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.
Take a look at the link I posted a bit further back and tell us in detail why it isn't science and / or it doesn't support evolution. We'll be waiting.
Even if his eyes take in the evidence, the mind is still blind to evidence. Likely not even his fault, just one of the consequences of a lifetime of delusional thought processes. His mind has developed an immunity to reason.
Take a look at the link I posted a bit further back and tell us in detail why it isn't science and / or it doesn't support evolution. We'll be waiting.
It's axiomatic. So, it isn't science because it isn't science. It just can't be, so therefore it isn't.
Sorry friend the evolution evangelists are WAY ahead of creationist that end up losing their job when they express their views in creation. Need evidence?
What are we teaching in schools - evolution or creation? Is the creation viewpoint even being expressed in schools (K-college)? Nope.
ZERO science supports evolution. We simply aren't evolving. Mutations show to drive species to extinction not evolution. Abiogenesis is something imagined by Agnostic humanists in high places (aka not observed). Neanderthal man etc has huge problems such as miscalculation of the mandible in the model of the original skeleton. Et al..
There is simply an agenda to get people to think that we can evolve to a higher state of "consciousness" where we can control our own little universe capable of being our own little god.
We aren't evolving. Evidence for intelligent design is EVERYWHERE. Anything created has a creator. The randomness statistics of all symbiotic relationships in nature prove evolution is fantasy. This computer didn't create itself by itself. It's pure fantasy fiction fairytale garbage being propagated/indoctrinated to kids across the world distorting what is reality.
And many have taken the bait hook, line, and sink.
In regards of your Intro ...
It is scientifically known that genes are responsible for building proteins & characteristics heredity .
That is why they can not inherit the new qualities and acquired behavioral patterns to subsequent generations .
So when the monkey's body shape or skin start to changes due to food or sun light for example , The monkey can not inherit this new acquires characteristics to his descendant because it is not found in the genetic structure .
Therefore, the monkey will remain a monkey even after a billion year .
I hope that I explained well .
Yes, you did explain your own vast mis-understanding of the processes of Evolution for sure.
Tell me, squall: do you enjoy knowingly mis-stating the facts? Or are you possibly actually interested in learning what really goes on?
I'm deadly serious here, squall old friend! Which is it for you? Parrotting mis-facts, replaying erroneous information and repeating the silliness of the QuRan or the biblical Genesis?
Perhaps it is that age-old human arrogance that prevents us from accepting our truly lesser and minor status on this lonely, tiny planet, huh? Some of us simply cannot deal with having arrived at our current bio-philosophical rung on the ladder of life via a simian ancestry; that I understand.
Let me know, squall; can you face the truth here? It is rather important to the future of your children's intellectual development, indeed, probably their eventual intellectual survival!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee9786
Sorry friend the evolution evangelists are WAY ahead of creationist that end up losing their job when they express their views in creation. Need evidence?
What are we teaching in schools - evolution or creation? Is the creation viewpoint even being expressed in schools (K-college)? Nope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by incredulous_rflmn
The reason for that so-called inequality, lee old soak, is that SCIENCE CLASS topics are, logically, restricted to... lessee here... oh yeah: SCIENCE, not outright speculation. That ideology (which cannot even be hinted at through any true scientific test) belongs, quite correctly, in a Philosophy of Religion class, silly! But then you stick your foot into your agape maw....
ZERO science supports evolution. We simply aren't evolving. Mutations show to drive species to extinction not evolution. Abiogenesis is something imagined by Agnostic humanists in high places (aka not observed). Neanderthal man etc has huge problems such as miscalculation of the mandible in the model of the original skeleton. Et al..
There is simply an agenda to get people to think that we can evolve to a higher state of "consciousness" where we can control our own little universe capable of being our own little god.
We aren't evolving. Evidence for intelligent design is EVERYWHERE. Anything created has a creator. The randomness statistics of all symbiotic relationships in nature prove evolution is fantasy. This computer didn't create itself by itself. It's pure fantasy fiction fairytale garbage being propagated/indoctrinated to kids across the world distorting what is reality.
And many have taken the bait hook, line, and sink.
Oh my.
