evolution would have gotten us to this point, were it not for the fact that God actually put us here instead. He may be trying to fool us, just as he may be pulling objects to the floor to make us think gravity exists. The complete consistency of the data may all be just a big trick. But it's not very likely, is it?

Here I'll appeal for help from other braindenners, to provide links to websites or books for those who wish to find out how evolution works.

Here's one which seems to do a good job of taking it from first principles.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

86 answers to this question

  • 0

Posted · Report post

Uhm is that iterate and iterate again - confusing iterate/reiterate the dictionary needs tidying up there

I meant say it again, but clarify what you meant, 'cos I was confused. :P

So you not serious then

too bad that was looking interesting on paper.

Oh no, I'm completely serious. You'll have to excuse my somewhat joking attitude. It's meant to be taken lightly; it's just kind of way to mask my frustrations. In all honestly, I have no idea how to get the money to fund any of this, which, sucks. Right now I'm 14, have no sort of formal education that looks good on paper, and I'm unemployed. A.k.a., Ican'tdoafudgingthing syndrome. I'll totally pursue this every/any chance I get, but I think it'll be at least another 4 years until any of this has even a chance of going into action. Help/support appreciated though. :D

there is more fun to life than that - just think what it wld be like to snowbaord into the back of a truck and laugh about it???

:D Hey - no using my memories against me! I'm not saying life isn't good, I totally love my life. I've done so many fun things and I've still got so much time to do many more, I'm just saying, what I do doesn't matter. It matters for humanity, but not the planet. Humanity's eventually going to die out, so in the end, it doesn't really matter. And.. that kind of bothers me.

no need to iterate/reiterate now - I was after your deeper theory about it so I could 'diss' it - but I can see you pulled my leg!

Aww, you were going to diss my theory? That's not very nice. :( I'm open to criticism, but.. don't be too harsh? :D?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted (edited) · Report post

Let me just state right off the bat that I don't believe in Evolution. I know of several holes picked in this theory, and there are many more that I have either forgotten or never heard. Lets look at the origins of life on earth. Lets not go before the point of matter since there is really nothing that we can know from then. But after the earth was, then we can have some more definite guesses. I am not to clear on the most excepted theory in evolution about how life began, but aside from the unbelievable improbability of even the simplest chromosomes being formed from random molecules floating around and all the organelles needed for this cell to live, how could it survive and reproduce? Possibly asexually, but even if it did that, how, after there are many asexual organisms, could they some how become organisms that reproduce sexually. There are so many organs, cell parts, and other building blocks that serve no purpose if they are even the tiniest bit different. Also, since you insist that evolution is still happening, why isn't life being generated anew? There are many, many, many more unanswered questions and downright impossibilities in this theory.

Although you have already been warned against Intelligent design, I believe that there is some merit in the theory. Here is a fairly in depth article about it. I know that it is long, but if you believe that Intelligent design is stupid, this might change your opinion.

You don't need to believe in evolution for it to be real ;)

While with God you need to believe that he exists otherwise he wouldn't because the idea of God was created by people :)

Evolution happened on it's own... people were merely observing and putting all the facts together, of course there will always be unanswered questions..

Think about it why would God create the world like it evolved instead of just randomly creating living beings?

In order to understand how life was created you need to know biochemistry, molecular genetics and population genetics just to ask questions (not to make conclusions) and you are making your assumptions based on what? You are just probably repeating the same questions that other narrow minded people with no basic knowledge of the subject are asking!

Let me help you with that one - IT'S ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE that a chromosome can be created from random molecules!

Life was created and became more complex in time... it didn't happen over night and you need specific conditions to generate life anew. Those conditions were FAR from perfect even back then when life was created, but somewhere, somehow in a tiny pocket of optimum conditions life was ignited.

