U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:33 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,845,358 times
Reputation: 3727

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
It had to start with some form of a primordial atom eh? So where did the stuff come form to create an entire universe full of matter, gravity, time and space? I know, some sky daddy made the first primordial atoms and made so many of them in fact, that they caused the big bang to happen.
It doesn't matter to the ToE how it started. All that matters is that life did start. Best to brush up on your BB knowledge, atoms were after the BB.

 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:36 AM
 
14,298 posts, read 8,118,051 times
Reputation: 4247
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
It doesn't matter to the ToE how it started. All that matters is that it did start. Best to brush up on your BB knowledge, atoms were after the BB.
I already said that, reread my post.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Land of Thought and Flow
8,323 posts, read 13,506,857 times
Reputation: 4884
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
The fossil record contains fossils of only complete and fully-formed species. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred.
Actually... there is

Just to give you a good starting point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
This is only possible with creation.
To you, that is the only possibility. But in the scientific community, the concept of only "one" possible solution is an idea that doesn't exist.

Also, the discussion of abiogenesis is different than that of evolution.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:37 AM
 
Location: 9851 Meadowglen Lane, Apt 42, Houston Texas
3,178 posts, read 1,695,531 times
Reputation: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallowsCalibrator View Post
The Theory of Evolution is a scientific theory.
Evolution may fit the criteria for a scientific theory but the origin of life does not (i.e protein molecules 'evolved' into "life" which further 'evolved' into us). That's basically the best guess they can come up with using evolution. It's not really falsiable.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,845,358 times
Reputation: 3727
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
I already said that, reread my post.
OK...


Quote:
first primordial atoms and made so many of them in fact, that they caused the big bang to happen.

Made so many atoms that caused the big bang to happen? M'kay...atoms did not cause the big bang. Atoms came after the BB. You have your cart before your horse.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Land of Thought and Flow
8,323 posts, read 13,506,857 times
Reputation: 4884
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
Technically a hypothesis is a testable explanation. We are discussing scientific terms.
That's why I generally either capitalize the word or use scientific. To those who don't actually understand scientific terms vs their normal definition, it helps differentiate.

scientific theory = Theory != theory
scientific hypothesis = Hypothesis != hypothesis
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:40 AM
 
7,249 posts, read 5,590,042 times
Reputation: 7954
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
It doesn't matter to the ToE how it started. All that matters is that life did start. Best to brush up on your BB knowledge, atoms were after the BB.
Indeed. It's an interesting question, but also one that doesn't concern evolutionary theory.

Unfortunately, the question isn't brought up out of a genuine curiosity, but instead as a last resort. When attacking the theory of evolution gets too difficult, they move on to attacking the big bang theory, something the anti-science brigade clearly understands even less than evolution.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:40 AM
 
2,085 posts, read 1,371,786 times
Reputation: 1401
Nothing is wrong with teaching about evolution in schools. Similarly, nothing is wrong with teaching about Creationism. Kids should learn about the conflict between scientific and religious beliefs, and why that conflict can cause problems and misunderstandings. Teaching about it doesn't have to mean promoting it, and I think there needs to be a greater understanding of Creationism, even if it's only taught in a cultural/religious sense.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Land of Thought and Flow
8,323 posts, read 13,506,857 times
Reputation: 4884
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire View Post
Evolution may fit the criteria for a scientific theory but the origin of life does not (i.e protein molecules 'evolved' into "life" which further 'evolved' into us). That's basically the best guess they can come up with using evolution. It's not really falsiable.
Abiogenesis is a different discussion than evolution. The topic of this thread is with Evolution, not Abiogenesis. I would suggest you lookup both terms and try to understand that they are way different.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Texas
35,283 posts, read 19,318,608 times
Reputation: 20913
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
The fossil record contains fossils of only complete and fully-formed species. There are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred. Even among evolutionists there are diametrically different interpretations and reconstructions of the fossils used to support human evolution from a supposed ape-like ancestry.

Even if evolution takes millions and millions of years, we should still be able to see some stages of its process. But, we simply don't observe any partially-evolved fish, frogs, lizards, birds, dogs, cats among us. Every species of plant and animal is complete and fully-formed.

Another problem is how could partially-evolved plant and animal species survive over millions of years when their basic organs and tissues were still in the process of evolving? How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if there respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still evolving?

The fact that animal and plant species are found fully formed and complete in the fossil record is powerful evidence (although not proof) for creation because it is evidence that they came into existence as fully formed and complete which is not possible by evolution. This is only possible with creation.
Every species is transitional.
Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top