Vast, infiltrated, parrot-read, re-chanted and mindlessly sustained IGNORANCE on display. Another poor lad who is [obviously...] deathly afraid to accept that we primate hominids are not on the top of the evolutionary heap (for now that is...)
That we were poofy-like instantly "created" out of nothing, but that nothing can be created out of nothing, but their wooden icon Gawd was, but...... uhhmmmm... that doesn't matter because ....uuhhhhuuummmm... He just is, because.... (mental scampering sounds, like when you surprise some cockroaches in the closet... scamper scamper scamper... back into the darkest corners... scamper.... etc. etc.)
Oh well. There is a sociological mandate for some in the tribe to huddle together off in the corner, throwing their bananas HARD into the ground and stamping their tiny little enraged feet as they yowl hopelessly at "the moon of their desires....."
And then there's the new-age decision-makers, we who have remained, through time, unafraid of the new world, the new knowledge, the new thinking paradigms, while those huddled in the corner remain there to carve their wooden icons. OK then; so be it.
The following should be required beginning reading for those huddlers. It is but a partial intro, but it does tell us a lot about the basics; information that, being true, should at least "twig" the interest of a curious & inquisitive intellectual reader.
I suppose there's simply not enough of that breed within the Christian cohort....
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
You did but it flies in the face of the acceptance of the genetic changes of micro - evolution. The descendants do inherit the genetic changes - or don't you accept that?
Evolution within a Lineage
In order for continuing evolution there must be mechanisms to increase or create genetic variation and mechanisms to decrease it. The mechanisms of evolution are mutation, natural selection, genetic drift, recombination and gene flow. I have grouped them into two classes -- those that decrease genetic variation and those that increase it.
Recombination
(edited for brevity... see it all above: rflmn™)
A gene mutation is a permanent change in the DNA sequence that makes up a gene. Mutations range in size from a single DNA building block (DNA base) to a large segment of a chromosome.
As in: It's NOT a case of a monkey seeing a problem banana (as in: out of his immediate reach), and his genes then deciding to grow a longer arm! What tripish nonsense! Learn, why dont'cha, folks? This only shows a preference for vast institutionalized ignorance! How can that be, in a sentient hominid?
Quote:
Originally Posted by achickenchaser
The problem with these debates (if you want to call them that) is creationist can say anything they want to, no matter how absurd, and it'll be true.....to them.
A perfect example right here: "ZERO science supports evolution."
You have the "because I say so/wanna believe it" crowd arguing with the "facts and evidence" crowd.
It's kinda hard to have a serious discussion when two sides are playing by different sets of rules; and really, there isn't a debate to be had on whether evolution happens or not anyways.
Agreed. It's patently absurd to try to continue with such hopeless mental solidity, ain't it? We know what's going on, and these people aren't even evincing some minor errors, but rather they show tectonic-level, pathologically invasive ignorance in their ideas and presentation. One presumes it's on purpose, to achieve two important goals:
1) to troll-irritate those of us who come here with honest intentions and logical information, but more importantly...
2) to bolster their own outrageous beliefs, so they could go to church tomorrow morning and speak to their Wooden God, in their prayers, that they fought the good battle for His Supremacy once again, despite all that truthy stuff...
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC
Take a look at the link I posted a bit further back and tell us in detail why it isn't science and / or it doesn't support evolution. We'll be waiting.
...and waiting... and waiting... and....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native
Even if his eyes take in the evidence, the mind is still blind to evidence. Likely not even his fault, just one of the consequences of a lifetime of delusional thought processes. His mind has developed an immunity to reason.
So soooo true!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
Oh dear.
You've got that right, Jay. It's staggeringly sad to see this level of apparently permanent "brainial" immunity and stolid and impacted intransigence.
Oh well. Some of us advance the species' chances for survival, while others retard it. It's a sort of evolutionary process in itself, huh?
So.... c',mon, intransigents of the world! Hit us with yet another one! We need a good laugh!
Ok. We've been a bit hard on Squall and Lee, but their posts were so ill -informed about what evolution theory (the mechanism for how it works) actually says that they didn't really deserve better treatment.
I do want to believe that this is not typical of theists and we are just getting the ah...well 'bottom of the barrel' tends to spring to mind... as the only ones foolhardy enough to make an issue out of this.