One more question don't you think that it's highly improbable that an unbroken chain of ancestors (and I don't mean 2000 years but millions) eventually produced you? What were the odds for all of them to stay alive to reproduce and bring up that offspring to do the same thing. How many obstacles they had to overcome for you to sit in front of your computer and bash the very same process that enables you to live your life right now? Think about it! ;)

Edited by andromeda
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

I'm just saying, what I do doesn't matter. It matters for humanity, but not the planet. Humanity's eventually going to die out, so in the end, it doesn't really matter. And.. that kind of bothers me.
What you do matters to you. And since your own experience is the only experience you will ever experience, why should it matter whether what you do matters beyond that? The planet doesn't give a hoot about anything anyway. I don't matter. I don't mind. (is that mind over matter, or never mind over doesn't matter? I dunno)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

There are a few problems with this that I see.

#1 a trillion seems like a tad bit to small of a number here. a better number might be something like 1*1010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

0000000000000000000 (If it is even possible which I still have doubts about) and I am not quite sure where you get 10 million, but that seems a little bit to high to me, seeing as, to the best of my knowledge, we haven't seen one so far.

#2 In this argument, you assume that we have an infinite, or at least a very large amount of time, which is not necessarily true. Why should this earth, this solar system, or this universe exist for trillions of years?

#3 You are also assuming that anything that is possible will eventually happen, which is not true.

blink.gif A friend of mine had a baby last week. There you go.

Are you saying that babies being born is evolution?

Unanswered questions are the lifeblood of science. Scientist seek them out, and in such a complex field, you would hope to find a few questions currently unanswered. But downright impossibilities? Name one.

DNA arising from a random stew of molecules that can code for thousands of proteins with extremely small amount of errors.

I just get a blank screen there, so I'll have to stay out of that one for now. sad.gif

It should try and download a file. Anybody else having trouble downloading it?

First off, while the accuracy of the Drake Equation is debated, it does indicate that the possibility of life developing on other planets is not as unlikely as you seem to think. We already know of a lot of planets around other stars and I remember reading about a planet that appeared to share a number of traits with the Earth discovered a couple years ago, but I can't find the link right now. Suffice to say, I don't see the likelihood of life developing on other planets to be negligible (or even remote.)

As for the DNA aspect, there are numerous arguments and counter arguments, but fundamentally it is, in some form, the argument of "irreducible complexity." I liked one article I found previously refuting the argument (but I can't find it right now, <_< ) but I hope that this one will suffice in its stead: Reducible Mousetrap. The other argument that I read talked about how if you removed the clasp from a mousetrap, you may not have a very good mousetrap anymore, but you'd have a decent tie-clip and if you only had the base, you'd still have a working paper-weight. The point being, that while we don't necessarily know how it all came together and while it may seem irreducibly complex, with some imagination and conjecture, we can find other uses for portions of these things that allowed them to develop separately, and then, once all the pieces were assembled, the final product was possible.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

I meant say it again, but clarify what you meant, 'cos I was confused. :P

Okay - your theory brought into reality, coz if you were an alien and abducted someone from area 51 (where it won't be taken seriously and bides you time). Then I could understand where you are going with it. Otherwise no experiments on animals pls

Oh no, I'm completely serious. You'll have to excuse my somewhat joking attitude. It's meant to be taken lightly; it's just kind of way to mask my frustrations. In all honestly, I have no idea how to get the money to fund any of this, which, sucks. Right now I'm 14, have no sort of formal education that looks good on paper, and I'm unemployed. A.k.a., Ican'tdoafudgingthing syndrome. I'll totally pursue this every/any chance I get, but I think it'll be at least another 4 years until any of this has even a chance of going into action. Help/support appreciated though. :D

Well you can give up school and reproduce - that will save money . It's sounding a bit like the WWII experiments on an unfortunate race- you know Mengele ??

:D Hey - no using my memories against me! I'm not saying life isn't good, I totally love my life. I've done so many fun things and I've still got so much time to do many more, I'm just saying, what I do doesn't matter. It matters for humanity, but not the planet. Humanity's eventually going to die out, so in the end, it doesn't really matter. And.. that kind of bothers me.

