Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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 05-28-2007, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
954 posts, read 809,561 times
Reputation: 202

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeweloflight View Post
Jesus holds the entire world together.
Beam me up Scottie!!!

Warp factor 6 for Vulcan Mr Sulu!!

 
Old 05-28-2007, 11:31 AM
 
Location: The Silver State (from the UK)
4,664 posts, read 8,219,146 times
Reputation: 2862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi View Post
Also dinosours bones are corbon dated but hey all come up to be only a few thousand years old and scientist dicard the answers and put what they desire also you didint even answer my questions about the forst bird so please if your so sure about evolution then explain to me how it came to be by reading my questions.THNX
Also dinosours bones are corbon dated but hey all come up to be only a few thousand years old

what are you talking about? only a thousand years old???? "Lucy" was dated at 3.2 million years old!

You do raise some important questions. However, its very difficult to determine the "first" bird. Species don't just stop existing and change into another. Its a gradual process that takes a heck of a long time. We are evolved from a species that shares very similar DNA to that of apes. This does not however mean that once we were apes, and then the next day humans.

You will see evidence of evolution everywhere you look for it. Humans that first grow a tail during pregnancy, dolphins that display feet during pregnancy, scorpions that have eye sockets but no longer have eyes due to thousands of years living in the dark etc etc Remember, the world wasn't created for us, we have evolved to fit our surroundings.

When asked about evolution, Darwin once commented that it would not be impossible for human beings to grow wings in thousands of years time if the need arose. Ponder that one!
 
Old 05-28-2007, 01:32 PM
 
124 posts, read 395,910 times
Reputation: 67
This is another blunder taken from: Pharyngula: Another Christian Science Fair embarrasses itself


It's becoming a trend: Evangelical Christian institutions that try to do science inevitably demonstrate breathtaking inanity of their own. The latest victim is the Pawleys Island Christian Academy. Take a gander at the first place winner in biology.
Brian Benson, an eighth-grade student who won first place in the Life Science/Biology category for his project "Creation Wins!!!," says he disproved part of the theory of evolution. Using a rolled-up paper towel suspended between two glasses of water with Epsom Salts, the paper towel formed stalactites. He states that the theory that they take millions of years to develop is incorrect.

"Scientists say it takes millions of years to form stalactites," Benson said. "However, in only a couple of hours, I have formed stalactites just by using paper towel and Epsom Salts."

This isn't just wrong, it's appallingly wrong. He's wrong on the facts, wrong on the interpretations, wrong on the understanding of how science works. If we're charitable and grant that a 14 year old has some reasonable excuse for ignorance, we can still indict his parents, his science teacher, and the judges at this fair on gross incompetence on multiple charges.

• This experiment has nothing to do with biology.

• Epsom salts are magnesium sulfate; stalactites are made of calcium carbonate.

• Stalactite growth rates are estimated to be around 0.1-10 centimeters per thousand years. If we assume his 'stalactite' was 10 cm long and use the slowest growth rate, that's 100 thousand years, not millions.

• Even if he had demonstrated an accelerated rate of stalactite growth, stalactite length isn't the method used to date the age of the earth.

• To quote the unquestionable authority, Terry Pratchett: "And all those exclamation points? Five? A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head." Mister Benson comes perilously close to the underpants limit in his title.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 05:53 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
219 posts, read 716,586 times
Reputation: 114
Malachi has brought up some points that I feel the need to address. I’m afraid the conclusions made and assertions presented are based on faulty information or possibly a lack thereof. One of the biggest contributors to people rejecting evolution seems to be holding a distorted idea of what evolution is, how it works and much of the evidence involved which supports the theory. Anyhow, I’ll address a couple of the posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi
Acctually this was not true Palantologist are now eating crow. Instead of a "true missing link" connecting dinosaours and birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unusual appending likley tacked on by a Chinese farmer, and it is not EVOLUTION.
This was a fossil specimen that was found to be a hoax by researchers. This has lead the community to be even more diligent in their scrutiny of unearthed specimens. However, there is no shortage of specimens showing affinities between theropods and what we would consider those of the class Aves. One of the most famous is Archaeopteryx. It is a link between a type of small dinosaur and modern birds. The morphology of the fossil shows both bird and dinosaur traits. This matter was been hotly debated for many years since its discovery in the late 1800's - was it a dinosaur or a bird? However within the past decade, many other feathered (or with feather-like structures) dinosaurs have been found such as Sinosauropteryx, Protarchaeopteryx, Caudipteryx, Confuciusornis and many others (Chen, Dong, and Zhen, 1998; Ji and Ji, 1997; Hou, Zhou, Martin & Feduccia 1995). A specimen of Archaeopteryx reported in 2005 was an exceptionally preserved fossil which allowed for detailed examination of the morphology. The dinosaurian features it shared with other theropods were a non-avian osteology, hyperextendible second toe like that found in dramaeosaurs as well as no fully reversed toe (Mayr, Pohl and Peters, 2005). This, amongst many other aspects of the specimens of Archaeopteryx solidify its place as an urvogel.