The quick return I'd say is:
(e) Even Creationists accept micro - evolution and to say that it can't, given enough time, become macro is simply as daft as saying that they believe in powered flight but not as far as other countries.
(f) There is virtually no evidence or mechanism for creation or creationism or even ID really. It all involves discrediting the evidence for evolution - which is pretty much all of it.
(g) Theism doesn't need to attack evolution. The only God - believers who need to are those who insist that Genesis is literally true. For the others, they can see 'god' as being behind evolution and even abiogenesis if it was ever proved, just as 'god' can be seen as being behind everything else that science finds out.
OK: This one's done, IMHO. My point has been well made. Mods? Kill-r off!
All so true. Well, I suppose these last few answers from my atheist friends cover all the bases in my OP very throughly.
To wit: It IS impossible to "professionally*" argue such debating points here on c-d, despite having irrefutable facts on one's side, despite the tedious centuries-old development of an excellent toolbox that takes most human frailties and failings into consideration, that allows and indeed invites, replication of the tests in question for anyone who disagrees. (Theists NEVER take advantage of this option. They know such enlightenment would stop them in their tracks, and so... Avoid! Avoid!).
Such a vigorous process (The SM**, BTW) does indeed inexorably lead to some enlightened, corrected, or improved, if not downright absolute, conclusions by the simple process of logical deduction and analysis.
But since literalist, denialist fundamentalist Christian and Muslim posters here can and do happily hide behind their stage names, and are not in any way compelled by an impartial adjudicator to "Truthfully answer the simple question asked of you!" or to "Read your assigned homework. There will be a written test tomorrow! ", the truth will never surface here. Which is just fine for devout evangelical literalists. After all, truth vigorously erodes their power and spiritual bases!
As well, given the strongpoints and mandates of the SM, theists would all be eating a medium-rare humble pie here. Specifically: Evolution is now easily demonstrated and has been, in both the lab and field, and via absolutely inarguable DNA genome mapping.
I should modify that to say: it's been proven to the satisfaction of those educated thinkers who understand the SM, it's minor limitations but also it's amazing strengths. To selectively turn away from it's conclusions with a numbingly mis-informed and hand-waving dismissal, like "It's only a Theory!" or "There's ZERO evidence for Evolution!" is... well... pretty telling of it's author's intellectual honesty, his educational limits and his personal inquisitiveness levels (which truly are ZERO!)
So.... I'm happy to leave this thread now; QED.
_____________________________________
*professionally: means honest and rigorous adherence to a set of reasonable ethical standards. That definitely means being "up" on the subject under debate. What we see here, by comparison, might be the automotive equivalent of some yutz yelling that "...yah can't get good fuel economy with your carburetted diesel 2011 Honda Accord!", which is, of course, errant on three fronts. And yet the yutz yowls... despite correction from an expert.
And as regards Evolution and it's processes, this is precisely what we see here, day in & day out. Absolute scientific illiteracy, and yet with absolute statements being made by some duncified author.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
** SM: The Scientific Method, silly! A proven, step-wise set-process that pretty much eliminates personal bias, accumulation of errors and/or claims of permanent absolutes in a world full of variables. BTW, it also catches bias and scientific dishonesty in every known case.
We find it, never The Church, who however then blaringly trumpets such discoveries as though... See? All of Science is corrupt! See???
But also, the SM'ssooo much better than the endless drone-chanting of ancient goat-herder-level fantasy witch-craft, which should be limited to the new age of on-line computer games for the intellectually bored. "Christianty Wars Two"!!
In regards of your Intro ...
It is scientifically known that genes are responsible for building proteins & characteristics heredity .
That is why they can not inherit the new qualities and acquired behavioral patterns to subsequent generations .
So when the monkey's body shape or skin start to changes due to food or sun light for example , The monkey can not inherit this new acquires characteristics to his descendant because it is not found in the genetic structure .
Therefore, the monkey will remain a monkey even after a billion year .
I hope that I explained well .
Actually no. the basis of evolution is minute bits of change seen against the backdrop of geological time frames. all species are in a constant state of change, granted this change is not noticeable in one human lifespan, in most cases it is not noticeable in 20 lifespans, think instead in terms of the lifespan of a rock or a mountain, these are the timeframes in which evolution spins its' magic.