Well we do our best and set examples to the rest. Basically you are a model for the future, your children. We are somehow compelled to gorge the planet and it's encouraged by free market 'cheapest is best for me'. Pay more and save more (planet). Buy cheap, pay more in the long run

oh and all is fair in love and war.

Aww, you were going to diss my theory? That's not very nice. :( I'm open to criticism, but.. don't be too harsh? :D?
Okay - but it does not sound like it has or should have any legs on it - hope you find a more humane (volunteer way - can babies volunteer?)

cant figure what i did with the quotes - hopefully the bold replies make sense

I fixed it

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

What you do matters to you. And since your own experience is the only experience you will ever experience, why should it matter whether what you do matters beyond that? The planet doesn't give a hoot about anything anyway. I don't matter. I don't mind. (is that mind over matter, or never mind over doesn't matter? I dunno)

Because I want to matter. It kills me to think that each of us only has a 70-year or so existence that means something. Even if we live on in memories, it's not like we can know about. Life's short and, frankly doesn't matter much. Well, it matters in large amounts. As a species thing. But beyond that, *shrug* it.. doesn't have much of an affect on me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

I don't feel like typing out all the quote tags again, so what LIS said is bolded, what I say is in purple.

Okay - your theory brought into reality, coz if you were an alien and abducted someone from area 51 (where it won't be taken seriously and bides you time). Then I could understand where you are going with it. Otherwise no experiments on animals pls

What difference does it make if I'm a human suggesting this or an alien?

If I find it necessary to experiment on animals, I will. I don't like the idea, and I don't like the idea of experimenting on humans, but for science, I will. It's a small sacrifice compared to the masses of people this will help.

Well you can give up school and reproduce - that will save money . It's sounding a bit like the WWII experiments on an unfortunate race- you know Mengele ??

..Dude, no. Knowledge is power, school is knowledge. A 14 year old bearing a child doesn't save money either, it causes problems. And kids are expensive from the complaints I get from adults. :P

This is totally different from WWII. In one really large sense, I won't fail. Muwhahaha.

Okay, only joking. I'm not doing this with bad intentions. I'm.. trying to help people.

Well we do our best and set examples to the rest. Basically you are a model for the future, your children. We are somehow compelled to gorge the planet and it's encouraged by free market 'cheapest is best for me'. Pay more and save more (planet). Buy cheap, pay more in the long run

oh and all is fair in love and war.

Okay, getting a bit lost here. How is this related?

Okay - but it does not sound like it has or should have any legs on it - hope you find a more humane (volunteer way - can babies volunteer?)

Super-human genius babies can. They'll be smart enough to realize what they're doing. :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Izzy - I go back to saying it is an awesome thought and the rest is going off topic - good luck with your experiment and yes stay at school - yes children can be expensive but the rewards are great too - but in your own time

and the good example to our children was a way to save the planet - re dying out of species - does not have too happen - are we willing it t0 happen?

big difference if your alien - it would be expected that they would be inquisitive - still not in favour of it though.

Uhmm - small sacrifice - how small and are you in the queue?

It is another topic to want to push evolution as opposed to believing in evolution.. I'll be there if you start it

Answered in different order - I should be in bed

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Because I want to matter. It kills me to think that each of us only has a 70-year or so existence that means something. Even if we live on in memories, it's not like we can know about. Life's short and, frankly doesn't matter much. Well, it matters in large amounts. As a species thing. But beyond that, *shrug* it.. doesn't have much of an affect on me.
I disagree that life is short and doesn't matter much. Life may be short if you're an unfortunate baby being experimented on by some mad scientist. But otherwise it's a pretty good length, just short enough that you are left wanting a bit more. But even if it were a lot longer it would still seem short compared to the huge amount of time (past and future) in which you are not alive.

