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.
Yes. Why do you respond to none of the questions? You ignore anything that you choose and go off on your imaginary "fact" quests. "Facts" only to you.
Well Predos, there are so many believers in evolution here, and it's not always easy responding to all their questions. Yet I do try. If you have a question for me about the family Tree Theory Collapsing, I will try to respond with the little time I have. And I do not believe facts are imaginary, I do believe some believers of evolution wish they were.
With the passage of 50 million years as it was believed, there was no obvious change that could be pointed to.
Incorrect. The modern coelacanth is not identical to the prehostoric fish at all. Regardless, even if it were identical this would not in the least "disprove" evolution. The fact that it is different only strengthens the arguement, though.
Well Predos, there are so many believers in evolution here, and it's not always easy responding to all their questions. Yet I do try. If you have a question for me about the family Tree Theory Collapsing, I will try to respond with the little time I have. And I do not believe facts are imaginary, I do believe some believers of evolution wish they were.
Let me provide a current and obvious example of evolution and see how you respond (as if I couldn't guess).
An infant is born. It is incapable of the actions of an adult or even adolescent human. It grows (evolves) into another being than it was born as. If not for evolution, it would remain a helpless infant.
Proof of evolution, except for those (you) who deny it.
By the way, what a cop out to claim you don't have time. You seem to find plenty of time to do your questionable "research" and attempt to vilify anything that disagrees with you.
Evolution's Family Tree is Alive & Sprouting New Foliage!
Well now, Predos, that's not actually genetically based "adaptive evolution". A human infant does, yes, have both hard-wired (i.e.: genetic, and thus evolved) characteristics, as well as the similarly-evolved neuronal structure within their brains that provide it with the eventual capacity to learn.
That is and was the major ancestral difference between us and our closest simian ancestors. Almost all the rest is IDENTICAL genetically. but we possess the ability to think ahead, to conceptualize, and to let our imaginations run wild with fantasy (hence Christianity...)
A lot of that capability is not there until the brain is fully developed, and that happens at different rates for different species. Antelopes: real quick. 3 months or so, max. Chimps: within about 18 mo. I believe. Humans: about 4 - 5 years. The sensitivity adn complexity of the human mind requires a bit longer "gestational period" to fully enable it's ability to cogitate.
But if you present both a baby chimp, antelope or human, at about 2 mo. each, with a "looming" stimulus (a rapidly approaching, possibly attacking, predator drawing, esp. if it has fierce eyes drawn on it) all three will automatically turn away and try to escape. Or show fear.
Proof in and of itself that we came from a common background, because nowadays babies really do not learn to be afraid of Nurse Cratchet in the Ob/GYN dept. Or do they?
When we then identify the specific set of DNA genes coded for such behavior, and then check across species, wowzee! We find, AMAZINGLY! ...the same set, in the same place, on the same relative chromosome pair, in all mammalian (and most ancient reptilian) species.
If we remove the little DNA patch, the response is gone. Put it back; the response returns.
Need more proof? When we transplant that code set into an animal that does not naturally show that loom-fear response complex.... do I have to tell you what happens? I will anyways, else the fundies won't get it. Or won't read it (NahnahNahnahnahNahnah...)
Voila! The previously unresponsive animal, of a species which NEVER had this response, now has the loom-fear response.
Such is the type and quality of research and evidence and logic that really modern (>2007), up-to-date DNA tracking studies are starting to uncover. By those crazy, illogical, lying scientists. (HOAX! HOAX!! HOAX!!!)
Oooppsss... back to the far dark corners of the hive for the sick chickens!
Now, if an Xtian fundy had anywherenear such quality of proofs, such inarguable logic, such elegance in experimental design at their disposal, and it somehow proved a Creator, they'd be all over it. It'd be plastered on every website and Sunday School comic book, unlike the made-up illogical quote-mined trash they try to pass off these days in their utter frantic panic to criticize and debunk the undebunkable.
But then I honestly do understand their utter panic. (I used to be a devout and fearful Christian, remember...). Their total life's belief system is under attack, and they don't have the common sense to accept inevitable change, even when it's the obvious truth.
(You'd think that to become an atheist, even if, hypothetically, we're right, is to accept some sort of death sentence! HaHa)
Last edited by rifleman; 08-26-2009 at 03:05 PM..
Reason: clarity
According to God's Word, the earth is only about 6,000 years old.
I believe God, not fallible men who weren't there and whose dates and theories are always changing, blown about by the winds of lies.
Someone who wasn't there takes the word of someone he can't see in order to verify an event that was dictated in a 2,000-year-old-book, written in another language, by hundreds of different people over a span of several centuries.