Ok. We've been a bit hard on Squall and Lee, but their posts were so ill -informed about what evolution theory (the mechanism for how it works) actually says that they didn't really deserve better treatment.
I do want to believe that this is not typical of theists and we are just getting the ah...well 'bottom of the barrel' tends to spring to mind... as the only ones foolhardy enough to make an issue out of this.
The quick return I'd say is:
(e) Even Creationists accept micro - evolution and to say that it can't, given enough time, become macro is simply as daft as saying that they believe in powered flight but not as far as other countries.
(f) There is virtually no evidence or mechanism for creation or creationism or even ID really. It all involves discrediting the evidence for evolution - which is pretty much all of it.
(g) Theism doesn't need to attack evolution. The only God - believers who need to are those who insist that Genesis is literally true. For the others, they can see 'god' as being behind evolution and even abiogenesis if it was ever proved, just as 'god' can be seen as being behind everything else that science finds out.
This is a very good post, worthy of reps had I spread them around more.
I recently realized something that may help you in all of this... The other day there was a news release that scientists at CERN had found certain neutrinos to be traveling faster than the speed of light. Of course, the implications of anything traveling faster than the speed of light are extraordinarily grand and mesmerizing for those "in the know," and especially those who understand the premise of Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. The scientific community will be poring over the recently released paper to scrutinize and pick apart any possibility that something may have been done in error.
In fact, I got so excited when I read the news that I just had to go and find the paper myself. I did. It's right here. I decided to read and do my best to understand it. Admittedly, it is over my head, but not from a lack of doing my best to try and understand everything possible. I think it was the addition of the second TT sensor for the measurement of the FPGA that threw me a little bit.
But, all that aside, what I realized by reading it is that an extraordinary amount of time, energy, knowledge, and already proven scientific methods were used to perform such an intricate test. Everything from the ultra-sensitive GPS system (which can detect continental drift down to the cm) to the OPERA system itself is built upon the shoulders of giants.
That paper alone, and we know there are literally millions of them ranging from physics to biology to chemistry and so on, all building and advancing upon previously known findings with further amazing research, are the very essence of what the stubbornly ill Creationist/Intelligent Design community simply cannot argue with. They can wave their magic book full of magical thinking, make-a-wish science, and Bronze Age ethics and morals, as though it has any authority whatsoever. In reality, they're pathetic rebuttals and weak traverses across the landscape of knowledge and science and have nothing to stand on.
The thing is that you can show them paper after paper of this. You can present them with papers such as the one I linked to and say "Use your book to defeat that," and, well Rifleman, they will find a way to ignore every single iota of what's in it in a matter of cognitive dissonance so astoundingly dense and massive that if it were to collapse would trigger something akin to a black hole.
The essential point is that we may never be able to show those members of the Creationist/Intelligent Design community how ignorant, stupid, and poorly researched their hypotheses are. We could talk to them until we are blue in the face, until we've prevented every ounce of scientific evidence, and yet, they have far too much emotional investment in such ballyhoo that nothing would convince them otherwise.
On the other hand, there is a massive group of people out there who are simply ignorant of science, what it means, what it entails, and how it is performed. These are the people who are probably what you could mostly consider "neutral" to the entire thing. In fact, the majority of these people often make comments such as "I think both theories should be taught in school for equality purposes." This is the part of the population that MUST be reached, that MUST be shown the blatant lies of Creationism, the attempts at injecting a strict religious viewpoint into the classroom, and most of all, the part of the population that must be inoculated against the deadly, brain-eating mind virus that is Intelligent Design/Creationism. If people such as me, or you, or certain other individuals can communicate to the vulnerable, un-vaccinated crowd in a way that shows just how powerful good science is and just how weak Creationism/Intelligent Design is, then we are doing everything we can to prevent the casual zombie from turning an entire population full of hordes of zombies looking for brain matter because theirs are gone.
Creationism/Intelligent Design has never, and most likely will not ever present, formulate, or propose a paper anything remotely close to what the paper from CERN (or the many others) proposed. They will continue to re-write the "Conclusion" section of the scientific papers to cater to their crowd, they will continue to ignore any and all evidence contrary to their small-minded and ignorant view of the universe, and they will continue to try and misinform the general populace. It is imperative that we do not bend to these people, that we cut them no slack, and that we ridicule and expose their blatant lies, their hypocrisy, and their lack of actual science at every corner.