Importance is relative. Your life matters, indeed as far as you're concerned it is the only thing that matters. So in a relative sense it is the most important thing there is. And yet you want it to matter even more? Sounds like you have a narcissistic personality disorder or something. ;) You have a nice little bit of time to create your own meaning and purpose before you get squashed like a bug. You are the center of your own universe. What else would you like your existence to mean? (seriously, do you wish to have a large impact on others? What will that do for you? When you're dead you'll still be dead. Everybody knows who Hitler was, but a fat lot of difference that makes to him)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

LIS, I can't tell whether you're serious or kidding around with me. :P But yeah, I'm pretty much spamming this thread. Going to start a new one in a bit. Tomorrow morning maybe, or in an hour or so if I decide to stay up. :)

Octopuppy, I just want there to be a reason for everything. As you're well aware of, I'm atheist, but that doesn't occasionally stop me from wishing the theists were right. It would be so awesome if there was a God, and all you had to do was live a good life and you get eternal happiness. I wish I could believe in that, I really do. But I can't, 'cos, well, I know it's all a load of bollocks. I guess everyone likes fairy tales, though. I think I've realized the meaning of life is to live and have fun, and while that's awesome and great, I still think it's really depressing that that's all there is to it. :(

Going to shut up now. Probably starting to sound a bit mental.. :(

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Or it could be that whenever I drop an object, God pulls it to the floor because He wants to. In which case, similarly, there is no reason to assume that he should continue to do so. He may change his mind at any moment. Likewise, this is a highly unlikely explanation because if God was merely exercising free will to move objects around it is unlikely that this would manifest itself in a behaviour so consistent as to appear to be a universal force with clear mathematically defined magnitude and direction. The other problem with that hypothesis is that it requires the existence of a god, which makes it a very complicated hypothesis indeed, and raises all sorts of awkward questions about how such a god could come to exist, why such a god would be doing what he is doing, the mechanisms by which he operates and so on.

First of all, where are you coming up with this idea the theists believe that "God excercises free will on gravity"? NO theists I know, nor myself, believe that is what is happening. Gravity is very real, and has little to nothing to do with evolution. God created gravity, of course he can control it at any point he feels the need, but its not like he is the one pulling objects onto the earth at all times, and if he wanted to "trick"(????) us, he could move objects around with inconsistent behavior. That's not how God works.

Believe it or not, God uses reason...which in another forum on evolution, some of the atheists were saying was not compatible with religion. And quite frankly God uses reason as a framework of his power. Its like if a person was gonna jump of the empire state building, trying to prove that if he prays to God on the way down, he wont die. That is a big problem most atheists and the scorners of Jesus back in the Bible days argued. Of course God could and can do anything, but by attempting to commit suicide, is that a reasonable thing to do? No. Just like if you said, "Hey God, put a pink elephant with purple polka dots and a cape in this room right now." Most likely, God will not oblige to something that foolish. If something isnt done for the glory of him or a need( as in a need, not a want)of the person asking, God will see it as being utterly pointless, and it was a stupid decision the person made in the first place.

Back to the point of Reason which was discussed in another topic....answer this question I am about to ask you aloud before you read any further.

Was Darwin a man of Reason? (Did he use reason in his depiction of evolution?)

I am imagine most if not all of you atheists said, "yes, he was a man of reason". I can't disagree. He had to use reason, just like any other human being thinking logically, to employ the topic of evolution. Being a man of reason, as we have now descerned, and the fact that it was mentioned that reason and religion are not compatible...

Charles Darwin in fact gave his heart to the Lord on his deathbed. Will all of his reason used throughout his life and science, did he in fact use reason in his choice to except Jesus into his heart, and except Creation as the basis of our complex human world? By deduction, he had to of. He WAS a man of reason.