The Archaeoraptor incident was motivated by monetary gain – no notoriety. The discovery and description did not appear in any peer-reviewed scientific journal – in fact papers submitted to Nature and Science were rejected (Dalton, 2000) - but in National Geographic and the story behind it was told months later in that periodical as well noting the motivations behind the fossil’s construction (Simons, 2000). This was simply a scam for profit and the overzealousness of an amateur fossil hunter. Scientists were the ones who exposed it as a hoax.

There is ample evidence to show the link between theropod dinosaurs and the Aves class. Even experimentation has elucidated much in this area. Researchers examining the Shh (sonic hedgehog gene) expression pattern showed that a small change in the pattern in modern chickens to resemble that found in alligators induces archosaurian teeth to develop (Harris, Hasso, Ferguson and Fallon, 2006).

I could go on with more information but I believe my point has been made.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi
The fact that there has never been a transition of a species found prooves it to be nothing more than a false theory. OK look at it this way The first bird did it breath? Did it breath before it evolved lungs? How did it do this? why did it evolve lungs if it was happily surviving without them? How did it know what needed to be evolved if its brain hadn't evolved yet? Did the bird have a mouth? How did it eat before it evolved a mouth? Where did the mouth send the food before it evolved a stomach? How did the bird have energy if it didn't eat (because it didn't yet have a mouth)? How did it see what to eat if it hadn't yet evolved eye's? now can you see why evolution is intellectual suicide. It is an embarrassment.
I’m afraid you are confusing evolution with development. They are two completely different things my friend. What we call “birds” evolved from small theropod dinosaurs sometime during the Jurassic – they did not appear ex nihilo – that is what creationists claim.

So, to answer your questions – yes, they did have lungs and mouths, stomachs and brains as well as eyes.

Also, you may want to evaluate the idea of “transitionals”. In essence, all fossils are transitional in that they all fall somewhere on a continuum. And this continuum has many, many branches – not one singular line, hence the analogy of a shrub or a “tree” of life. One need only look at an evolutionary lineage found in the fossil record such as the Chesapecten scallops or trilobites (Pojcta and Springer, 2001). Also, the continual asking for “transitional” specimens can become problematic. If someone asks “where is the fossil to fill in the space between two samples”, and one is presented, then there are now two spaces which “need” to be filled and so on and so forth. It comes close to Zeno’s paradox of the archer and shows the fundamental misunderstanding some hold about this theory.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi
Also dinosours bones are corbon dated but hey all come up to be only a few thousand years old and scientist dicard the answers and put what they desire also you didint even answer my questions about the forst bird so please if your so sure about evolution then explain to me how it came to be by reading my questions.THNX
Carbon dating utilizing the unstable C14 isotope is not utilized for specimens of what we would colloquially call “dinosaurs”. C14 isotopes have a specific half-life (5730 years to be exact) and even with amplification techniques – it is not useable for specimens, say in the range of 180 million years ago – Jurassic period - the specimens are carbon deficient. Someone on another board compared it to trying to weigh an 18-wheeler truck with a regular bathroom scale which only goes up to 300 pounds.

The upper bound is about 60,000 years for C14 dating. Other methods are utilized for dating such specimens such as Potassium/Argon dating (Monroe and Wicander, 2001; Plummer, McGeary and Carlson, 2003). Relative and absolute methods are utilized together in most instances to reach the most accurate date for specimens.

References (in order of appeareance):

Chen, P., Dong, Z., Zhen, S. (1998). An exceptionally well-preserved theropod dinosaur from the Yixian Formation of China. Nature, 391, 147-152.

Ji, Q. and Ji, S. (1997) A Chinese archaeopterygian, Protarchaeopteryx gen. nov. William Downs (Trans.) Geological Science and Technology (Di Zhi Ke Ji), 238, 38-41.

Hou, L., Zhou, Z., Martin, L., and Feduccia, A. (1995). A beaked bird from the Jurassic of China. Nature, 377, 616-618.

Mayr, G., Pohl, B. and Peters, S. (2005). A Well-Preserved Archaeopteryx Specimen with Theropod Features. Science, 310, 1483-1486.

Dalton, R., (2000). Feathers fly over Chinese fossil bird's legality and authenticity. Nature 403, 689-690.

Simons, L., (2000). Archaeoraptor fossil trail. National Geographic, 198(4), 128-132.

Harris, M., Hasso, S., Ferguson, M. and Fallon, J. (2006). The Development of Archosaurian First-Generation Teeth in a Chicken Mutant. Current Biology, 16, 371-377.