I recently realized something that may help you in all of this... The other day there was a news release that scientists at CERN had found certain neutrinos to be traveling faster than the speed of light. Of course, the implications of anything traveling faster than the speed of light are extraordinarily grand and mesmerizing for those "in the know," and especially those who understand the premise of Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. The scientific community will be poring over the recently released paper to scrutinize and pick apart any possibility that something may have been done in error.
In fact, I got so excited when I read the news that I just had to go and find the paper myself. I did. It's right here. I decided to read and do my best to understand it. Admittedly, it is over my head, but not from a lack of doing my best to try and understand everything possible. I think it was the addition of the second TT sensor for the measurement of the FPGA that threw me a little bit.
But, all that aside, what I realized by reading it is that an extraordinary amount of time, energy, knowledge, and already proven scientific methods were used to perform such an intricate test. Everything from the ultra-sensitive GPS system (which can detect continental drift down to the cm) to the OPERA system itself is built upon the shoulders of giants.
That paper alone, and we know there are literally millions of them ranging from physics to biology to chemistry and so on, all building and advancing upon previously known findings with further amazing research, are the very essence of what the stubbornly ill Creationist/Intelligent Design community simply cannot argue with. They can wave their magic book full of magical thinking, make-a-wish science, and Bronze Age ethics and morals, as though it has any authority whatsoever. In reality, they're pathetic rebuttals and weak traverses across the landscape of knowledge and science and have nothing to stand on.
The thing is that you can show them paper after paper of this. You can present them with papers such as the one I linked to and say "Use your book to defeat that," and, well Rifleman, they will find a way to ignore every single iota of what's in it in a matter of cognitive dissonance so astoundingly dense and massive that if it were to collapse would trigger something akin to a black hole.
The essential point is that we may never be able to show those members of the Creationist/Intelligent Design community how ignorant, stupid, and poorly researched their hypotheses are. We could talk to them until we are blue in the face, until we've prevented every ounce of scientific evidence, and yet, they have far too much emotional investment in such ballyhoo that nothing would convince them otherwise.
On the other hand, there is a massive group of people out there who are simply ignorant of science, what it means, what it entails, and how it is performed. These are the people who are probably what you could mostly consider "neutral" to the entire thing. In fact, the majority of these people often make comments such as "I think both theories should be taught in school for equality purposes." This is the part of the population that MUST be reached, that MUST be shown the blatant lies of Creationism, the attempts at injecting a strict religious viewpoint into the classroom, and most of all, the part of the population that must be inoculated against the deadly, brain-eating mind virus that is Intelligent Design/Creationism. If people such as me, or you, or certain other individuals can communicate to the vulnerable, un-vaccinated crowd in a way that shows just how powerful good science is and just how weak Creationism/Intelligent Design is, then we are doing everything we can to prevent the casual zombie from turning an entire population full of hordes of zombies looking for brain matter because theirs are gone.
Creationism/Intelligent Design has never, and most likely will not ever present, formulate, or propose a paper anything remotely close to what the paper from CERN (or the many others) proposed. They will continue to re-write the "Conclusion" section of the scientific papers to cater to their crowd, they will continue to ignore any and all evidence contrary to their small-minded and ignorant view of the universe, and they will continue to try and misinform the general populace. It is imperative that we do not bend to these people, that we cut them no slack, and that we ridicule and expose their blatant lies, their hypocrisy, and their lack of actual science at every corner.
I know, Troop...isn't it just sooooooo wonderful that there are people that are so smart, so focused, and so dedicated, that they can/will work to try (and sometimes succeed) to figure out nothing more than the "inner workings" of this awesome conglomeration of matter and energy we call "The Universe"...that Source God has created/instigated?!!!
To support your "genre" of concept...the matter and energy that comprises "The Universe" (or some "source" for it) must have necessarily "always been", and has "evolved" to "become" what we now have...and continues in this "state of becoming".
When you get hip to the fact that IS a "God Claim" (and that this so-called "Universe", and everything in it, IS God), you will have finally reached a point of "true understanding".
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.
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.
OK: This one's done, IMHO. My point has been well made. Mods? Kill-r off!