One more question. Knowing what I have told you, Charles Darwin accepting Creation after a life spent devoted to a silly conjecture, with which in an instant he through out the window in return for living into eternity, this very man of reason, which you have devoted your debate to also, how does that make you feel knowing in that very moment he gave it up, knowing it was just in fact a huge intellectual and physical mistake; the theory (conjecture) of evolution. ??? This man of Reason, chose God....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Sounds like you have a narcissistic personality disorder or something. ;)

Ooh, that stings. :P According to Impervious, I'm just capable of tapping into a higher percentage of my brain than the average person. Btw, nicest way to tell a person they have a psychological problem ever. ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

This is unrelated, but about 2 years ago one of my best friends came up with a selective breeding plan that would create humans with tails, or rather, give humans back their tails. I'm not so sure on the details, but I can ask him about it if anyone's interested.

Mental and physical, in my opinion. Earlier this year, Eli (he's registered on here but never comes on :P )and I were going for a walk, and created our Theory Hypothesis of Superhuman Evolution. This wasn't referring to the way humans are already evolving on their own, but rather how we could make them evolve. It has to do with being capable of using more of our mind and muscles during life-threatening situations. In spite of adrenaline having quite a bit to do this with, I think the more often you are exposed to situations that challenge you physically and mentally, the easier they will be to overcome. We thought that if perhaps we had a hundred or so infants, who were completely contributed to science, we could perform a few trials ("experiment on" seems like such a bad term to use in this case >_>) on them and look at the results. If our hypothesis is correct, that the infants grow and are capable of using much more of their brain and muscle than generations before them, a superhuman race is in the breeding, and the geniuses of today will not even compare to the dumb people of tomorrow. That's one rather large step for mankind methinks, albeit an important one.

Sounds mighty interesting. Please ask your friend the details without fail and don't forget to post it here. :P

But interfering with the process of evolution isn't a particularly good idea, in my opinion. As long as we limit ourselves to experiments which can give us a fair amount of knowledge on evolution, there's no problem. But in the process we humans tend to cross the line drawn by nature, in out insatiable hunger for knowledge and ultimately dominance. There have been speculations about humans emerging into a superhuman race, which I agree is definitely possible. But I for one will be happy to sit back and see the evolution take place naturally. Call me pessimistic or ignorant but in my opinion somethings are best left untouched, evolution among them. Of course, researching is completely acceptable to me as long as it does not cause an uncontrolled, irreversible reaction.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

First of all, where are you coming up with this idea the theists believe that "God excercises free will on gravity"?....
You posted that already. Here is my response to it.

Charles Darwin in fact gave his heart to the Lord...
You know, I was so disgusted that you should wheel out that mendacious attack on the intelligence and personal integrity of a dead man, I quite forgot to remind you of the general meaninglessness of attacks ad hominem and appeals to authority. Even when bad reasoning is based on lies, it's still bad reasoning.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

First of all, where are you coming up with this idea the theists believe that "God excercises free will on gravity"? NO theists I know, nor myself, believe that is what is happening. Gravity is very real, and has little to nothing to do with evolution. God created gravity, of course he can control it at any point he feels the need, but its not like he is the one pulling objects onto the earth at all times, and if he wanted to "trick"(????) us, he could move objects around with inconsistent behavior. That's not how God works.

And you KNOW this with reasoning - of course (not) best shot?

Believe it or not, God uses reason...which in another forum on evolution, some of the atheists were saying was not compatible with religion. And quite frankly God uses reason as a framework of his power. Its like if a person was gonna jump of the empire state building, trying to prove that if he prays to God on the way down, he wont die. That is a big problem most atheists and the scorners of Jesus back in the Bible days argued. Of course God could and can do anything, but by attempting to commit suicide, is that a reasonable thing to do? No. Just like if you said, "Hey God, put a pink elephant with purple polka dots and a cape in this room right now." Most likely, God will not oblige to something that foolish. If something isnt done for the glory of him or a need( as in a need, not a want)of the person asking, God will see it as being utterly pointless, and it was a stupid decision the person made in the first place.
An unproven falicy and a cop out

Back to the point of Reason which was discussed in another topic....answer this question I am about to ask you aloud before you read any further.