Pojcta, J. and Springer, D. (2001). Evolution and the Fossil Record. Alexandria: American Geological Institute.

Monroe, J. & Wicander, R. (2001). Physical geology: Exploring the earth. (4th ed.).Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.

Plummer, C., McGeary, D. & Carlson, D. (2003). Physical Geology. (9th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 06:27 PM
 
1,028 posts, read 2,328,364 times
Reputation: 392
Beyond that, genetics dictates that transitional species aren't required for great change. Mutations can occur which eliminates limbs. These "mistakes" are sudden, with no transition. They don't last because the absence of those limbs puts them at a disadvantage. Same with White Tigers. When you breed White Tigers you don't breed generations and generations of orange tigers to gradually dilute the orange out. You find the right combination of tigers with the right genes (I believe they would be recessive), and bam! White tiger.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 08:47 PM
 
28,803 posts, read 47,487,419 times
Reputation: 37905
Quote:
Jesus Christ is Risen, He is Risen Indeed
True. He lives next door to me. He has three pit bulls, two of which have bitten another neighbors child, six (that I know of) automatic rifles, and beats his wife, Mary.

The only thing I find confusing is why he runs around all day in a loin cloth. Is that part of scripture?

As you have all figured out this is patently not true. Pretty much like the garbage the OP is spewing.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Morrisville, North Carolina
465 posts, read 2,420,657 times
Reputation: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ View Post
"Fall back, troops! Retreat!"

"General, what should we do?"

"There's nothing we can do, Private. There's no WAY we can ever answer that question. Just haul out the 'you can't get it because you lack something indefinable and mystical' flag."

"But will it work, General?"

(general smiles) "Well...it's always worked for me!"
I'll be praying for you Jer-z.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 11:01 PM
 
59 posts, read 128,369 times
Reputation: 21
Quote:
Also dinosours bones are corbon dated but hey all come up to be only a few thousand years old

what are you talking about? only a thousand years old???? "Lucy" was dated at 3.2 million years old!
Acctually lucy left palantologists confused because recent study's show lucy may not be human after all. In the June, 11, 1990 issue of time magazine publushed a article explaining how "Geologist show how carbon dating can be way off".

Quote:
You do raise some important questions. However, its very difficult to determine the "first" bird. Species don't just stop existing and change into another. Its a gradual process that takes a heck of a long time. We are evolved from a species that shares very similar DNA to that of apes. This does not however mean that once we were apes, and then the next day humans.
This is because evolution is nothing more than a fairy tale for grown ups like i said please present proof that evolution exists you can go to Intelligent Design versus Evolution and if you can present proof you will win 10,000 dolars become famouse and proov GOD to be false.

Quote:
You will see evidence of evolution everywhere you look for it. Humans that first grow a tail during pregnancy, dolphins that display feet during pregnancy, scorpions that have eye sockets but no longer have eyes due to thousands of years living in the dark etc etc Remember, the world wasn't created for us, we have evolved to fit our surroundings.
LOL no we havent evolved and what you just explained is "microevolution" which is adaptation with in a species but it is way different then evolution evolution is when one form of species transforms into another species and microevolution is adaptation within a species wich has not changed so the scorpion having eye's is not evolution but it is microevolution the scorpion is still a scorpion not some different species from when it was born and this goes for every thing else we and animals adapt to our enviroment but we do not become a different species.

Quote:
When asked about evolution, Darwin once commented that it would not be impossible for human beings to grow wings in thousands of years time if the need arose. Ponder that one!
He also said there needs to be hundreds of transitional forms of animals to proove evolution and ya know what not even one has been found in the history of the earth and he also said if it hasint been prooven with in a hundred years then his theory should be discarded and it's been past a hundred years and not one has been fount so you ponder that.THNX

Oh and this reply is for solidsquid also.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 11:09 PM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,731,941 times
Reputation: 23653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi View Post
This is because evolution is nothing more than a fairy tale for grown ups like i said please present proof that evolution exists you can go to Intelligent Design versus Evolution and if you can present proof you will win 10,000 dolars become famouse and proov GOD to be false.
LOL... yeah, like some Christian propaganda website is proof over actual scientific research.
Sorry, but for every one mistake in science, I could probably name 100 in the Bible - and if it ever comes to my life being saved, I'd rather play the odds & choose science.
 
Old 05-28-2007, 11:23 PM
 
59 posts, read 128,369 times
Reputation: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
LOL... yeah, like some Christian propaganda website is proof over actual scientific research.
Sorry, but for every one mistake in science, I could probably name 100 in the Bible - and if it ever comes to my life being saved, I'd rather play the odds & choose science.
Tell me does science love you? can it save you from hell? NO so why rely on something that can't even give you greatness but hey just because it's a Christian website doesint mean you can't go proov them wrong quit making excuses to avoid being prooved wrong.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top