Well now, Predos, that's not actually genetically based "adaptive evolution". A human infant does, yes, have both hard-wired (i.e.: genetic, and thus evolved) characteristics, as well as the similarly-evolved neuronal structure within their brains that provide it with the eventual capacity to learn.
Rifleman, that is kind of the point I was attempting to make.
According to the fundies we are all created in gawds image, perfect and thus never change. Is gawd an infant?
Whether we adapt or are hard-wired to deal with specific situations, we do in a sense evolve in order to survive.
The fundies just refuse to see this, what with their ridiculous adherence to false stories in a book of myths.
The whole "made in his image" thing quickly runs aground on the shoals of truth in so many ways. Are we but wanton physical and mental knock-offs of Him, like so many cheap Chinese-made "Ro-Rex" watches? Or, are we actually pretty much like Him, including basic brain structure, etc.?
'Cause if we're even remotely mirroring His neural systematics, but just not so "evolved" (ha ha), then I again raise my point that the Universe is, in fact, far too complex for any single (or even for a team) of brainiacs to have, simultaneously, covering all the bases, in all the far-flung corners of this apparently unlimited Universe, "poofed" into instant creation. All at the subatomic particle (or smaller) levels, by conscious effort.
Unfathomably, incalculably unlikely and implausible.
As for the parts of the Universe He would know we'll never see (unless we truly do invent time/space continuum warp), why bother with all of that as well? Why? To pass the time, for a guy who would, naturally, be really bored. Does He watch ESPN or The Discovery Channel (or two of my faves, NatGeo or SyFy? He'd get a laugh out of SyFy for sure!).
Is He here on C-D in some guise, floating through these fora? Maybe as YSM... Now that's depressing, that He would be such an intransigent mutt-head... Or simply a troll. Trolling for God. (you heard it here first, Antlered C!)
Now, on the other hand, should there be some basic and rational laws of molecular assembly (which there are), gravitation between even the smallest bodies floating in space (which there is), and atomic interaction constants (which, again, there are), then if you just toss out a big bunch of simple helium atoms and wait about 10B years,
Voila!
The inevitability of subsequent interactions is apparent: just look up!
Suicidal planet seems on death spiral into star - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090826/ap_on_sc/us_sci_suicidal_planet - broken link)
Everything you now see here is or has already happened. No initial nor constant Godly tinkering required! Evolution of the universe on a mass and simultaneous scale. Especially when we can peer back in time (via the calculated speed of light coupled with the old movie now playing in the skies overhead on any clear night... "Billions & Billions of Stars", to quote Carl Sagan). What we now observe has partially demmonstrated and explained the most likely ways that our little solar system, which is not particularly unique, came to be.
No Godly Hand Required! Frankly, if He is, by corollary, thus in our image, it's impossible.
Rifleman, that is kind of the point I was attempting to make.
According to the fundies we are all created in gawds image, perfect and thus never change. Is gawd an infant?
Whether we adapt or are hard-wired to deal with specific situations, we do in a sense evolve in order to survive.
The fundies just refuse to see this, what with their ridiculous adherence to false stories in a book of myths.
Of course that is the point where the theist would take 'made in his image' as a bit too literal. the 'Image' is man. As such. Not baby men. Or women.
Ok then, what men? Negroid, ongolian, caucasoid or Semitic?
That's over literal too, it must be more metaphorical than that. The 'Image' is more like intelligence, morality or having a soul where animals don't. In fact, rewrite the Bible meaning to fit whatever suits Mr. Theist.
Of course that is the point where the theist would take 'made in his image' as a bit too literal. the 'Image' is man. As such. Not baby men. Or women.
Ok then, what men? Negroid, ongolian, caucasoid or Semitic?
That's over literal too, it must be more metaphorical than that. The 'Image' is more like intelligence, morality or having a soul where animals don't. In fact, rewrite the Bible meaning to fit whatever suits Mr. Theist.
Precisely. Whatever can be evolved into evidence (at least in their own minds) to support the theist must be gawd sent.
Incorrect. The modern coelacanth is not identical to the prehostoric fish at all. Regardless, even if it were identical this would not in the least "disprove" evolution. The fact that it is different only strengthens the arguement, though.
You do know, that we often see differences in fish. Even in some that are living. We can see differences even in the human race. Yet differences and similarities do not represent evidence for evolution. And some of your leading believers in evolution today will tell you this. The fact that the fossil coelacanth shows any difference from what we see today does not strengthen any arguement for evolution. It just represents the reality of what is. And it became obvious to the believers in evolution, that their attempt to make the coelacanth a transional was flawed. And that is why they removed it from the Family Tree. Of course, now we call it the Family Bush.
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.
Evolution's Family Tree is Alive & Sprouting New Foliage!
into evidence (at least in their own minds) to support the theist must be gawd sent.