Was Darwin a man of Reason? (Did he use reason in his depiction of evolution?)

I am imagine most if not all of you atheists said, "yes, he was a man of reason". I can't disagree. He had to use reason, just like any other human being thinking logically, to employ the topic of evolution. Being a man of reason, as we have now descerned, and the fact that it was mentioned that reason and religion are not compatible...

Charles Darwin in fact gave his heart to the Lord on his deathbed. Will all of his reason used throughout his life and science, did he in fact use reason in his choice to except Jesus into his heart, and except Creation as the basis of our complex human world? By deduction, he had to of. He WAS a man of reason.

Again just hiding with a conclusion that can not be proven one way or the other - btw Darwin may have said that, deathbed quotes heve been misheard and misrepresemnted and even massaged into context - the point is Evolution theory is better reasoning than God theory.

One more question. Knowing what I have told you, Charles Darwin accepting Creation after a life spent devoted to a silly conjecture, with which in an instant he through out the window in return for living into eternity, this very man of reason, which you have devoted your debate to also, how does that make you feel knowing in that very moment he gave it up, knowing it was just in fact a huge intellectual and physical mistake; the theory (conjecture) of evolution. ??? This man of Reason, chose God....
Yeah right - Hw went for an uncertain afterlife over a lifetime achievement... That may be your way of thinking. anyone else in the room want to give up there historical immortality for a chance a meeting god?

Hiding behind this kind of thing true or untrue - did Darwin cop out in case? Even if true, would not prove that evolution theory is wrong or that God did it... Pleas offer some substance as opposed to unaccepting evoulution (which maybe god started or not) - Brings me back to the question

DID GOD GET IT RIGHT FIRST TIME - NO! hence the floods etc - and start again, and that brings me to the conclusion that god is not perfect or does not exist - going for the latter here

IZZY - I am chaffing you as much as you are me. Looking forward to your thread, It was close to spamming but just moving on to the cloning/forceing evolution theory

Hey save some eggs, grow your won babies - they are yours and you can treat them according to how you see fit - whoops forgot child services - keep thinking? (another chaff btw)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Ooh, that stings. :P According to Impervious, I'm just capable of tapping into a higher percentage of my brain than the average person. Btw, nicest way to tell a person they have a psychological problem ever. ;)

Well, like I said, there are several flaws in the theory. You could very well just be a mental nut case. I also stated that mental differences occur when that tapped into percentage cannot be comprehended and controlled by the mind. So, it's still slightly damaged goods. Slightly. If I recall, LIS, octopuppy I'm sure one of you two can either confirm or deny the truthfulness. Einstein was a genius, but if I recall he also lakced the skills to take care of himself (I believe it was his sister that di so) and could not even manage to tie his own shoes. A reasonable sacrifice to mentally evolve above the rest? I'd say so.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

To be honest I have no idea - when you are rich it's esentric when poor just mad

Too busy to deal with trivia things like eating etc I should imagine - and usually no one would live with someone who is totally focused on everything but there own center of universe as Oct put it

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Hah, that's not really what I meant LIS, I was referring to the fact that our personal experiences are all that really matter, rather than being self-absorbed or whatever.

Impervious: My how-nuts-are-you scores just indicate that I'm schizoid, not really enough fun to be the result of an extra tapped-into resource. Just plain old damaged goods.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Hah, that's not really what I meant LIS, I was referring to the fact that our personal experiences are all that really matter, rather than being self-absorbed or whatever.

Impervious: My how-nuts-are-you scores just indicate that I'm schizoid, not really enough fun to be the result of an extra tapped-into resource. Just plain old damaged goods.

haha, or maybe it is....the world may never know :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

I am avoidant it says, could be true. Maybe it is. :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

look at what i started. :D yet still somehow remained on topic. Anyway, I was having a discussion with one of my friends who I consider to be highly intelligent about my theories as well as showing him this thread. He found the close minded point highly interesting, yet responded much in the same was a LIS and octopuppy have. Both of his parents have been wearing glasses from the time they were about 8-10 years of age. If I recall simple biology then in theory he should be genetically predisposed to it. Yet at 26 he still has 20/10 vision. I'd say that this, however extremely minor demonstrates a form of evolution. Not something we sould consider to be such, but I think when you strip it down to its bare essence, it is such.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted (edited) · Report post

look at what i started. :D yet still somehow remained on topic. Anyway, I was having a discussion with one of my friends who I consider to be highly intelligent about my theories as well as showing him this thread. He found the close minded point highly interesting, yet responded much in the same was a LIS and octopuppy have. Both of his parents have been wearing glasses from the time they were about 8-10 years of age. If I recall simple biology then in theory he should be genetically predisposed to it. Yet at 26 he still has 20/10 vision. I'd say that this, however extremely minor demonstrates a form of evolution. Not something we sould consider to be such, but I think when you strip it down to its bare essence, it is such.

Actually, it represents a genetic mutation. However, it might not even represent something that significant. It could just be that several genes control eyesight (likely), and he got lucky in terms of dominant v. not genetics (picked a lucky block in the Punnett's square). However, in the event that poor eyesight were a recessive trait, it's still possible that he could have gotten good eyesight through a mutation. This would become evolution if those with poor eyesight performed less well than those with good eyesight, and as a result more "good eyesight" genes were passed on to the next generation. Evolution can't really be observed on the small scale, because it's a systematic and global type of event. It occurs over several generations, and isn't really even occurring unless it's on the scale of an entire ecosystem.

Edited for an amusing comparison: Saying that this is evolution would be like saying "Today was warmer than yesterday, this represents global climate change." While it's possible, it's not really indicative.

Edited by SomeGuy
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Actually, it represents a genetic mutation. However, it might not even represent something that significant. It could just be that several genes control eyesight (likely), and he got lucky in terms of dominant v. not genetics (picked a lucky block in the Punnett's square). However, in the event that poor eyesight were a recessive trait, it's still possible that he could have gotten good eyesight through a mutation. This would become evolution if those with poor eyesight performed less well than those with good eyesight, and as a result more "good eyesight" genes were passed on to the next generation. Evolution can't really be observed on the small scale, because it's a systematic and global type of event. It occurs over several generations, and isn't really even occurring unless it's on the scale of an entire ecosystem.

Edited for an amusing comparison: Saying that this is evolution would be like saying "Today was warmer than yesterday, this represents global climate change." While it's possible, it's not really indicative.

I do have to agree that that was an amusing analogy. However I feel that weather patterns are more understood than genetics. Compared to even 50 years ago we have a greater understanding of both subjects however there are still several unknowns especially when it come to the fields of bio engineering and genetics.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Well, all the things I put in there are things that we know, and my point wasn't that I could tell you exactly why your friend has better eyesight than his parents, but rather that this doesn't represent an "evolution," because it's not on a grand enough scale.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Posted · Report post

Hah, that's not really what I meant LIS, I was referring to the fact that our personal experiences are all that really matter, rather than being self-absorbed or whatever.
Sorry, slight misquote - i meant it as you originally posted it. Explaining is not my bag ... as you all may have noticed

Could we be mutating into a hive type group with strong and weak becoming clearer - like bees and ants. When we learn to exist in such a way we will probably coexist for a common good, and can consider ourselves as a successful species, or we may mutate into a rapidly evolved awesome alien like in the film species or even one of Izzy's turbo evolved babies

Why do i have the feeling that the world will go into reverse as far as evolving goes? We just become more perfect.

Another thought - why are there so many different species and of the same type like fruit files and various apes - hmmm I may be able to work that out actually ... but still questionable. If it is survival of the fittest - how comes many of the weak are still around ??

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.